1 / 27

An Evaluation of a Value-Based Health Plan Design at Group Health

An Evaluation of a Value-Based Health Plan Design at Group Health. David Grossman, MD, MPH Group Health Research Institute Seattle, Washington. Disclosures and Funding. PI is employee and shareholder, Group Health Permanente medical group

vaughan
Download Presentation

An Evaluation of a Value-Based Health Plan Design at Group Health

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. An Evaluation of a Value-Based Health Plan Design at Group Health David Grossman, MD, MPH Group Health Research Institute Seattle, Washington

  2. Disclosures and Funding • PI is employee and shareholder, Group Health Permanente medical group • Funding from AHRQ (R01 HS018913-01) and Group Health Cooperative

  3. Improving Value of US Healthcare Expenditures • Increased purchaser focus on: • Improving value of expenditures • Reducing waste • Improving health outcomes for beneficiaries • Preventing chronic illness and complications • Two main levers • Health plan design • Delivery system design

  4. Cost-Sharing and Health • Impact of larger cost-shares on chronic disease self-management • Chronic disease the major driver in health care costs • Re-consideration of indiscriminate cost-sharing • Consumer holds the early short term risk • Purchaser/health plan holds the longer term risk

  5. Value-based Cost-Sharing • First iterations: • Preventive service coverage • Tiered pharmacy benefits • Generics • Brand-name • Non-preferred and non-formulary • Most recent efforts focused on pharmacy cost-sharing: reducing cost-shares • Pitney Bowes • University of Michigan employees

  6. Science of Value-Based Design • Large body of evidence on impact of increased cost-shares • Tends to be focused on discrete services • Much smaller literature on impact of reducing cost shares • Even smaller literature on impact of cost-sharing on health outcomes and productivity • Tiny literature using control group with multiple outcomes

  7. Worksite Wellness • Another approach to reducing costs and improving health • Focus on lifestyle change • Incenting health behavior • Healthy work environments • Change of work culture • Outcomes of interest • Health status and utilization • Absenteeism and presenteeism • Productivity • 77% of large employers offer these services • Health risk assessments are entry portal for engagement

  8. Group Health’s Total Health Plan for Employees • Employer Aims • Improve productivity through • Better health of staff • Decreased absences • Improved on-the-job productivity • Decrease health expenditure trend rate • Mechanism • Incent healthy behaviors and improved chronic disease control through monetary incentives and value-based health benefit pricing • Reinforce culture of self-awareness, accountability and reporting of health and health behaviors through monetary incentives and culture change

  9. Specific Aims • To assess the impact of the new value-based insurance design on: • PRIMARY: changes over time in employee self-reported: • health status • absenteeism due to illness and disability • presenteeism (i.e. lost productivity time at the workplace) • SECONDARY: • clinical quality scores for chronic illness care and preventive screenings, • lifestyle behavioral risk factors, • employee satisfaction with health benefits, • health services utilization by employees, and • employer-paid health costs for the employee population.

  10. Total Health Design Overview • Value-based copayments • Preventive services (already 1st dollar): no change • Chronic disease cost-sharing decreased for • Selected Visits • Pharmacy • Worksite wellness and health promotion activities • Engagement tied to premium stabilization for 3 years • Health risk assessment annually, AND • Achievement of point threshold • Points aimed at both healthy and chronically ill staff

  11. Visit Cost-Sharing • Waiver of co-pay for 2 visits/year for chronic care • Coronary Artery Disease • Diabetes • Hypertension • Congestive Heart Failure • Asthma • Mental Health (first ten visits) • Waiver of copay for chemical dependency visits and lactation service visits

  12. Pharmacy Co-payments • Copayments reduced to zero for: • generic, mail dispensed meds for same diseases plus depression • Copayment reduced for brand name drugs for same diseases

  13. Devices • Wavier of cost-sharing for: • Home BP monitors • Diabetic glucose monitors • Spaces for inhaled asthma meds

  14. Obesity Management Programs • 50% discount for enrollment • 100% coverage (50% rebate) for diabetics that lose five percent of body weight

  15. Cost-Shares Increased • Outpatient surgery • High cost imaging procedures • CT, MRI, PET

  16. Total Health Website

  17. Total Health Evaluation Design • Study Design • Quasi-experimental 2 group before/after design • Repeated measures • Control group: Kaiser Permanente Colorado employees

  18. Outcomes • Primary • Health status change: Survey • Absenteeism due to illness: Survey +HR data • Productivity at work: Survey • Secondary • Care Quality scores • Chronic illness: HEDIS scores • Preventive services HEDIS scores • Lifestyle behavioral risk factors Survey • E.g. smoking, activity • Employee satisfaction Survey • Costs and service utilization Claims data

  19. Survey Tool • Survey invitation to employees • Web survey tool • Paper survey on request • Domains: Instrument • Functional Status: (SF-12) • Workplace productivity: Work Health Interview • Health Risk Behaviors BRFSS, other • Tobacco • Alcohol • BMI • Physical Activity • Satisfaction w/ plan

  20. Administrative Data • Health utilization/cost/quality • Group Health Research Institute data warehouse • Claims • Pharmacy • EMR data • Employee characteristics • Human Resources administrative data

  21. Data Collection • Sample of 5000 employees invited to take e-survey tool • Active opt-out • Implied consent with survey completion • Separate permissions to link claims and HR data • 3 follow-up emails • No telephone follow-up

  22. Statistical Power

  23. Total Health – participation • >80% of all staff and spouses/domestic partners on the TH medical plan have taken the HRA • 73% are earning points on the wellness website

  24. Progress to Date • Baseline survey completed early 2010 • Group Health: 70% response rate • KPCO: 60% response rate Permissions to link survey data • Approximately 60-64% agree to linkage with HR and/or medical data

  25. Challenges and Strengths • Privacy issues/concerns • Employer is also provider of care • Key engagement of organized labor units • Validity of self-reported data • Study design and potential for confounding • Use of highly similar control group external to Group Health

  26. Research Team • GHRI/UW KPCO • Paul Fishman Arne Beck • Nora Henrikson Debra Ritzwoller • Rebecca Hubbard Nancy Brace • Diane Martin • Rob Reid • Ellen Schartz • Aaron Scrol • Kay Theis

More Related