Article

Health Care Cost Growth Among The Privately Insured

Stanford University School of Medicine, California, USA.
Health Affairs (Impact Factor: 4.64). 09/2009; 28(5):1294-304. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.28.5.1294
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Controlling health care cost growth remains a high priority for policymakers and private decisionmakers, yet little is known about sources of this growth. We examined spending growth among the privately insured between 2001 and 2006, separating the contributions of price changes from those driven by consumption. Most spending growth was driven by outpatient services and pharmaceuticals, with growth in quantities explaining the entire growth in outpatient spending and about three-quarters of growth in spending on prescription drugs. Rising prices played a greater role in growth in spending for brand-name than for generic drugs. These findings can inform efforts to control private- sector spending.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
60 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Researchers have disagreed about factors driving up health care spending since the 1980s. One camp, led by Kenneth Thorpe, identifies rising numbers of people being treated for chronic diseases as a major factor. Charles Roehrig and David Rousseau reach the opposite conclusion: that three-quarters of growth in average spending reflects the rising costs of treating given diseases. We reexamined sources of spending growth using data from four nationally representative surveys. We found that rising costs of treatment accounted for 70 percent of growth in real average health care spending from 1980 to 2006. The contribution of shares of the population treated for given diseases increased in 1997-2006, but even then it accounted for only one-third of spending growth. We highlight the fact that Thorpe's inclusion of population growth as part of disease prevalence explains the appreciable difference in results. An important policy implication is that programs to better manage chronic diseases may only modestly reduce average spending growth.
    Health Affairs 05/2014; 33(5):823-31. DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0656 · 4.64 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to describe comorbidities, healthcare costs, and resource utilization among patients with chronic non-infectious uveitis initiating corticosteroid, immunosuppressants, or biologics. In this retrospective cohort study, patients with a non-infectious uveitis diagnosis and continuous insurance coverage during a 6-month baseline were selected from a privately insured claims database with 80.7 million enrollees. Index dates were defined as the first prescription/administration of a corticosteroid, immunosuppressant, or biologic between 2003 and 2009. Comorbidities, healthcare costs, and utilization were analyzed in a per-member-per-month (PMPM) framework to account for varying between-patient treatment periods, defined as continuous medication use within the same class. Wilcoxon rank-sum and chi-square tests were used for comparisons of costs and categorical outcomes. Patients on corticosteroids (N = 4,568), immunosuppressants (N = 5,466), and biologics (N = 1,694) formed the study population. Baseline PMPM inpatient admission rates were 0.029 for patients on corticosteroids, 0.044 for patients on immunosuppressants, and 0.045 for patients on biologics (p < 0.001 immunosuppressants or biologics versus corticosteroids); during treatment, PMPM inpatient admissions increased to 0.044 and 0.048 for patients taking corticosteroids and immunosuppressants, respectively, but decreased to 0.024 for patients taking biologics (p < 0.001 versus corticosteroids and p = 0.003 versus immunosuppressants). Baseline average PMPM costs for patients taking corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, and biologics were US$935, US$1,738, and US$1,439 (p < 0.001 between groups), while on-treatment PMPM costs excluding drug costs increased to US$1,129 for patients taking corticosteroids but lowered to US$1,592 for patients taking immunosuppressants, and US$918 for patients taking biologics (p < 0.001 versus corticosteroids or immunosuppressants). There is significant economic burden associated with existing treatments of uveitis. Corticosteroids may be overused as a treatment for uveitis.
    11/2013; 3(1):64. DOI:10.1186/1869-5760-3-64
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The recent relatively slow growth in health care spending masks significant differences among payers, clinical settings, and geographic areas. To better understand the spending slowdown, we focus on 2008-2012 trends in Texas among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries and enrollees in Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas (BCBSTX). Spending per person for Medicare grew only 1.5% per year on average, compared with 5.2% for BCBSTX. In Medicare, utilization rates were relatively flat, while prices grew more slowly than input prices. In BCBSTX, spending growth was driven by increases in negotiated prices, in particular hospital prices. We find that geographic variation declined sharply in Medicare, due to drops in spending on post-acute care in two notoriously high-spending regions but rose slightly in BCBSTX. The aggregate spending trends mask two divergent stories: spending growth in Medicare is very slow, but price increases continue to drive unsustainable spending growth among the privately insured. © The Author(s) 2014.
    Medical Care Research and Review 12/2014; 72(1). DOI:10.1177/1077558714563174 · 2.57 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from