Browsing by keyword "*Deductibles and Coinsurance"
Now showing items 1-6 of 6
-
Consequences of cost-sharing for children's healthDo children whose families bear a percentage of their health care costs reduce their use of ambulatory care compared with those families who receive free care? If so, does the reduction affect their health? To answer these questions, 1,844 children aged 0 to 13 years were randomly assigned (for a period of 3 or 5 years) to one of 14 insurance plans. The plans differed in the percentage of their medical bills that families paid. One plan provided free care. The others required up to 95% coinsurance subject to a +1,000 maximum. Children whose families paid a percentage of costs reduced use by up to one third. For the typical child in the study, this reduction caused no significant difference in either parental perceptions of their child's health or in physiologic measures of health. Confidence intervals are sufficiently narrow for most measures to rule out the possibility that large true differences went undetected. Nor were statistically significant differences observed for children at risk of disease. Wider confidence intervals for these comparisons, however, mean that clinically meaningful differences, if present, could have been undetected in certain subgroups.
-
Cost-sharing and the use of general medical physicians for outpatient mental health careMany patients with emotional disorders receive their mental health care from general medical physicians. In this article, we examine differences in costs and style between mental health care delivered by mental health specialists and that provided by general medical physicians, and the sensitivity to insurance of the patient's choice of mental health care provider. We use data from a randomized trial of cost-sharing, the RAND Health Insurance Experiment. Even when all outpatient mental health care was free (up to 52 visits a year), one-half of the users of outpatient mental health services visited general medical providers only. This half accounted for only 5 percent of outpatient mental health care expenditures, because the treatment delivered by general medical providers was much less intensive than that delivered by mental health specialists. Mental health status, at enrollment, was similar for those who received their mental health care from either provider group. Despite the large difference in cost of care, the choice of provider (mental health specialist versus general medical provider) was not sensitive to the generosity of insurance.
-
Effects of cost sharing on seeking care for serious and minor symptoms. Results of a randomized controlled trialTo estimate the effect of cost sharing on seeking care for serious and minor symptoms, we analyzed data for 3539 persons aged 17 to 61 from the Rand Health Insurance Experiment. Participants were randomly assigned to a free-care group or to insurance plans requiring them to pay part of the costs (cost-sharing group). Annual surveys were administered to determine if participants had serious and minor symptoms during the preceding month and whether they saw a physician. Serious symptoms were judged by a panel of physicians to warrant care in most instances; minor symptoms were judged neither to be severe nor to warrant care in most instances. The cost-sharing group was nearly one third less likely than the free-care group to see a physician when they had minor symptoms (6.3% compared with 9.0%; p less than 0.04). The free-care and cost-sharing groups did not differ significantly in seeking care for serious symptoms (22.3% compared with 17.9%; p = 0.095). However, for participants with low socioeconomic status who began the study in poor health, the prevalence of serious symptoms was higher in the cost-sharing than the free-care group (29.1% compared with 23.8%, p less than 0.004).
-
How cost sharing affects the use of ambulatory mental health servicesThe less generous insurance coverage for mental health care has generated some controversy. The major unresolved question is how the demand for outpatient mental health care responds to cost sharing. We used data from a randomized trial of fee-for-service health insurance for the nonelderly to address this question. The study enrolled 5809 persons. The results are based on 19 819 person-years of data. One hundred thirty-three percent more is spent on outpatient psychotherapy when care is free to patients than when they pay 95% of the fee, subject to an annual catastrophic limit. But, the absolute level of expenditure is low on all plans; $32 per person per year with free care. The response to psychotherapy services to cost sharing is insignificantly larger than that for outpatient general medical services. We found no evidence that more generous coverage for outpatient psychotherapy decreases total health expenditures.
-
How do incentive-based formularies influence drug selection and spending for hypertensionThis study examined the association between incentive-based formularies and antihypertensive drug selection and spending. We compared the use of drugs from five drug classes by the number of tiers and copayment differentials. We found that raising copayments within a single-tier formulary system had a relatively modest impact on use of antihypertensives, compared with raising them in multi-tier systems. Likelihood of using ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers was lower among two-tier plans with generic/brand differentials of dollars 10 relative to flat-copayment plans. Incentive formularies were associated with lower total antihypertensive spending by plans, but enrollees paid more out of pocket.