Pages

Showing posts with label Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

Rand Predicts HIX Price Shock Unlikely

Despite numerous predictions to the contrary, big jumps in premiums for policies sold through the new state-based health exchanges are unlikely, a Rand Corp. analysis has found.

Health Insurance Exchange:
BY: ELLIOT M. KASS
SEPTEMBER 3, 2013

English: Barack Obama signing the Patient Prot...
English: Barack Obama signing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act at the White House (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The study, released last week by the nonprofit research group, projects that out-of-pocket premiums for most individuals who buy health plans through new insurance exchanges will actually decline due to federal subsidies. The report surveyed insurance markets in 10 states and the nation as a whole to project costs once the impact of the Affordable Care Act begins to be felt.
“Rates for policies in the individual market are likely to vary from state to state, with some experiencing increases and some experiencing decreases in cost,” Christine Eibner, a Rand senior economist and the study’s lead author, said in a statement. “But our analysis found no widespread trend toward sharply higher prices in the individual market.”
Maximum Out-of-Pocket Premium Payments Under PPACA
Maximum Out-of-Pocket Premium Payments Under PPACA (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The web-based exchanges will begin offering health plans for sale in all 50 states plus the District of Columbia beginning October 1.
About 7 million currently uninsured people are expected to gain coverage through the online marketplaces in 2014, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Many of the newly insured are expected to be people in poor health who were previously denied coverage, and there have been numerous claims that this would cause premiums to rise across the board. Earlier this year, the Society of Actuaries predicted an average increase of 32 percent because of the ACA, which prompted outcries from the legislation’s numerous opponents.
English: Spending on U.S. healthcare as a perc...
English: Spending on U.S. healthcare as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The Rand study was conducted on behalf of the U.S. Health and Human Services Department. Looking at 10 representative states, Rand found that premiums in the individual market would likely rise in three of them (Minnesota, North Dakota and Ohio) and decline in two others (Louisiana and New Mexico). For the other five states (Florida, Kansas, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Texas) and the nation as a whole, the Rand researchers concluded that “the law causes no change in premiums.”
Where higher premiums do occur, government subsidies will be available to offset them. Rand’s analysis determined that more than 60 percent of people who purchase health plans through a state exchange will get a discount.



The study also found that as a result of the ACA, the number of U.S. uninsured will fall to 8.2 percent by 2016, compared with 16 percent at present.
'via Blog this'
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

How cutting employee hours due to health reform may infringe federal law

Employee Benefit News:
By Craig J. Davidson, CEBS
May 29, 2013
Countless employers and their advisers are considering a health care reform strategy of cutting employees' weekly hours to less than 30 hours to try to avoid dealing with coverage requirements under the Affordable Care Act. At first blush, this approach seems to provide cover from a variety of costs associated with the ACA by getting employees off the health plan eligibility list.
However, a potential problem exists with this strategy and it is found in the backwaters of ERISA Section 510 which refers back to ERISA Section 502. This could be fodder for attorneys depending on the motive of the employer in taking employees part time. ...
The poignant part of ERISA Section 510 states: "It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge, fine, suspend, expel, discipline or discriminate against a participant or beneficiary for exercising any right to which he is entitled under the provisions of an employee benefit plan ... or for the purpose of interfering with the attainment of any right to which such participant may become entitled under the plan ... "
A plan participant in an ERISA plan (health plans are ERISA plans) has a legal right to participate in the plan without undo interference.
For sure, employers can - and do - cut employees' hours for reasons of legitimate business necessity. Sometimes a cut in hours relegates a benefit plan participant to ineligibility to participate in the plan under the terms of the plan's eligibility requirements.
Now, let us look at the single motive that some employers are considering to avoid offering health benefits under the terms of the ACA. This is key to a potential ERISA Section 510 claim against an employer.
If the single motive for cutting employees hours is to avoid the purposes of the ACA, to me, that sounds like a subterfuge that interferes with a plan participant's rights to their health plan. That is one of the very prohibitions that ERISA Section 510 was written to prevent.
The bottom line is that you and your employer client may be on shaky ground using the cut-in-hours strategy to knock plan participants off the health plan eligibility list and avoid further provision of health benefits to otherwise qualified plan participants.

Penalties
Penalties always get attention. A violation of the employee's rights to participate in their plan or retaliation of the sort that results in a loss of group health plan coverage for reasons already discussed can be prohibitively expensive for the employer.
First, a plan participant may start a civil action to address loss of ERISA rights or retaliation for seeking to exercise rights under the plan. Second, the DOL can assess fines for each violation against the fiduciaries of the plan.
When all is said and done, messing with employees' rights to a health plan is tricky and potentially an expensive proposition. Knowing the sleepy 510 and 502 sections of ERISA gives you something valuable to talk with your clients about as so many employers seek a strategy to avoid the full force of the ACA.
Get out and talk to your clients about this important part of benefits law.
Davidson, CEBS, is founder of Davidson Marketing Group and FutureOffice Network. He is also on the faculty at the Sheldon B. Lubar School of Business at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. Reach him atcraigd@davidsonmarketing.com.


'via Blog this'
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, June 6, 2013

Exclusive: 'Workplace wellness' fails bottom line, waistlines - RAND

Reuters:
NEW YORK | Fri May 24, 2013 6:39pm EDT

English: President Barack Obama's signature on...
English: President Barack Obama's signature on the health insurance reform bill at the White House, March 23, 2010. The President signed the bill with 22 different pens. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Reuters) - A long-awaited report on workplace wellness programs, which has still not been publicly released, delivers a blow to the increasingly popular efforts, Reuters has learned, casting doubt on a pillar of the Affordable Care Act and a favorite of the business community.
According to a report by researchers at the RAND Corp, programs that try to get employees to become healthier and reduce medical costs have only a modest effect. Those findings run contrary to claims by the mostly small firms that sell workplace wellness to companies ranging from corporate titans to mom-and-pop operations.
RAND delivered the congressionally mandated analysis to the U.S. Department of Labor and the Department of Health and Human Services last fall.
The report found, for instance, that people who participate in such programs lose an average of only one pound a year for three years.
In addition, participation "was not associated with significant reductions in total cholesterol level." And while there is some evidence that smoking-cessation programs work, they do so only "in the short term."
..."Companies from the CEO on down feel that these programs are bringing value," said Maria Ghazal, a vice president at the Business Roundtable, the association of chief executives of big companies. "The criticism is surprising, because companies are not hearing that internally."
Some experts not involved with the new report say even the modest benefits RAND found need qualification.
"The strongest predictor of whether someone will lose weight or stop smoking is how motivated they are," said Al Lewis, founder and president of the Disease Management Purchasing Consortium International, which helps self-insured employers and state programs reduce healthcare costs. "Since the programs are usually voluntary, the most motivated employees sign up. That makes it impossible to credit the programs with success in smoking cessation or weight loss rather than the employees' motivation."
Care Continuum Alliance
Care Continuum Alliance (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
For its report, RAND collected information about wellness programs from about 600 businesses with at least 50 employees and analyzed medical claims collected by the Care Continuum Alliance, a trade association for the health and wellness industry.
Industry experts noted that whenever researchers analyze hundreds of programs, there are inevitably more effective and less effective ones.
"Traditional workplace wellness barely scratches the surface," said Keith Lemer, president of WellNet, which provides programs to Cumulus Media, Viking Range Corp and the Charlie Palmer Group of restaurants, among others. "Done right, (the program) requires the integration of clinical data, wellness, health coaching, and work flow." The initiatives succeed if they have "senior level support and a high-degree of employee engagement in healthy behaviors," he said.
SAVINGS OF $2.38 A MONTH
The report's conclusions about the financial benefits of workplace wellness programs are also grim. In theory, the programs should reduce medical spending as employees become healthier and thereby avoid expensive conditions such as heart disease, cancer and stroke.
In fact, workers who participated in a wellness program had healthcare costs averaging $2.38 less per month than non-participants in the first year of the program and $3.46 less in the fifth year. Those modest savings were not statistically significant, meaning they could have been due to chance and not to the program.
More surprisingly, workplace wellness did not catch warning signs of disease or improve health enough to prevent emergencies. "We do not detect statistically significant decreases in cost and use of emergency department and hospital care" as a result of the programs, RAND found.
The RAND report was mandated by the Affordable Care Act, the healthcare reform law known as Obamacare. Two sources close to the report expected it to be released publicly this past winter. Reuters read the report when it was briefly posted online by RAND on Friday before being taken down because the federal agencies were not ready to release it, said a third source with knowledge of the analysis.
FROM SUBSIDY TO PENALTY
Starting next year, the healthcare reform law allows employers to reward employees who participate in workplace wellness programs with subsidies equal to 30 percent of the cost of insurance premiums, or about $1,620 annually per worker.
If wellness programs do not reduce healthcare spending, some employees could suffer financially. If an employer is subsidizing employees who use its program but is not reaping lower healthcare costs, it has three choices. It can absorb the costs, perhaps figuring it helps recruit or retain valued employees. It can raise healthcare premiums across the board. Or it can raise costs only to workers who do not participate, through higher deductibles or premiums, by at least that $1,620.
Cost-shifting seems especially unfair if wellness programs don't deliver medically or financially, said senior counsel Dania Palanker of the National Women's Law Center, which generally supports the programs: "We've seen plans that appear to cost-shift, with wellness programs rolled out at the same time that premiums or deductibles are increased."
$6 BILLION INDUSTRY
Workplace wellness is a $6 billion industry in the United States, with an estimated 500 vendors now selling the programs. Fifty-one percent of employers with 50 or more workers offer one, the RAND report found. Medium-to-large companies now spend an average of $521 per employee per year on wellness incentives (gift cards for losing weight, for instance), double the $260 in 2009, according to a survey by Fidelity Investments and the National Business Group on Health released in February.
For many employers, wellness programs are a recruiting and retention tool, attracting the health-conscious employees they prefer. The programs also promise to control an employer's healthcare spending. By getting workers to stop smoking they should reduce expensive emphysema treatments, for instance, and by nudging workers to get annual physicals they are expected to help companies avoid such financial black holes as cancer treatment and stroke rehabilitation.
Although the RAND report's conclusions seem counterintuitive... - other recent studies agree.
This year researchers at the University of California conducted an analysis of dozens of existing studies of workplace wellness programs at the behest of the California state senate. Based on gold-standard studies, similar to those that evaluate a new drug, participating in work-based wellness programs does not lower blood pressure, blood sugar or cholesterol and rarely leads to weight loss, said Janet Coffman, a health policy expert at the University of California, San Francisco, Institute for Health Policy Studies.
"Even in studies that found statistically significant weight loss, it was not always sustained," she said.
Similarly, after years in which vendors and others claimed that the programs return $3, $9 and more for every $1 invested, rigorous studies have found the opposite, also providing support for the RAND findings.
Earlier this year, economist Gautam Gowrisankaran of the University of Arizona and colleagues found that employees who participated in the wellness program at BJC Healthcare, a St. Louis, Missouri-based hospital system, had fewer hospitalizations for illnesses such as heart disease and diabetes. But their overall spending did not decrease, the researchers reported in the journal Health Affairs.
The main reasons, said Gowrisankaran, were that employees who fill out company surveys assessing their health risks ("what is your blood pressure?") or get health screenings at company-sponsored health fairs ("you better see a doctor about that") led to more office visits and medication use. In-patient costs fell $22 per employee per month, on average, but other costs rose $19. The program cost $500,000 per year.
"The wellness program just didn't save money," Gowrisankaran said.
To understand how that can be, experts offer the example of what happens when a workplace wellness program identifies hypertension (by requiring participants to get a physical) in someone who never suspected she had it. That might keep her from having a stroke in 20 years, but in the meantime it leads to physician visits and drugs to manage a condition that had gone untreated - and that therefore had previously cost the company or its insurer nothing, explained Vik Khanna, a benefits consultant in St. Louis.
Employers told RAND they were "overwhelmingly" confident that workplace wellness reduces medical costs. Yet only 44 percent have actually evaluated their efforts, and only 2 percent had precise savings estimates. ...
Tom Emerick, president of Emerick Consulting and former vice president of global benefits at Walmart, is one of [the skeptics]: "Many of the vendors reporting savings are making it up."
Ghazal of the Business Roundtable acknowledged that calculating savings from wellness programs is tricky: "Sometimes the benefits are way down the road, when the person is not at that employer anymore."
On the bright side, the RAND report says healthcare costs and use of expensive medical services rose more slowly for program participants than nonparticipants. That offers hope "that a reduction in direct medical costs would materialize if employees continued to participate."
(Reporting by Sharon Begley; editing by Prudence Crowther)


'via Blog this'
Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, May 31, 2013

Feds Deal a Blow to Wellness Programs

New regulations could make certain programs more costly and, worse, hinder them from achieving goals that can reduce a company’s health-care costs.
CFO.com
:Health Benefits | May 30, 2013
David McCann



Final regulations for operating wellness programs in compliance with the Affordable Care Act, issued on Wednesday, could increase companies’ costs and dilute the value they aim to get from the most rigorous programs.
“Outcome-based” wellness programs, which require participants to attain or maintain one or more specific health outcomes in order to get a reward or avoid a penalty, may be significantly compromised. (Such outcomes could be, for example, weight loss, blood-pressure level, certain biometric-screening results or smoking cessation.)
Existing rules for such programs under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) require employers to offer a “reasonable alternative standard” that gives an opportunity to earn the reward or avoid the penalty to employees who, for medical reasons, can’t or shouldn’t try to achieve the health outcome. Such employees must prove their eligibility for the exception with a physician’s certification.
English: The graph shows the correlation betwe...
English: The graph shows the correlation between body mass index (BMI) and percent body fat (%BF) for men in NCHS' NHANES III 1994 data. The body fat percent shown uses the method from Romero-Corral et al. to convert NHANES BIA to %BF (June 2008). "Accuracy of body mass index in diagnosing obesity in the adult general population". International Journal of Obesity 32 (6) : 959–956. DOI:10.1038/ijo.2008.11. PMID 18283284. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
But the new regulations – issued jointly by the departments of Labor, Treasury, and Health and Human Services, and effective for companies’ first health-plan year starting after Dec. 31, 2013 – eliminate the physician-certification requirement for outcome-based programs. Any participant who does not meet an initial standard for getting the reward or avoiding the penalty – for instance, having a body mass index (BMI) under 30 at the program’s launch and then staying under that threshold for a year – can simply opt for the alternative standard.
“Regardless of the type of wellness program, every individual participating in the program should be able to receive the full amount of any award or incentive, regardless of any health factor,” the regulations state. The reason for that is “to ensure that the program is reasonably designed to improve health and is not a subterfuge for underwriting or reducing benefits based on health status.” 
English: 8 women with the same Body Mass Index...
English: 8 women with the same Body Mass Index rating (BMI - 30) but with different weight distribution and abdominal volume, so they have different Body Volume Index (BVI) ratings. Select Research, 09-09-08 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Also of note, outcome-based programs, specifically, “must offer a ‘reasonable alternative standard’ (or waiver of the otherwise applicable standard) to a broader group of individuals than is required for activity-only wellness programs.” With activity-based programs, ... participants earn awards or avoid penalties simply by engaging in an activity – for example, just participating in a weight-loss program, rather than having to actually lose a certain percentage of weight.
In most cases, the alternative standards companies set for outcome-based programs are much easier to achieve than the normal standards, notes Steve Wojcik, vice president of public policy for the National Business Group on Health (NBGH), which represents the interests of 364, mostly large companies on healthcare-related matters. Often the alternative is activity-based rather than outcome-based, diluting the distinction between the two kinds of programs.
“If you have lots of people opting out from the standard, it could reduce the effectiveness of the program,” says Wojcik. “The whole reason for incentives is to induce people to work on their health.” He likened the new rule to an element of today’s youth sports, “where everyone gets a trophy, everyone is a winner. You don’t even have to try.”
And the new regulations could raise the costs of outcome-based programs, he says, because the company may have to deal with each person opting for the alternative standard on a one-on-one basis, possibly talk with their physicians, and figure out a program for each person that enables him or her to get the incentive.
“This adds a layer of complexity to these programs that will make employers think harder about offering one,” Wojcik says. “It’s already difficult to move the needle on employee health, but it’ll probably be more difficult now.”
According to results of a study by NBGH and Fidelity Investments released in February, 41 percent of surveyed employers offered wellness programs with outcome-based elements or planned to start doing so.
The new regulations also increase the maximum reward employers can offer in wellness programs, to 30 percent of the total cost of an employee’s health coverage (both the employer and employee shares), from 20 percent under HIPAA. The reward can be up to 50 percent of that cost for smoking-cessation programs. However, even now few companies offer rewards anywhere near the current 20-percent level, Wojcik notes.

'via Blog this'
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Putting an I in Healthcare

The days of the disengaged health consumer are numbered. Consumerization will transform healthcare systems, involving individuals as never before in the management of their own care.

strategy+business:
Published: February 18, 2013

In a shopping center on the western outskirts of Harrisburg, Penn., ... sits a window into the future of healthcare in the United States: Highmark Direct. Open since 2009, it is part of a small chain of nine retail health insurance stores scattered across Pennsylvania owned and operated by Highmark Inc., the fourth-largest plan in the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, which serves 4.9 million members in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Delaware. 
The retail stores run by Highmark, ... are a direct channel into the growing market for individual health insurance created by reform and by budget-strained employers, ... Consumers walk in or make appointments for consultations with Highmark’s licensed agents, who ... assist them in identifying and applying for coverage. Seniors attend informational seminars that explain their Medicare coverage and supplemental insurance needs. Plan members learn how to better manage their own health with Highmark’s wellness programs, and contact customer service via self-service kiosks and videoconferencing.
 ... Florida Blue (a licensee of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association), ... operates a chain of 11 stores stretching the length of its state, and United Healthcare, ... opened 30 pop-up stores and more than 1,400 kiosks in shopping malls in October 2012. These companies are being driven by a nascent trend that is quickly becoming an industry imperative: the consumerization of healthcare.
... [Other] consumerization initiatives are currently under way among insurers, care providers, and pharmaceutical companies. Accountable care organizations, ... are beginning to tie physician compensation to population health. Healthcare bundles combine medical care, coverage, and support across a care episode or condition—such as a knee replacement or coronary bypass surgery—at a fixed, risk-adjusted price. And capitation payment contracts pay providers an annual rate per patient, no matter how much care they require. These and other efforts skim the surface of a game-changing industry transition.
The word consumerization has several meanings, but we use it here to describe the transformation of an industry from a primarily business-to-business (B2B) enterprise to one that focuses on business-to-consumer (B2C) activities. In today’s B2B health marketplace, business is transacted among large employers, payors, providers, and pharmaceutical companies. The people being insured and treated have little involvement in or responsibility for their own care and cost choices. In the years ahead, healthcare will evolve into a B2C industry, in which consumers will take a much more active role in their healthcare decisions and expenditures. And, as a result, every healthcare company and organization will need to become more consumer-centric. ...
This shift is both a reaction to and a result of the state of healthcare systems around the world, .... The U.S. system has been in the spotlight for years because of double-digit cost inflation, frustratingly complex patient experiences, and, most recently, the controversial Affordable Care Act. But the much-lauded, publicly funded healthcare systems in nations such as Canada and the United Kingdom are coming under pressure, too, ...
Meanwhile, in developing countries, the struggle to extend basic healthcare to large portions of the population has been intensified by an explosion of “developed nation” diseases. ...
These global healthcare challenges have revealed the cracks in the industry’s current operating models, and they demand a new way of thinking. The idea of consumer-driven healthcare has been around for years, but now healthcare companies are being forced to act. ... U.S. health insurers, care providers, and pharmaceutical companies are experimenting with a host of new models and technologies that should be replicable in the healthcare systems of Europe and in countries in other regions.
Many of these innovative solutions are based on fundamentally sound ideas for cutting costs and improving care outcomes. But unless and until the consumer is positioned at the center of the healthcare industry, it is highly unlikely that such concepts will deliver their full potential. Just look at the fate of HMOs ... In the 1990s, HMOs produced lower costs and provided care comparable to that of other healthcare benefit models. But because HMOs disenfranchised their members by imposing constraints on where they could go to obtain care and placed limits on the amount of care they could receive, they created a consumer backlash, and many failed.
The lesson: To successfully cure the systemic ills of healthcare in the U.S. and elsewhere, the industry will have to promote and support more control, awareness, and responsibility on the part of the healthcare consumer. The digital enablers of consumerization—big data, cloud computing, telemedicine, and social media—are already at hand, ... 

Influencing Consumer Behavior

A fundamental reframing of the consumer’s role on the part of healthcare companies is a prerequisite for sustainable healthcare systems, because consumer behavior has an outsized influence on the demand for care and care outcomes. In the U.S., fully 40 percent of deaths are attributable to behavioral factor... And according to the American Medical Association, 25 percent of the United States’ total annual healthcare expenditures are the result of behaviors that could be changed, such as smoking, lack of exercise, and poor diet.

Furthermore, once people become ill, their behavior often exacerbates their condition, as many are unwilling or unable to complete their treatment. The lack of treatment adherence, ... is the cause of approximately 125,000 deaths and 10 percent of hospitalizations in the U.S. each year, according to a study funded by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. In a recent analysis of the financial effects of five chronic diseases (namely, hypertension, asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic back pain, depression, and rheumatoid arthritis) in Europe, Booz & Company and the Bertelsmann Foundation concluded that national productivity losses associated with a lack of treatment adherence were €10 billion to €20 billion ($13.5 billion to $27.1 billion) in Germany, €8 billion to €19 billion ($10.8 billion to $25.7 billion) in the U.K., and €2 billion to €4 billion ($2.7 billion to $5.4 billion) in the Netherlands (see “Unleashing the Potential of Therapy Adherence: High-Leverage Changes in Patient Behavior for Improved Health and Productivity,” by Peter Behner, Ab Klink, and Sander Visser, Booz & Company white paper, July 2012).
The ramifications of consumer behavior extend to choices regarding care options and healthcare insurance. A 2012 survey by health insurer Aetna Inc. found that Americans rank choosing a health plan as the second most difficult decision in their lives... The Consumers Union studied the ability of consumers to select a health insurance plan, reporting in January 2012, “Almost all participants were stymied in their desire to identify the best value plan among those offered. ...” The Affordable Care Act is a first step in demystifying the process for consumers, but they will need sustained guidance and support.
Influencing consumer behavior, whether through outright incentives or the design of the subtler, supposedly more effective changes in choice architecture advocated by ... Richard H. Thaler and ... Cass R. Sunstein inNudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness (Yale University Press, 2008), is no trivial task. ...

The Building Blocks of Consumerization

... But three building blocks are essential to any successful adoption: (1) product and service portfolios based on insights that are derived from a nuanced understanding of consumers; (2) tools and programs that engage consumers in care delivery and influence their behavior, and enable service providers to optimize and coordinate patient-centric care; (3) and end-to-end customer experiences that produce consumer satisfaction, trust, and brand loyalty. In developing these products and tools, healthcare companies will have to master new capabilities ... or risk disintermediation.

1. Insight-powered products and services. As companies such as Starbucks and Facebook have demonstrated, if products and services are accessible and can be personalized in ways that make them highly relevant, consumers ... will alter their lifestyles and behaviors to use them...
... But in most cases, their genesis is found in insights about consumers. Such insights come from a deep study of what consumers need and desire, and how they act. ...
We are already seeing the glimmerings of this more sophisticated, consumer-centric approach to product and service innovation in the health insurance sector. ... In response, the industry has begun developing more insight-driven offerings, such as life stage–based products that are tailored to match consumers’ evolving health and financial needs as they enter the workforce, start families, or prepare to retire. ... 
To enhance their ability to capture and utilize insights, healthcare organizations will need to integrate all the data they gather from customer touch points and meld it with external demographic, behavioral, and attitudinal consumer data. Then, they will need to ... redesign their processes and systems ... and to affordably bring them to market. ...
2. Engaging care delivery. Involving consumers in the care delivery process will require the development of tools and programs that incentivize people to pursue healthier lifestyles and participate more actively in the medical treatment they receive, and enable a new clinical operating paradigm that coordinates care around the patient.
Consider the advent of healthcare bundles. ... In a Booz & Company survey of roughly 1,000 U.S. healthcare consumers in October 2012, 78 percent of respondents found the concept of bundled care appealing. Among the benefits they would expect to reap from bundles are lower prices, greater price clarity and transparency, more integrated care, the ability to provide input in care processes, and simplified billing.
Healthcare bundles are starting to drive costs down by streamlining, standardizing, and coordinating what were formerly discrete and often highly variable processes and procedures, transforming them into comprehensive, patient-centric delivery systems. In October 2012, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. announced agreements with six leading hospital systems, ... for exclusive, fixed-price care bundles for certain heart, spine, and transplant surgeries. This enabled the company to provide incentives to employees who choose one of the six providers. If an employee who requires one of these procedures uses one of the fixed-price bundle providers, the employee’s out-of-pocket expenses are eliminated and other expenses related to receiving the care, such as travel, lodging, and food for the patient and a caregiver, are provided without charge.
As Walmart’s agreements suggest, employers can play a valuable role in encouraging consumer engagement. ... In CEO John Mackey’s new book,Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business (with Raj Sisodia, Harvard Business Review Press, 2013), Mackey describes Whole Foods’ Team Member Healthy Discount Incentive Program. It is a voluntary program in which employees can go to a mobile lab that will measure basic biometrics, such as cholesterol levels, body mass index, and blood pressure. The healthier the employee, the higher Whole Foods will raise his or her store discount above the standard 10 percent. At the highest level, employees can obtain a 30 percent discount. “Within our culture,” writes Mackey, “it has become a matter of pride for team members to move up to higher levels.”
Whole Foods has also established the Total Health Immersion Program for its least healthy and most at-risk employees. It is a one-week, medically supervised program that provides intensive education about healthy eating and living. Mackey reports that more than 1,300 employees took advantage of the program in its first two years, prompting the company to extend the program to spouses and partners.... “It’s a win-win strategy for all stakeholders involved,” Mackey told us. “When we have healthy team members, they are happier, and happy team members provide better customer service to our shoppers. It also leads to the company needing to spend less on healthcare, which is better for investors.”
Consumer engagement is also an area where pharmaceutical companies can make an impact. For example, Biogen Idec and Merck Serono have been making impressive improvements in the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Using Web-based engagement tools and patient services that add “beyond-the-pill” value, they show consumers how their behavior can maximize the effectiveness of therapies.
These consumerization pioneers are ... integrating behavioral cues into a coherent therapeutic system that reinforces medical management and improves outcomes. To achieve truly engaging delivery, care will have to be coordinated among consumers, care providers, and insurers. Simplified and transparent pricing strategies will be needed to help consumers make more informed decisions. Tools and programs will be needed to help them participate in their own care. And, of course, the technology infrastructure, analytics, and devices that help them fully engage will need to be ubiquitous within healthcare systems.
3. Compelling end-to-end customer experiences. In healthcare today, customer experiences tend to be passive and fragmented, ... Thus, the quality of the customer experience can vary widely by touch point, and there is often little or no coordination among the many touch points in the end-to-end process of purchasing insurance or receiving care. ...  According to the American Customer Satisfaction Index, an independent national benchmark based on surveys of more than 70,000 people, U.S. consumers rank hospitals just above the U.S. Postal Service in terms of customer satisfaction. They rank health insurers lower yet, in the company of utilities and wireless service providers.
In the health insurance sector, creating compelling customer experiences that bolster satisfaction, trust, and brand loyalty will require more personalized approaches to selecting products, more transparent and comprehensible plan options and costs, and less onerous enrollment processes. ...
In 2011, Cigna launched its largest brand campaign to date, “Go You,” a $25 million marketing effort designed to attract consumers with a more personalized customer experience. ... Cigna is supporting it with 24/7 worldwide customer service; a Web portal, www.MyCignaforHealth.com; social media apps; tools, such as Intuit Inc.’s Quicken Health Expense Tracker, that help plan members better manage their medical care and costs; and mobile applications that help members locate nearby pharmacies and emergency rooms. Plan members are also provided access to health coaches for chronic conditions and wellness programs.
Hospitals have been on the forefront of the effort to create more compelling customer experiences. ... One result is the addition of experiential elements such as valet services, streamlined admissions processes, more family-friendly policies, and the redesign of facilities to build in directional cues and create calmer, more attractive settings.
Of course, before a customer experience can be improved, it must be understood. This starts with a mapping of the current customer experience and a clear understanding of how consumers interact with the brand. ... Health organizations must then develop the skills and tools needed to enhance touch points and deliver information in ways that are accessible to consumers.

Enabled by Technology

The common thread in nearly all consumer-driven initiatives is the digitization of healthcare. Big data and new technologies will enable organizations to adopt new products and services by simultaneously supporting personalization, superior clinical outcomes, and affordability. Although some technologies have yet to be widely adopted in healthcare, some companies are already using new platforms to engage with consumers.

Healthcare companies have access to untold amounts of clinical and financial data. But to make it actionable, they need to convert this data into readily understandable information. When this information is made available and accessible to the consumer through personalized channels, it will affect their behavior—whether the information is a treatment reminder, a lifestyle suggestion, or direction to an optimal site of care. Some healthcare payors are now using the insights gleaned to create more effective products and services that align their benefit structure with the individual’s needs. For example, Bloom Health, a Minnesota-based private health insurance exchange, uses big data and analytics to transfer decisions about health benefits from employers to employees. Its website includes a decision engine that asks employees a series of questions aimed at guiding them to the policy that best fits their needs, financial situation, and risk tolerance. ...
Cloud computing will be another key technological enabler of consumerization, providing, for example, the platform for long-overdue interoperable electronic health records that can provide seamless transitions for patients and better clinical decision support for physicians. ... Of course, any mention of cloud computing may raise concerns about privacy among consumers, especially when it comes to their medical history. Although industry security standards have made considerable headway, hospitals and other care providers will need to manage security requirements and risk carefully.
Telemedicine—remote monitoring and diagnosis—is a third enabler of consumer-centric healthcare. It promises improved access and lower care delivery costs. ...
Finally, given their ability to engage and mobilize people, it should come as no surprise that mobile health (m-health) and social media can support the transition to consumerization. During epidemics in the U.S., the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been a leader in using social media, such as Twitter, Facebook, and Wikipedia, to distribute information to the public across multiple channels, including smartphones. ... The CDC is also tapping into the power of crowds to encourage people to become “health advocates” who pass health information through their own networks. It is expected that m-health and social media use among healthcare companies will increase, engaging consumers more in their own health and wellness—for example, they could use their smartphone to monitor prescriptions, track weight maintenance, and get medical appointment reminders.
The digital tools are available and accessible, and organizations such as the National eHealth Collaborative (NeHC) are devising strategies and standards for integrating them into the U.S. healthcare landscape. The NeHC, a public–private partnership, has mapped out a five-phase framework for guiding the development of the technological infrastructure that the industry will need to support consumer-centric healthcare. It suggests how the digital components of healthcare may come together in the coming years (see “The Patient Engagement Framework,” below).

The Path to Consumerization

As consumer-driven healthcare spreads, the fundamental nature of the industry will change... The ultimate goal for insurers, care providers, and pharma companies alike is to drive initiatives forward until the industry reaches a tipping point. The new healthcare industry that results will be adept at influencing consumer behaviors. It will use sophisticated attitudinal segmentation to design and deliver personalized products and services, and its financial performance will be linked directly to care outcomes. Such an industry will motivate consumers to pursue wellness, and will provide them with access to healthcare when they need it via the channels that they prefer.

Of course, this vision will not materialize overnight. It will take years, perhaps decades. And it will require a sustained effort across the healthcare industry, investment, and the willingness and ability to change. But healthcare companies around the world are realizing that their current business models are insufficient to meet today’s challenges. As Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini told the participants at the HIMSS Conference in Las Vegas in 2012, “The end of insurance companies, the way we’ve run the business in the past, is here.” Consumerization is the industry’s future. The work will be hard, but the rewards promise to far exceed the effort: a high-quality, cost-effective, and user-friendly system that continuously improves population health. 

THE PATIENT ENGAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

The National eHealth Collaborative released its road map in November 2012. It begins with “Inform Me,” an initial step during which consumers are provided with standardized forms and information about advanced directives, privacy, and specific conditions. The second step, “Engage Me,” provides patients with access to their electronic health records, fitness trackers, and other e-health tools. The third step, “Empower Me,” includes secure messaging between patients and care providers; the integration of personal patient data, such as genetic, behavioral, and medical history information, into the providers’ electronic records; and patient access to the quality, safety, and experience ratings of care providers. Next, during the “Partner with Me” step, the penultimate phase of engagement, patients are given condition-specific management tools and access to care summaries to support their personal health maintenance efforts. Also, patient-generated information, such as personal preferences and wellness and home health device data, is added to their electronic health records. In its most advanced and final phase, “Support My e-Community,” patient engagement is enhanced with a fully interoperable platform that supports seamless information sharing between a patient and the entire care team.
Today, various players are at different stages of the road map, though most have yet to move beyond “Empower Me.” As companies continue the evolution, they will not only optimize individual outcomes, but also enhance health through the analysis of data and the identification and dissemination of best practices.
Reprint No. 00167

AUTHOR PROFILES:

  • Gil Irwin is a senior partner with Booz & Company based in New York. He specializes in business model and operating model transformations in the healthcare industry, with a focus on technology and operations strategy.
  • Jack Topdjian is a partner with Booz & Company based in New York. He leads the firm’s North American healthcare technology and operations practice and global healthcare consumerization practice. He specializes in large-scale transformation and capability building in the healthcare industry.
  • Ashish Kaura is a partner with Booz & Company based in Chicago. He specializes in the development of growth strategies and new business models in response to market discontinuities for healthcare and health-services companies.
  • Also contributing to this article were Booz & Company senior partner Gary Ahlquist, partner Michael Ruhl, and senior associate Nate Holobinko.




'via Blog this'
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, November 5, 2012

EBN legal contributor: Romney can’t repeal PPACA on day one

By Kelley M. Butler
November 5, 2012
On the eve of Election Day, it soon will be time to shift from rhetoric to results.

Whether they support President Obama or former governor Mitt Romney, a major issue for benefits professionals is the future of health care reform. While an Obama re-election means full-steam ahead for implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Romney vowed throughout the campaign to repeal PPACA on day one of his presidency.

However, each man faces obstacles for achieving his agenda, according to EBN legal contributor Frank Palmieri. Palmieri, an employee benefits attorney with Palmieri & Eisenberg in Princeton, N.J., offers his thoughts on what lies ahead for PPACA regardless of who wins at the ballot box tomorrow.

Mitt Romney
Mitt Romney (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Should Romney win the White House, repealing PPACA at all — let alone on day one — will prove difficult, if not impossible, Palmieri says, citing a Washington Post article that points out that President-elect Romney most likely would not have the congressional majority needed to overturn the law legislatively.

“The president is only one of the three prongs in our government,” Palmieri says. “And he can say, ‘I promise to repeal it,’ but he can’t do it by himself.” Even if PPACA does get repealed, he adds, “I think there are some [PPACA provisions] that are not going to go away, [like] coverage for pre-existing conditions and coverage for children up to age 26,” citing the provisions’ public popularity and that the dependent eligibility extension already has become entrenched in employer plans….

I
Official photographic portrait of US President...
Official photographic portrait of US President Barack Obama (born 4 August 1961; assumed office 20 January 2009) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
n the case of an Obama re-election, the president will have to kickstart staffing the Health and Human services Department, …. “HHS isn’t staffed up for implementation,” Palmieri says. “Hiring would have to be fast and furious.”

Obama also will have to cope with employers that have been sluggish on PPACA compliance and states that have been slow to create the infrastructure for health insurance exchanges. “A lot of people have been on the sidelines watching and waiting to see what happens with the election,” Palmieri notes, adding that there is an advantage for employers who began compliance from the outset. “It happens all the time in benefits — those who act early get to act twice, For [companies that] are proactive and get started on compliance, deadlines get extended and rules get changed.”

Maximum Out-of-Pocket Premium Payments Under PPACA
Maximum Out-of-Pocket Premium Payments Under PPACA (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
If the president wins a second term, Palmieri says, employers will have to start “doing the numbers. If you have 47, 48, 49 employees, are you not going to hire because you want to avoid” PPACA’s requirement to offer health coverage for employers with 50 or more workers.

Larger employers already subject to the coverage mandate, “will want to see if the exchanges are an effective alternative.” For employers who do opt to send employees to exchanges, he forecasts they’ll “have to hire someone in the payroll or HR department [to be] what I call the exchange manager, because if you have employees [in multiple states], you’ll have to manage exchanges in all of those states. It’s a whole new position I think we’ll have by 2014.”

Another assessment for employers to make in an Obama second term is reviewing part-time staff “to see who’s working an average of 30 hours a week, and whether to cut back on the hours they work,” he says. “Say Mary, John and Harry are 30 hours a week and you haven’t given them benefits in the past. Now, they have to come into your plan,” because PPACA mandates coverage for part-time employees working at least 30 hours per week.

Or, a final consideration for employers would be to “drop coverage altogether and pay the penalty. A lot of large employers have already indicated that they’re thinking about that seriously,” Palmieri says. “All you need is one or two large employers to do it, and others will consider it a viable option.”
Enhanced by Zemanta