Biomedical subjects

Susan L Ettner

Publications and source records attributed to Susan L Ettner.

40 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

PubMedDate not supplied

Do adjusted clinical groups eliminate incentives for HMOs to avoid substance abusers? Evidence from the Maryland Medicaid HealthChoice program.

The adequacy of risk adjustment to eliminate incentives for managed care organizations (MCOs) to avoid enrolling costly patients had been questioned. This study explored systematic differences in expenditures between beneficiaries with and without substance disorders assigned to the same capitation rate group under the Maryland Medicaid HealthChoice program. The investigators used fiscal year (FY) 1995 to 1997 Medicaid data to assign beneficiaries to rate cells based on FY 1995 diagnoses and compared the distribution of expenditures for beneficiaries with and without substance disorders, defined using FY 1997 and FY 1995 diagnoses. Results showed that differences in FY 1997 expenditures between beneficiaries with and without FY 1995 substance disorders were negligible. However, MCOs could expect greater average losses and lower average profits on beneficiaries with FY 1997 substance disorders. Thus, the adjusted clinical groups methodology used to adjust capitation payments in the HealthChoice program attenuated, but did not eliminate, financial incentives for MCOs to avoid substance abusers.

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Risk adjustment for people with chronic conditions in private sector health plans.

BACKGROUND: Although the problem of adverse selection into more generous health insurance plans has been the focus of previous work, risk adjustment systems have only recently begun to be implemented to blunt its effect. OBJECTIVES: This study examines the ability of the leading risk adjustment systems to predict health care expenditures for people with chronic conditions, using claims and enrollment data from 2 large employers. RESEARCH DESIGN: Predictive errors and total financial losses/gains are compared for different risk adjustment approaches (primarily hierarchical condition categories [HCCs] and adjusted clinical groups) for several chronic conditions. RESULTS: One of the best performing risk adjustment systems was a regression-based HCC method, which had an average under-prediction error rate of 9% or 6%, depending on the employer. In comparison, more typical actuarial risk adjustments based on just age, gender, and prevailing area wages lead to a prediction error of at least 50%. We did not find evidence that payments for particular chronic conditions would be consistently and significantly under- or overestimated. CONCLUSION: The leading risk adjustment approaches substantially reduce the incentives for adverse selection but do not eliminate them.

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

An alternative approach to reducing the costs of patient care? A controlled trial of the multi-disciplinary doctor-nurse practitioner (MDNP) model.

OBJECTIVE: Hospitals adapt to changing market conditions by exploring new care models that allow them to maintain high quality while containing costs. The authors examined the net cost savings associated with care management by teams of physicians and nurse practitioners, along with daily multidisciplinary rounds and postdischarge patient follow-up. METHODS: One thousand two hundred and seven general medicine inpatients in an academic medical center were randomized to the intervention versus usual care. Intervention costs were compared to the difference in nonintervention costs, estimated by comparing changes between preadmission and postadmission in regression-adjusted costs for intervention versus usual care patients. Intervention costs were calculated by assigning hourly costs to the time spent by different providers on the intervention. Patient costs during the index hospital stay were estimated from administrative records and during the 4-month follow-up by weighting self-reported utilization by unit costs. RESULTS: Intervention costs were $1187 per patient and associated with a significant $3331 reduction in nonintervention costs. About $1947 of the savings were realized during the initial hospital stay, with the remainder attributable to reductions in postdischarge service use. After adjustment for possible attrition bias, a reasonable estimate of the cost offset was $2165, for a net cost savings of $978 per patient. Because health outcomes were comparable for the 2 groups, the intervention was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Wider adoption of multidisciplinary interventions in similar settings might be considered. The savings previously reported with hospitalist models may also be achievable with other models that focus on efficient inpatient care and appropriate postdischarge care.

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

A bitter pill: formulary variability and the challenge to prescribing physicians.

BACKGROUND: Multitiered, incentive-based formularies have been increasingly used as a mechanism to control prescription drug expenditures. Prescribing physicians who manage patients from multiple insurers must be familiar with the variability in their patients' formulary incentives to help patients choose therapy wisely. However, the degree of formulary variability among and within health plans over time is unclear. METHODS: In 6 major health plans in California, we evaluated formulary incentive variability in 4 of the 5 drug classes with the highest expenditures in California: proton pump inhibitors, hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors ("statins"), calcium channel blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We categorized 20 branded members of these classes into either "preferred" or nonpreferred/uncovered categories. We calculated the consistency that brands were preferred across health plans and the frequency of changes in formulary status for each drug within plans between 2000 and 2002. RESULTS: None of the branded drugs evaluated were preferred on all formularies in 2002, and 10% were not available on any of the formularies. Formulary status varied greatly across plans, and more than 60% of drugs were preferred on 2 to 4 of the 6 formularies studied. Formulary status within health plans varied between 2000 and 2002 in more than half of the plans in the drug classes evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: In the drug classes evaluated, over a 2-year period, considerable variability was seen among and within formularies over time. This variability poses a challenge to physicians who wish to reduce patients' expenditures by prescribing the least expensive among similarly effective drugs within a drug class. This variability is especially relevant because recent legislation increases the likelihood that more Medicare beneficiaries will receive their medications from private health plans.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors↗