• June 2008 FEATURE ARTICLES •
Consumerism in Healthcare
CDHP: Tools and Attitude
Studies show the consumer-driven approach provides mutual benefits to companies and workers.
By Kerry Winkle
According to the 13th Annual National Business
Group on Health/Watson Wyatt Employer Survey on Purchasing Value
in Health Care, a company’s average healthcare expenditure per
employee was $7,211 in 2007 and expected to rise to $7,620 in
2008. In all, 453 large U.S. employers participated in the
survey which also stated that in 2007, the average annual cost
increase for healthcare was 6 percent, a reduction from the 8
percent increase in 2006. However, costs are predicted to again
increase by 9 percent in 2008 and again (although at a
slightly-lower rate) by 8 percent in 2009. With this double
whammy of high healthcare costs and a slowing economy,
healthcare stakeholders are examining the potential of
consumer-directed healthcare plans (CDHP) to reduce their
overall healthcare costs, given CDHP’s cost transparency and
provider-related quality measurements.
The federal government has expressed its
support of healthcare programs that encourage transparency in
pricing and an open exchange of quality information. In August
2006, President Bush signed Executive Order 13410, which
instructed federal agencies that administer or sponsor federal
health insurance programs to improve transparency in pricing and
quality, promote the adoption of health IT standards, and
support overall efforts to increase quality and efficiency.
Later that year, the Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) took an important step towards the
implementation of the executive order by calling on employers
throughout the nation to commit to supporting its "Four
Cornerstone goals" of value-driven healthcare. These four
cornerstones are health IT standards, quality standards, price
standards, and incentives. During a March 14, 2006 presentation
to the Commonwealth Club of California, HHS Secretary Michael
Leavitt stated his intention to initiate policies designed to
encourage healthcare payer support of increased quality and
price transparency. "People need to know what they pay for
healthcare and what quality they get for their money," Leavitt
said.
With the growing adoption of CDHPs and their
tools to support cost transparency and consumer empowerment, one
would expect that most, if not all, payers would offer these
options to their members. In fact, although 41 percent of
employers who responded to the National Association of Health
Underwriters 2006 survey chose CDHPs as the most effective way
to reduce medical costs, only 29 percent expected to offer the
plans in 2007, which represents zero growth from the prior year.
However, 85 percent of respondents identified "enrollment
communication and support" as the largest barrier to CDHP
adoption, which tends to explain the contradiction. The same
percentage stated that many CDHPs did not include necessary
functionalities such as online tools, a single access point and
provider cost comparisons, echoed by 84 percent of consumers
surveyed by the Council for Affordable Health Insurance in 2006.
Lifting the Veil
Although various methods exist to estimate
and gather healthcare costs, payers can most easily provide
consumers with the data through CDHP portals, which interface
with providers, contracts and benefits plans. By leveraging the
data within providers’ electronic claims systems, payers can
deliver real-time electronic data exchange to consumers. Members
can manage their accounts, examine explanations of benefits and
review real-time financial summaries of their individual account
cards, which are typically linked to their health reimbursement
accounts (HRA) and health spending accounts (HSA).
Equally as important, individuals benefit
from a CDHP portal’s cost comparison tools that allow them to
view account details and summary information on physician
visits, prescription drug purchases and treatment costs. These
tools may also offer information on: a drug’s primary use, risk
and benefits; alternative drugs and therapies; drug comparisons;
over-the-counter options; as well as, a prescription calculator
to compare brands versus generics.
This aggregated information provides the
patient with an overview of costs associated with given
providers or pharmacies. Moreover, this data can be integrated
into electronic medical records (EMR) and personal health
records (PHR), allowing payers, providers and individuals to
work from a shared platform of information. Once healthcare
stakeholders fully utilize this real-time data exchange
platform, one could expect reduced adverse drug events,
decreased misdiagnoses and elimination of duplicate testing, as
well as enhanced patient care and satisfaction, and increased
provider productivity.
Cost and Quality Comparisons
Although the initial lure of CDHP was cost
reduction, the healthcare industry is now realizing that a
substantial benefit will also result from sharing data on
provider quality. Yet, only about one-quarter of executives
believe that their organization supplies easily understood,
accessible and usable healthcare quality data to employees,
according to an April 2006 study by PricewaterhouseCoopers.
Similar views were reported by 24 percent of respondents at 35
large, U.S.-based multinational companies.
CDHPs are beginning to offer hospital and
physician performance metrics to assist individuals in selecting
quality providers. Some plans offer data on a physician’s
network status, verified disciplinary actions, malpractice
history, evidence-based quality measures, adverse events and
patient satisfaction survey data. This practitioner-focused
information may be drawn from the payer’s pay-for-performance
programs or using tools such as the Healthcare
Effectiveness Data and Information Set, or from third-party
patient advocates such as Consumer Assessment of Healthcare
Providers and Systems (CAHPS).
For hospital metrics, such as adverse events,
length of stay, success rate and readmissions, many plans look
to performance data based on The Leapfrog Group’s practice
standards, CAHPS Hospital Survey (H-CAHPS) data or other
standardized patient experience data, NQF measures, AHRQ
indicators, and others. Plans are also careful to ensure that
this performance information is updated and verified annually —
or more frequently. With the ability to compare a specific
provider’s costs with the quality and performance delivered,
consumers will be able to make informed healthcare decisions —
resulting in improved outcomes, and thus, lower overall
healthcare costs.
Consumer Engagement
One of the main goals of CDHPs is to
encourage consumers to take a proactive role in managing their
care. As such, many CDHP portals include consumer-focused
healthcare databases, online health and drug encyclopedias,
e-newsletters, and even tools to evaluate whether an illness or
condition necessitates a visit to a healthcare provider. These
consumer empowerment tools encourage healthy lifestyle changes
and deliver structured plans based on the three-component model
of life balance: nutrition, exercise and positive attitude (e.g.
stress-reduction techniques).
This proactive care concept has a powerful
impact on disease management and ongoing wellness. Many CDHPs
offer online health-risk-assessment tools that provide consumers
with a baseline of their health status and suggestions on how to
improve their current condition, as well as steps to prevent
future diseases for which they may have risk factors. In
addition to CDHP portals, the health risk appraisals may also be
supplied to employees via onsite wellness or disease management
seminars, online message boards, or through confidential access
to a clinician via phone or the Internet. These tools, combined
with incentives for healthy behavior, have the potential to
impact consumers’ long-term health status. This positive impact
is recognized by many employers, as reflected in the National
Business Group on Health/Watson Wyatt survey, which reported
that 83 percent of employers offered health risk appraisals in
2008, an 18 percentage-point increase from 2007.
Integrated Financials
The last tool in the CDHP "toolkit" is the
financial component — a medical savings account. CDHPs typically
offer either HRAs or HSAs to assist members with the high
deductibles. The HRA is funded only by the employer, which may
occur prior to or at the time of the medical expense. Unused
funds would roll over to the following year, but are not
portable if the employee leaves the company.
In contrast, the HSA is a tax-advantaged
medical savings account that allows both deposits and
withdrawals for medical expenses to occur without taxation.
Created in December 2003 as part of the Medicare Modernization
legislation, the HSA can be funded by both employers and
employees and is fully portable. This medical savings account
can be managed similar to an IRA, enabling users to place their
funds in growth or value investment vehicles to later deliver
potentially higher funds for future medical costs. An additional
benefit is that HSA funds may be used for non-medical expenses
after retirement age, but will be treated as income and taxed
appropriately. Withdrawals prior to age 65 would be treated as
an early distribution and would incur a penalty of 10 percent
plus regular income tax.
Due to these unique benefits, the rollout of
HSAs, in conjunction with CDHP, is expanding. In the National
Business Group on Health/Watson Wyatt report, analysts found
that 47 percent of the companies surveyed currently offer a
CDHP, an increase from 39 percent in 2007 and 33 percent in
2006. Even more — 54 percent — plan to offer a CDHP by 2009. The
study also found that 27 percent of companies offer a CDHP with
an HSA and 24 percent offer a CDHP with an HRA. Statistics from
the
Department of the Treasury also mirror this growth spurt with a
seven-fold uptick from 2004 to 2005 in individuals insured by
plans that were compatible with HSAs. Additionally, the Treasury
Department estimates that by 2010, the number of consumers with
CDHPs compatible with HSAs will rise to 14 million.
However, in a Towers Perrin survey,
researchers found that only 29 percent of consumers with CDHPs
funded their HSAs at any level. This low participation may be
related to the complex process of creating and managing an HSA.
For example, employees must understand the various tax
implications and regulations, including contribution caps and
covered medical expenses. Furthermore, some employers will not
have contracts with HSAs, requiring their employees to research
and select their own HSA providers.
Best Practices
Executive buy-in is crucial to support the
extensive, ongoing communication efforts that are necessary to
ensure a successful CDHP or HSA rollout. Once establishing that
top-down level of support, the communications team must develop
champions from the ground up. An effective method is to form
focus groups to discuss any challenges the members will face
when using the CDHP portal tools and HSA enrollment process.
This feedback should be gathered very early in the process and
incorporated into the development of targeted, effective
communications.
These communications should begin far in
advance of the plan’s launch and should address frequently asked
questions about enrollment, covered medical costs under the HSA,
tax advantages and regulations, as well as advice on how to
invest HSA funds. A variety of methods should be used to send
these communications to employees in order to ensure that the
employees and their families receive and understand the
information. For example, many spouses still obtain most of
their insurance-related information from printed materials
mailed to the home, while the employees may prefer online
communications (e-mail, e-newsletter, Intranet) or face-to-face
meetings with their company’s human resources staff.
The CDHP portal must also be easy-to-use,
functional and offer a turnkey enrollment process. According to
Forrester Research Inc., an independent technology and market
research company, a plan is a "truly integrated platform" if the
consumer sees the health plan and HSA administrator as one
system. Many CDHPs, working directly with financial
institutions, create portals that enable consumers to create
accounts, make payments and manage contributions, use decision
support tools and other online financial services. Since health
plans may deal with many HSA banks, the long-term success of any
CDHP technology platform requires a robust back-end claims
processing and payment system.
Power of Attitude
All CDHP tools — online and offline — offer
consumers tremendous opportunities to maximize their CDHPs and
HSAs. However, without the right mindset, the full potential may
not be realized. For example, some employers may fear that HSAs
encourage turnover, since their employees would no longer be
shackled to a funded, non-portable medical savings account. To
limit their exposure, this subset of employers may choose to
contribute a minimum — or none at all — to the HSA. Similar to a
401(k) match, employees are much more likely to participate in
an HSA if an employer also contributes. Without participation in
an HSA, the employee has a high-deductible healthcare plan with
limited benefits, which will most likely result in lower
employee participation.
Interest in HSAs by smaller employers seems
to vary based on a company’s staff salary level. Some see CDHPs
with HSAs as a way to continue, or begin, offering healthcare
benefits to employees without exceeding limited budgets. Studies
have also shown that it’s less common for companies with
lower-paid staff to contribute to HSAs, whereas companies with
higher salaries offer HSAs with contributions as part of a
standard benefits package.
Motivation is the most important aspect of
promoting CDHPs or HSAs, whether the employer is a start-up or
Fortune 500 corporation. If the main goal is cost reduction, a
short-term payoff is possible if a significant percentage of
employees participate. However, employers with only 15 percent
CDHP enrollment won’t see substantial savings, according to Ted
Nussbaum, Watson Wyatt’s director of group and healthcare
consulting in North America.
According to the National Business Group on
Health/Watson Wyatt report, companies with at least 50 percent
employee participation showed a two-year, average healthcare
cost increase of only 3.6 percent versus 6.2 percent for firms
without similar plans. Looking at companies with CDHP plans,
regardless of the level of employee participation, researchers
found an average of 5.5 percent versus 7 percent increase over
two years, compared to firms without similar plan offerings.
The Secret for Success
However appealing the initial cost-reduction
numbers appear, these results can only be maintained or
increased if employees are satisfied with their plans. Thus, the
key to successful cost reduction for many companies will be a
CDHP that is first and foremost designed to improve care. This
would not only drive the selection of quality oriented CDHPs,
but would also shape corporate communications and management
behavior, while incentivizing wellness programs.
Healthcare stakeholders must be convinced
that by giving consumers tools to proactively manage their own
care, organizations gain employee satisfaction, increased
productivity and reduced healthcare costs; and, perhaps most
importantly, obtain the priceless return of individual health
and well-being.
Kerry Winkle is SVP of strategic
planning, MphasiS Healthcare
Solutions. Contact him at
Kwinkle@mhs.mphasis.com.