When High Deductibles Hurt: Even Insured Patients Postpone Care

When High Deductibles Hurt: Even Insured Patients Postpone Care

In November 2015, Tina Heck was in her garage lifting 40-pound bags of wood pellets to fuel her heating stove, when something went very wrong with her back.

“The next day, I could barely walk,” said the 55-year-old who lives on an acre of land in Nevada City, Calif., 60 miles northeast of Sacramento. The cause: a bulging disc in her lower spine, which shoots pain down her leg and makes her back stiff.

The injury wasn’t Heck’s only setback. The initial MRI, cortisone shot and doctor visit cost her $3,000 because her health plan requires her to shell out $5,000 before insurer payments kick in. She doesn’t want to explore other treatment options because of that high deductible. Heck, who makes $68,000 a year in marketing for a nonprofit, is not willing to add more debt on top of her credit-card and mortgage payments.

“I’m in pain every day,” she said, but “it’s not bad enough to go into debt.”

The concept behind high-deductible plans was to lower premiums and reduce overall health costs by ensuring that consumers shared the financial burden of their own health care decisions. But evidence is mounting: High deductibles have actually forced people to delay care that could prevent health emergencies later or improve their quality of life.

Regardless of what happens to the Affordable Care Act, such plans are likely to become more widespread as health care costs continue to rise. Just over half of people with health plans from their employers now have a deductible of $1,000 or more, up from 10% in 2006, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. (Kaiser Health News, which produces California Healthline, is an editorially independent program of the foundation.)

“People who have medical problems that can be put off tend to do so much more now because of the high deductible,” said Dr. Ted Mazer, a San-Diego based head and neck surgeon who is president-elect of the California Medical Association.

Dr. Mazer blurb: Dr. Ted Mazer, president-elect of the California Medical Association, says some of his patients delay various tests and treatments because of the high deductibles and copays associated with their health plans.  (Courtesy of Kurt Kohnen)

Annual deductibles can amount to many thousands of dollars on some plans. Covered California bronze plans, with the lowest premiums available on the exchange, carry deductibles of $6,300 for an individual and $12,600 for a family.

A Kaiser Family Foundation survey released this year showed that 43% of insured people reported having trouble paying their deductible, up from 34% in 2015. (Kaiser Health News, which produces California Healthline, is an editorially independent part of the foundation.)

In one study by the liberal advocacy group Families USA, more than a quarter of people in high-deductible plans delayed some type of medical service such as a doctor visit or diagnostic test. And 44% of adults with high out-of-pocket expenses put off medical care, according to a nonpartisan Commonwealth Fund study.

Another recent study by researchers at the University of California-Berkeley and Harvard University found that people with high-deductible plans spent 42% less on health care before meeting their deductibles, primarily by reducing the amount of health care they received, not by shopping around for a better price.

Jonathan Kolstad, associate professor of economics at UC-Berkeley’s business school and co-author of the study, said patients dropped both needed care, such as diabetes medication, and potentially unnecessary care, such as imaging for headaches.

“Left to their own devices, people [in high-deductible plans] seem ill-equipped to make their own decisions” about what care they need, and what care they don’t, Kolstad said.

Mazer said that, in his practice, people have delayed all kinds of treatment that may not save “life or limb” but involved medical conditions that interfered with breathing or sleeping.

He said he’s had patients who needed a biopsy to determine if an abnormal vocal cord was cancerous, and they put it off because of the cost.

“I have to make the phone call and say, ‘We’re looking at a mass that may be malignant and if you put it off you’re putting yourself at risk,’ ” Mazer said. “And I’ll tell you, we’ve had people take that risk.”

Recent Republican proposals to repeal Obamacare have promoted the use of high-deductible plans by allowing people to put away more tax-free dollars into the health savings accounts that consumers use in conjunction with those plans. And experts said the proposals would also spur the growth of these plans — by cutting the subsidies available through exchanges, inducing customers to look for cheaper plans with higher deductibles.

Conservatives say insurance that promotes personal financial responsibility helps tamp down overall health costs. Hoover Institution analysts, for example, argue that high deductibles encourage patients to “choose wisely.”

But new evidence suggests that putting off care can be dangerous and, eventually, more costly to patients.

A March 2017 Harvard study found that low-income patients with diabetes who had high-deductible plans delayed visits for complications such as skin infections and pneumonia. They wound up getting more expensive care later on.

Patients may try to treat their conditions at home, or hope they go away — but if that approach fails, “they then have to seek care at the emergency department,” said Frank Wharam, a health policy researcher at Harvard Medical School and lead author of the study.

Wharam said the middle-income earners he studied didn’t suffer any adverse effects from health care choices they made in high-deductible plans, adding that more studies are needed on that group.

Sabrina Corlette, from the Georgetown University Center on Health Insurance Reforms, said that until national health policy addresses the “underlying costs of care,” patients in high-deductible plans will likely be stuck with the difficult task of figuring out what medical attention they need or can afford.

Heck said the symptoms from her back injury have changed — the pain is in a different part of the body than it was right after the injury. But she’s not even considering a trip to a nearby clinic for a new assessment. That would require another MRI, she said, which could cost at least $1,500, and it might not even help her. If her deductible weren’t as high, she’d feel “freer” to explore other health care options, she said.

For now, she’s taking a lot of ibuprofen and seeing a chiropractor.

“A lot of people get stuck in this place,” she said.

Sounding The Alarms On Children’s Health Coverage

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/06/26/sounding-the-alarms-on-childrens-health-coverage/

Amari Carter, 5, protests the U.S. House passage of the plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act at the south gate of the Capitol in Austin, Texas, on Friday May 5, 2017. (Jay Janner/Austin American-Statesman via AP)

Buried beneath a very intense discussion on the future of adult coverage in this country has been a far more serious issue in children’s coverage many years in the making.

The American Health Care Act (AHCA) and the president’s recent budget proposal certainly have those who care for children concerned about the future of children’s insurance. The AHCA’s proposed changes to Medicaid would undo a half century of health care standards that were designed to maximize child development and well-being outcomes, such as guaranteed comprehensive health care coverage that includes access to mental health services, dental care, and school-based assistance for children with special health care needs. For special needs children, they have also insured that children with autism have aides to assist them in school, or that a child with cerebral palsy has access to appropriate transportation for themselves and their durable medical equipment to and from school, as well as the assisted nursing to support them while they are there.

But it’s not just the direct impact to children that is concerning. To the extent the AHCA rolls back the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) Medicaid expansion, it would strip health insurance coverage from many low-income parents, whose own health is critical to that of their children.

There have also been proposed cuts to Medicaid that are at a magnitude never seen before: the president’s budget recommends reducing Medicaid funding by more than $600 billion dollars over 10 years, above and beyond the more than $800 billion in Medicaid cuts written into the AHCA.

These changes to Medicaid would not be trivial: more than 36 million children and adolescents in this country are insured through Medicaid, a number that grows every day. These are not simply children living in poverty; most hail from working families. Many of these children have complex medical or behavioral health concerns, intellectual disabilities, or are in foster care. Medicaid’s reach among children is huge.

The Risk To Families Is A Perfect Storm That’s Been Brewing For Some Time

Although the dramatic changes proposed by the AHCA and the president’s budget are more immediate, the truth is that their impact would negate the gains made in reducing the uninsured rate in children and leave families with fewer options for their children’s health care. When the ACA became law in 2010, children’s uninsurance rates in this country were much lower among children than adults (and continued to decline to only 5 percent by 2015). Lawmakers, therefore, designed the ACA principally to address uninsurance among adults, but nonetheless, added regulations that guaranteed a set of essential benefits to families who purchased coverage through the exchanges, including maternity, pediatric, mental health, and substance abuse benefits.

Optimism abounded and many hoped that the exchanges’ success might one day eliminate the need for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). CHIP is a federally subsidized state program, which, at its peak, has insured an additional 8 million children in low- and moderate-income families who were not offered affordable coverage through their employers and could not qualify for Medicaid because their families were just above the federal poverty line.

From that high point, there has been a steady erosion of children’s coverage under their parents’ employer-sponsored plans that has gone largely unseen. Even as we’ve climbed out of recession and more low-income individuals are gaining employment, they’re not being provided affordable family coverage by their employers. Facing soaring benefits costs, many employers are dropping dependent coverage for their employees, or offering ever-more-expensive coverage. Escalating family deductibles and premiums have far outpaced those for single-adult enrollees, making such coverage unaffordable for many families.

Lacking affordable options to cover their children, it’s not surprising that many low- and moderate-income families have responded by flocking to public insurance. We reported on this trend in a recent Health Affairs article, in which we found that in 2013, nearly one-third of children in low-income working families above the poverty line got their health coverage through Medicaid or CHIP, up 8 percent from just six years earlier.

Today, more than 40 percent of children and adolescents in this country are now covered by Medicaid and CHIP, second only to employer-sponsored insurance. As a result, children are disproportionately vulnerable to health care reforms that cut public programs. In making any changes, caution is needed, as is an awareness of the many factors leading to families’ heavy reliance on public programs, if we are to improve, or at least maintain, children’s health.

Potential Solutions To Weather The Storm

Children largely remain on the outside of the ongoing health care debate, yet they have the most to lose. Beyond protecting Medicaid as an entitlement with certain guaranteed benefits there are other potential solutions that could help mitigate this risk.

CHIP Reauthorization

While the AHCA works its way through Congress, some may not have noticed that CHIP funding expires this fall. Without re-appropriation, more than 8 million children may lose coverage immediately. States are already sounding alarms; they have been unable to project their CHIP budgets for next year. The immediacy of the CHIP re-appropriation debate in Congress offers a “NOW” opportunity to stake a new way forward and present pragmatic solutions to strengthen children’s insurance, embracing the realities that have reshaped the family insurance market.

Guarantee Of Essential Health Benefits

The most critical issue arising from any children’s insurance plan today, whether in the employer-sponsored or public insurance market, is the promise of a set of health standards to all children regardless of their insurance. The House-passed AHCA proposes removing the requirement of federally guaranteed essential health benefits from all plans. Should this become law, states will have the choice of whether or not to provide these benefits. So, one solution for protecting children is to require these states to provide families access to a CHIP plan that meets a comprehensive and standard set of federally legislated and guaranteed essential benefits, such as vision, developmental, and behavioral health screenings.

Private Market Reforms

Beyond essential benefits, it may be time to address the affordability and quality of dependent coverage on the employer-sponsored and exchange markets. We may need stronger caps on deductibles as a proportion of income, and limits to exorbitant cost-sharing for child dependents. Furthermore, prohibitions of narrow networks—or the increase of cost-sharing for enrollees who seek out-of-network services—in the pediatric market would go a long way to ensuring that families have critical access to pediatric subspecialty care should their children develop cancer, diabetes, or other debilitating illnesses. While narrow networks may work in the adult health care arena, they are not nimble for families whose children have special health care needs and require specialists based solely in children’s hospital networks that may be tiered out in such plans. All told, the private market is not working for families, and if Congress wishes to halt the migration of families onto public insurance, they may need to hold employers and commercial insurers responsible for their own contributions to crowding families out of that market.

We are at an inflection point in the historic success we’ve had at providing near- universal children’s coverage in this country. While our leaders get mired in discussions around the future of adult coverage, they need to be mindful of immediate vulnerability within the children’s market that could threaten their coverage. It’s time we uncover this threat and make it a bigger part of the mainstream conversation.

30% of antibiotics inappropriately prescribed in US

http://www.fiercepracticemanagement.com/story/30-antibiotics-inappropriately-prescribed-us/2016-05-04?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal&mrkid=959610&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTWpVd1lqSTNZalZsWWpReCIsInQiOiJINE9BNitVSm1VYUR3NFVOZG1YMFFiVFQ2d2lmRGtEZ01NdjVpY0x2bmZUSmxTVFFcL2NcL3FMTmlGaXJqRFhSUHI2Tm1yK0Q1MHU1R3U2OWlGQ3NVYU9uTll2VXMxcEJSdUxlcGlYSjJEV1ZBPSJ9

Antibiotic Overuse

Study findings may drive efforts to curb improper prescription practices.

Increased cost sharing does NOT make better health care shoppers

Increased cost sharing does NOT make better health care shoppers.

Cost of Care

Skin in the game

Patients shoulder higher out-of-pocket costs at freestanding ERs in Texas

http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/patients-shoulder-higher-out-of-pocket-costs-at-freestanding-ers-in-texas.html

Freestanding ER

View From the Losing Side of Health Care

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacqueline-dooley/a-view-from-the-losing-si_b_8499202.html

2015-11-07-1446910700-3214045-6393381xsmall.jpg

Why Low Growth in Health Costs Still Stings

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/04/08/why-low-growth-in-health-costs-still-stings/?utm_campaign=KFF%3A+Drew%27s+Columns&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=16962011&_hsenc=p2ANqtz–38gNBe4tArXEi1kR4gIoGPcB2uGQndAtR9a57fX7sixUnjJtHdETi4iYn613Dneh6G2TarKm9MCTz9h8Q_rrLuRwo4Q&_hsmi=16962011