RAND Health Insurance Experiment

Last updated

The RAND Health Insurance Experiment (RAND HIE) was an experimental study from 1974 to 1982 of health care costs, utilization and outcomes in the United States, which assigned people randomly to different kinds of plans and followed their behavior. Because it was a randomized controlled trial, it provided stronger evidence than the more common observational studies and concluded that cost sharing reduced "inappropriate or unnecessary" medical care (overutilization) but also reduced "appropriate or needed" medical care.

Contents

Methods

The RAND HIE was begun in 1971 by a group led by health economist Joseph Newhouse and including health service researchers Robert Brook and John Ware; health economists Willard Manning, Emmett Keeler, Arleen Leibowitz, and Susan Marquis; and statisticians Carl Morris and Naihua Duan. The group set out to answer this question (among others): "Does free medical care lead to better health than insurance plans that require the patient to shoulder part of the cost?" [1]

The team established an insurance company using funding from the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The company randomly assigned 5809 people to insurance plans that had no cost sharing, 25%, 50% or 95% coinsurance rates with a maximum annual payment of $1000. [2] It also randomly assigned 1,149 persons to a staff model health maintenance organization (HMO), the Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound. [3] [4] That group faced no cost sharing and was compared with those in the fee-for-service system with no cost sharing as well as an additional 733 members of the Cooperative who were already enrolled in it. [3]

Findings

An early paper with interim results from the RAND HIE concluded that health insurance without coinsurance "leads to more people using services and to more services per user," referring to both outpatient and inpatient services. [5] Subsequent RAND HIE publications "rule[d] out all but a minimal influence, favorable or adverse, of free care for the average participant" [6] but determined that a "low income initially sick group assigned to the HMO . . . [had a] greater risk of dying" than those assigned to fee-for-service (FFS) care. [7] The experiment also demonstrated that cost-sharing reduced "appropriate or needed" medical care as well as "inappropriate or unnecessary" medical care. [2] [8] Studies of specific conditions and diseases in the RAND HIE data found, for example, that the decrease in use of medical services had adverse effects on visual acuity [9] and on blood pressure control. [10] A RAND summary said, "The projected effect was about a 10 percent reduction in mortality for those with hypertension." [11] Newhouse, summarizing the RAND HIE in 2004, wrote, "For most people enrolled in the RAND experiment, who were typical of Americans covered by employment-based insurance, the variation in use across the plans appeared to have minimal to no effects on health status. By contrast, for those who were both poor and sick—people who might be found among those covered by Medicaid or lacking insurance—the reduction in use was harmful, on average." [12]

Criticisms and legacy

The RAND Health Insurance Experiment is considered "one of the best experimental social science studies ever conducted". [13] However, several criticisms of the study have been suggested.

Nevertheless, the study opened the way for increased cost sharing for medical care in the 1980s and 1990s.[ citation needed ]

The RAND HIE is still referenced in the academic literature as a "gold standard" study in research on the effects of health insurance. [17] For example, in 2007 RAND researchers reviewed the literature published between 1985 and 2006 on prescription drug cost sharing, which included co-payments, tiering, coinsurance, pharmacy benefit caps or monthly prescription limits, formulary restrictions, and reference pricing. [18] In summarizing 132 articles, they found that the RAND HIE provided the only relevant experimental data; all other studies they reviewed were observational. [18] They concluded:

Increased cost sharing is associated with lower rates of drug treatment, worse adherence among existing users, and more frequent discontinuation of therapy. For each 10% increase in cost sharing, prescription drug spending decreases by 2% to 6%, depending on class of drug and condition of the patient. The reduction in use associated with a benefit cap, which limits either the coverage amount or the number of covered prescriptions, is consistent with other cost-sharing features. For some chronic conditions, higher cost sharing is associated with increased use of medical services, at least for patients with congestive heart failure, lipid disorders, diabetes, and schizophrenia. While low-income groups may be more sensitive to increased cost sharing, there is little evidence to support this contention. [18]

Furthermore, the RAND HIE is mentioned regularly in the newsmedia:

Oregon Health Study

In 2008, for reasons of cost, Oregon's Medicaid agency accepted 10,000 uninsured low-income adults into its insurance program based on a lottery with 89,824 applicants. In the Oregon Health Study, Newhouse and others tracked the effects on those who were accepted and rejected. [22] They found that health insurance improved people's perceptions of health, but people spent more money on health care and their physical health had not improved.[ citation needed ]

According to economist Katherine Baicker, the study "put to rest two incorrect arguments" related to Medicaid: that Medicaid is not beneficial and that Medicaid coverage saves money. [23]

New data regarding the Oregon experiment shows that while it was effective to reduce out-of-pocket payment by the beneficiaries and increase their financial security, it did not lead to objective improvements in blood sugar, blood pressure, or some other metrics. The findings contradicted the earlier results, which had shown greater effects upon people's health. [24] However, these results are based on two years of data, and longer follow-up might reveal different results. The study did indicate a significant improvement in rates of depression in the two-year window. [25]

Notes

  1. Brook, Robert H.; Ware, John E.; Rogers, William H.; Keeler, Eemmett B.; Davies, Allyson R.; Sherbourne, Cathy A.; Goldberg, George A.; Lohr, Kathleen N.; Camp, Patricia; Newhouse, Joseph P. (1984). The Effect of Coinsurance on the Health of Adults: Results from the Rand Health Insurance Experiment (Report R-3055-HH) (PDF) (Report). The Rand Publication Series. Santa Monica, California: The Rand Corporation. ISBN   0-8330-0614-2. ["An earlier version of the present report appeared in the December 8, 1983, issue of The New England Journal of Medicine (Vol. 309, pp. 1426-1434)."]
  2. 1 2 Manning, Willard G.; Newhouse, Joseph P.; Duan, Naihua; Keeler, Emmet B.; Benjamin, Bernadette; Leibowitz, Arleen; Marqus, M. Susan; Zwanziger, Jack (1988). Health Insurance and the Demand for Medical Care: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment (Report R-3476-HHS) (PDF) (Report). Rand Health Insurance Experiment Series. Santa Monica, California: The Rand Corporation. ISBN   0-8330-0864-1. ["An abridged version of this report... was published in The American Economic Review, June 1987."]
  3. 1 2 Manning, Willard G.; Leibowitz, Arleen; Goldberg, George A.; Rogers, William H.; Newhouse, Joseph P. (1985). A Controlled Trial of the Effect of a Prepaid Group Practice on the Utilization of Medical Services (Report R-3029-HHS) (PDF) (Report). Rand Health Insurance Experiment Series. Santa Monica, California: The Rand Corporation. ISBN   0-8330-0679-7. ["An abridged version of this report was published in the New England Journal of Medicine, June 7, 1984."]
  4. Wagner, Edward H.; Bledsoe, Turner (March 1990). "The Rand Health Insurance Experiment and HMOs". Medical Care. 28 (3): 191–200. doi:10.1097/00005650-199003000-00001. JSTOR   3765469. PMID   2314132.
  5. Newhouse, Joseph P.; Manning, Willard G.; Morris, Carl N.; Orr, Larry L.; Duan, Naihua; Keeler, Emmett B.; Leibowitz, Arleen; Marquis, Kent H.; Marquis, M. Susan; Phelps, Charles E.; Robert H., Robert H. (December 17, 1981). "Some Interim Results from a Controlled Trial of Cost Sharing in Health Insurance". The New England Journal of Medicine. 305 (25): 1501–1507. doi:10.1056/NEJM198112173052504. PMID   6795505.
  6. Brook, Robert H.; Ware, John E. Jr.; Rogers, William H.; Keeler, Emmett B.; Davies, Allyson R.; Donald, Cathy A.; Goldberg, George A.; Lohr, Kathleen N.; Masthay, Patricia C.; Newhouse, and Joseph P. (December 8, 1983). "Does Free Care Improve Adults' Health? — Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial". The New England Journal of Medicine. 309 (23): 1426–1434. doi:10.1056/NEJM198312083092305. PMID   6355851.
  7. Ware, John E. JR; Rogers, William H.; Davies, Allyson Ross; Goldberg, George A.; Brook, Robert H.; Keeler, Emmett B.; Sherbourne, Cathy Donald; Camp, Patricia; Newhouse, Joseph P. (May 3, 1986). "Comparison of Health Outcomes at a Health Maintenance Organisation with those of Fee-For-Service Care". The Lancet. 327 (8488): 1017–1022. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(86)91282-1. PMID   2871294. S2CID   27509743.
  8. Lohr, Kathleen N.; Brook, Robert H.; Kamberg, Caren J.; Goldberg, George A.; Leibowitz, Arellen; Keesey, Joan; Reboussin, David; Newhouse, Joseph P. (December 1986). Use of Medical Care in the Rand Health Insurance Experiment: Diagnosis- and Service-specific Analyses in a Randomized Controlled Trial (Report R-3469-HHS) (PDF) (Report). Rand Health Insurance Experiment Series. The Rand Corporation. ISBN   0-8330-0779-3. ["Reprinted from Supplement to Medical Care, Volume 24, Number 9, September 1986, pp. S1-S87"]
  9. Lurie, N; Kamberg, C J; Brook, R H; Keeler, E B; Newhouse, J P (May 1, 1989). "How free care improved vision in the health insurance experiment". American Journal of Public Health. 79 (5): 640–642. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.79.5.640 . PMC   1349513 . PMID   2705602.
  10. Keeler, Emmett B.; Brook, Robert H.; Goldberg, George A.; Kamberg, Caren J.; Newhouse, Joseph P. (October 11, 1985). "How Free Care Reduced Hypertension in the Health Insurance Experiment". Journal of the American Medical Association. 254 (14): 1926–1931. doi:10.1001/jama.1985.03360140084030. PMID   4046121.
  11. Brook, Robert H.; Keeler, Emmett B.; Lohr, Kathleen N.; Newhouse, Joseph P.; Ware, John E.; Rogers, William H.; Davies, Allyson Ross; Sherbourne, Cathy D.; Goldberg, George A.; Camp, Patricia; Kamberg, Caren; Leibowitz, Arleen; Keesey, Joan; Reboussin, David (2006), The Health Insurance Experiment: A Classic RAND Study Speaks to the Current Health Care Reform Debate, Santa Monica, California: RAND Corporation
  12. Newhouse, Joseph P. (November–December 2004). "Consumer-Directed Health Plans And The RAND Health Insurance Experiment". Health Affairs. 23 (6: The Future Of Insurance): 107–113. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.23.6.107 . PMID   15584103.
  13. Chen, Alice; Goldman, Dana (October 31, 2016). "Health Care Spending: Historical Trends and New Directions". Annual Review of Economics. 8 (1): 291–319. doi: 10.1146/annurev-economics-080315-015317 . ISSN   1941-1383. S2CID   154901081.
  14. Ginzberg, Eli (February 20, 1992). "Opinion: Managed Care Hasn't Lived Up to Its Promises". The New York Times. p. A24.
  15. Nyman, John A. (October 1, 2007). "American Health Policy: Cracks in the Foundation". Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law . 32 (5). Duke University Press: 759–783. doi:10.1215/03616878-2007-029. PMID   17855716.
  16. Newhouse, Joseph P.; Brook, Robert H.; Duan, Naihua; Keeler, Emmett B.; Leibowitz, Arleen; Manning, Willard G.; Marquis, M. Susan; Morris, Carl N.; Phelps, Charles E.; Rolph, John E. (April 1, 2008). "Attrition in the RAND Health Insurance Experiment: A Response to Nyman". Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law . 33 (2). Duke University Press: 295–308, discussion 309-17. doi:10.1215/03616878-2007-061. PMID   18325902.
  17. 1 2 Levy, Helen; Meltzer, David (April 2008). "The Impact of Health Insurance on Health". Annual Review of Public Health. 29. Annual Reviews: 399–409. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.28.021406.144042 . PMID   18031224.
  18. 1 2 3 Goldman, Dana P.; Joyce, Geoffrey F.; Zheng, Yuhui (July 4, 2007). "Prescription Drug Cost Sharing: Associations With Medication and Medical Utilization and Spending and Health". Journal of the American Medical Association. 298 (1): 61–69. doi:10.1001/jama.298.1.61. PMC   6375697 . PMID   17609491.
  19. Cogan, JR; Hubbard, RG (September 15, 2007). "Bringing the market to health care". Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on July 6, 2008 via Hoover Institution.
  20. "Editorial: The High Cost of Health Care". The New York Times. November 25, 2007.
  21. Sanghavi, Darshak (May 27, 2008). "The High Price of A Medical Miracle: If Health-Care Costs Are Trimmed, Who Will Be Deprived of Treatment?". The Washington Post .
  22. "What is the Oregon Health Study?". Oregon Health Study. Center for Outcomes Research and Education at Providence Health & Services. July 2011. Archived from the original on June 26, 2012.
  23. Lowrey, Annie (June 22, 2012). "In Oregon, Test Case for Health Overhaul, Better Care at a Cost". New York Times.
  24. Cowen, Tyler (May 1, 2013). "The follow-up study on Medicaid coverage in Oregon". Marginal Revolution. Retrieved August 5, 2015.
  25. Lowrey, Annie (May 1, 2013). "Medicaid Access Increases Use of Care, Study Finds". New York Times.

Further reading

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Medicaid</span> United States social health care program for families and individuals with limited resources

In the United States, Medicaid is a government program that provides health insurance for adults and children with limited income and resources. The program is partially funded and primarily managed by state governments, which also have wide latitude in determining eligibility and benefits, but the federal government sets baseline standards for state Medicaid programs and provides a significant portion of their funding.

In the United States, a health maintenance organization (HMO) is a medical insurance group that provides health services for a fixed annual fee. It is an organization that provides or arranges managed care for health insurance, self-funded health care benefit plans, individuals, and other entities, acting as a liaison with health care providers on a prepaid basis. The US Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973 required employers with 25 or more employees to offer federally certified HMO options if the employer offers traditional healthcare options. Unlike traditional indemnity insurance, an HMO covers care rendered by those doctors and other professionals who have agreed by contract to treat patients in accordance with the HMO's guidelines and restrictions in exchange for a steady stream of customers. HMOs cover emergency care regardless of the health care provider's contracted status.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mark McClellan</span> American health economist (born 1963)

Mark Barr McClellan is the director of the Robert J Margolis Center for Health Policy and the Margolis Professor of Business, Medicine and Health Policy at Duke University. Formerly, he was a senior fellow and director of the Health Care Innovation and Value Initiative at the Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform at The Brookings Institution, in Washington, D.C. McClellan served as commissioner of the United States Food and Drug Administration under President George W. Bush from 2002 through 2004, and subsequently as administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services from 2004 through 2006.

The term managed care or managed healthcare is used in the United States to describe a group of activities intended to reduce the cost of providing health care and providing American health insurance while improving the quality of that care. It has become the predominant system of delivering and receiving American health care since its implementation in the early 1980s, and has been largely unaffected by the Affordable Care Act of 2010.

...intended to reduce unnecessary health care costs through a variety of mechanisms, including: economic incentives for physicians and patients to select less costly forms of care; programs for reviewing the medical necessity of specific services; increased beneficiary cost sharing; controls on inpatient admissions and lengths of stay; the establishment of cost-sharing incentives for outpatient surgery; selective contracting with health care providers; and the intensive management of high-cost health care cases. The programs may be provided in a variety of settings, such as Health Maintenance Organizations and Preferred Provider Organizations.

A copayment or copay is a fixed amount for a covered service, paid by a patient to the provider of service before receiving the service. It may be defined in an insurance policy and paid by an insured person each time a medical service is accessed. It is technically a form of coinsurance, but is defined differently in health insurance where a coinsurance is a percentage payment after the deductible up to a certain limit. It must be paid before any policy benefit is payable by an insurance company. Copayments do not usually contribute towards any policy out-of-pocket maximum, whereas coinsurance payments do.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Medicare Part D</span> United States prescription drug benefit for the elderly and disabled

Medicare Part D, also called the Medicare prescription drug benefit, is an optional United States federal-government program to help Medicare beneficiaries pay for self-administered prescription drugs. Part D was enacted as part of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 and went into effect on January 1, 2006. Under the program, drug benefits are provided by private insurance plans that receive premiums from both enrollees and the government. Part D plans typically pay most of the cost for prescriptions filled by their enrollees. However, plans are later reimbursed for much of this cost through rebates paid by manufacturers and pharmacies.

An out-of-pocket expense is the direct payment of money that may or may not be later reimbursed from a third-party source.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Medicare for All Act</span> Proposed U.S. healthcare reform legislation

The Medicare for All Act, also known as the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act or United States National Health Care Act, is a bill first introduced in the United States House of Representatives by Representative John Conyers (D-MI) in 2003, with 38 co-sponsors. In 2019, the original 16-year-old proposal was renumbered, and Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) introduced a broadly similar, but more detailed, bill, HR 1384, in the 116th Congress. As of November 3, 2019, it had 116 co-sponsors still in the House at the time, or 49.8% of House Democrats.

Consumer-driven healthcare (CDHC), or consumer-driven health plans (CDHP) refers to a type of health insurance plan that allows employers and/or employees to utilize pretax money to help pay for medical expenses not covered by their health plan. These plans are linked to health savings accounts (HSAs), health reimbursement accounts (HRAs), or similar medical payment accounts. Users keep any unused balance or "rollover" at the end of the year to increase future balances or to invest for future expenses. They are a high-deductible health plan which has cheaper premiums but higher out of pocket expenses, and as such are seen as a cost effective means for companies to provide health care for their employees.

In the United States, health insurance helps pay for medical expenses through privately purchased insurance, social insurance, or a social welfare program funded by the government. Synonyms for this usage include "health coverage", "health care coverage", and "health benefits". In a more technical sense, the term "health insurance" is used to describe any form of insurance providing protection against the costs of medical services. This usage includes both private insurance programs and social insurance programs such as Medicare, which pools resources and spreads the financial risk associated with major medical expenses across the entire population to protect everyone, as well as social welfare programs like Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program, which both provide assistance to people who cannot afford health coverage.

Healthcare reform in the United States has a long history. Reforms have often been proposed but have rarely been accomplished. In 2010, landmark reform was passed through two federal statutes: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), signed March 23, 2010, and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, which amended the PPACA and became law on March 30, 2010.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dana Goldman</span>

Dana Paul Goldman is the dean of the USC Price School of Public Policy, Leonard D. Schaeffer Chair and director of the University of Southern California Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, and Professor of Public Policy, Pharmacy, and Economics at the Price School and USC School of Pharmacy. He is also an adjunct professor of health services and radiology at UCLA, and a managing director and founding partner, along with Darius Lakdawalla and Tomas J. Philipson, at Precision Heath Economics, a health care consulting firm. Previously held positions include the director of the Bing Center for Health Economics, RAND Royal Center for Health Policy Simulation, and UCLA/RAND Health Services Research Postdoctoral Training Program.

Bundled payment is the reimbursement of health care providers "on the basis of expected costs for clinically-defined episodes of care." It has been described as "a middle ground" between fee-for-service reimbursement and capitation, given that risk is shared between payer and provider. Bundled payments have been proposed in the health care reform debate in the United States as a strategy for reducing health care costs, especially during the Obama administration (2009–2016). Commercial payers have shown interest in bundled payments in order to reduce costs. In 2012, it was estimated that approximately one-third of the United States healthcare reimbursement used bundled methodology.

An accountable care organization (ACO) is a healthcare organization that ties provider reimbursements to quality metrics and reductions in the cost of care. ACOs in the United States are formed from a group of coordinated health-care practitioners. They use alternative payment models, normally, capitation. The organization is accountable to patients and third-party payers for the quality, appropriateness and efficiency of the health care provided. According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, an ACO is "an organization of health care practitioners that agrees to be accountable for the quality, cost, and overall care of Medicare beneficiaries who are enrolled in the traditional fee-for-service program who are assigned to it".

Joseph P. Newhouse is an American economist and the John D. MacArthur Professor of Health Policy and Management at Harvard University, as well as the Director of the Division of Health Policy Research and of the Interfaculty Initiative on Health Policy. At Harvard, he is a member of the four faculties at Harvard Kennedy School in Cambridge, Harvard Medical School in Boston, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston, and Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences in Cambridge.

The Andersen healthcare utilization model is a conceptual model aimed at demonstrating the factors that lead to the use of health services. According to the model, the usage of health services is determined by three dynamics: predisposing factors, enabling factors, and need. Predisposing factors can be characteristics such as race, age, and health beliefs. For instance, an individual who believes health services are an effective treatment for an ailment is more likely to seek care. Examples of enabling factors could be family support, access to health insurance, one's community, etc. Need represents both perceived and actual need for health care services. The original model was developed by Ronald M. Andersen, a health services professor at UCLA, in 1968. The original model was expanded through numerous iterations, and its most recent form models past the use of services to end at health outcomes and includes feedback loops.

Health care finance in the United States discusses how Americans obtain and pay for their healthcare, and why U.S. healthcare costs are the highest in the world based on various measures.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Oregon Medicaid health experiment</span>

The Oregon health insurance experiment was a research study looking at the effects of the 2008 Medicaid expansion in the U.S. state of Oregon, which occurred based on lottery drawings from a waiting list and thus offered an opportunity to conduct a randomized experiment by comparing a control group of lottery losers to a treatment group of winners, who were eligible to apply for enrollment in the Medicaid expansion program after previously being uninsured.

A safety net hospital is a type of medical center in the United States that by legal obligation or mission provides healthcare for individuals regardless of their insurance status or ability to pay. This legal mandate forces safety net hospitals (SNHs) to serve all populations. Such hospitals typically serve a proportionately higher number of uninsured, Medicaid, Medicare, Children's Health Insurance Program (CHiP), low-income, and other vulnerable individuals than their "non-safety net hospital" counterpart. Safety net hospitals are not defined by their ownership terms; they can be either publicly or privately owned. The mission of safety net hospitals is rather to provide the best possible care for those who are barred from health care due to the various possible adverse circumstances. These circumstances mostly revolve around problems with financial payments, insurance plans, or health conditions. Safety net hospitals are known for maintaining an open-door policy for their services.

The Grossman model of health demand is a model for studying the demand for health and medical care outlined by Michael Grossman in a monograph in 1972 entitled: The demand for health: A theoretical and empirical investigation. The model based demand for medical care on the interaction between a demand function for health and a production function for health. Andrew Jones, Nigel Rice, and Paul Contoyannis call the model the "founding father of demand for health models".