We are working to gather raw data for your own analysis and to pinpoint trustworthy outside sources of data, analysis and summaries that you can use in your reporting. Below are data sources that can assist you in covering insurance.
Who Uses a Price Transparency Tool? Implications for Increasing Consumer Engagement
Research data published in an article shows use of an online price transparency tool was relatively low, echoing prior research findings that few people offered price transparency tools use them. Earlier research also shows that younger people are more likely to use price transparency tools and that those who used transparency tools had higher medical spending than non-users. The article was published in Inquiry: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing.
The 2016 Health Care Cost and Utilization Report
The Health Care Cost Institute issued a report in January 2018 on health care spending among employed workers and their family members. The 2016 Health Care Cost and Utilization Report is based on analyses of HCCI’s data from commercial health insurers. It contains day from those employed workers who under age 65 and who have employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) in the United States. In the report, HCCI said health care spending for the ESI population grew by 4.6 percent in 2016, an increase over the lower rates observed between 2012 and 2015.
Concentration of Health Expenditures and Selected Characteristics of High Spenders, U.S. Civilian Noninstitutionalized Population, 2015
In a statistical brief published Dec. 12, 2017, the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality describe the concentration of health care expenses across the U.S. civilian non-institutionalized population.
What Happens to Health care Costs When Nonprofit Hospitals Take a Financial Hit?
Contrary to conventional wisdom, nonprofit hospitals generally act like for-profit hospitals, at least following a financial crisis, researchers report. Rather than raise prices, many non-profit hospitals cut back on unprofitable services to offset losses in a financial crisis. Researchers from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University discussed their work in this KelloggInsight article. Wiley published the original research in The RAND Journal of Economics.
Why Value-Based Payment Isn’t Working, and How to Fix It
In a report, Harold D. Miller, president and CEO of the Center for Healthcare Quality and Payment Reform, argues that the fee-for-service payment system and current approaches to value-based payment, including pay-for-performance, shared savings, two-sided risk, population-based payments, and narrow networks, have failed to control costs or improve the quality of care. They failed because their central focus is on how to pay providers for services or how to reduce spending for insurers, not on how to achieve good healthcare outcomes for patients at the most affordable cost for patients and insurers, the report says. Instead, this report says health insurers and other payers need to develop a patient-centered payment system that corrects the problems of fee-for-service payment while preserving its strengths.
New Medicare Incentives Encourage Accountable Care Organizations To Assume Greater Risk
A report from consultants Avalere shows that ACOs participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program could have earned additional net payments of $886 million in 2015 if they had assumed greater financial risk under the program and had qualified for the 5 percent bonus payment available under the Quality Payment Program.
Medical cost trend: Behind the numbers 2018
The Health Research Institute at consultants PwC projects the growth of medical costs in the employer insurance market for the coming year and identifies the factors expected to affect medical costs. For 2018, HRI predicts that health care costs may be settling into what PwC calls a “new normal” of moderate fluctuations, meaning cost increases will be in the single digits. For 2018, HRI predicts medical costs will rise by 6.5 percent and that this increase will be the first in three years.
Medical cost trend: Behind the numbers 2018
PwC projects 2018 medical costs will grow at a slightly faster rate than 2017. Future reductions in cost trend will require more focus on price.
Preventable, Potentially Fatal Patient Identification Errors Analyzed by ECRI Institute Patient Safety Organization
Assessing the 2017 Medicare Advantage Star ratings
For a report in which it analyzed CMS data on Medicare Advantage plans, McKinsey & Company showed that it is important for health plans to invest in their abilities to deliver quality care in order to receive a bonus under the star-ratings program.
Explaining Health Care Reform: Risk Adjustment, Reinsurance, and Risk Corridors
In this issue brief, researchers from the Kaiser Family Foundation explain the three provisions included in the Affordable Care Act called risk adjustment, reinsurance, and risk corridors (sometimes known as the 3Rs). These provisions were designed to help health insurers cover the uncertainty about how to price and pay for the health insurance coverage that many newly insured Americans would receive under the act. The 3Rs were intended to promote stability in the insurance markets in years following implementation of the law on Jan. 1, 2014. Previously, insurers denied coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, some of whom were considered to be uninsurable. Given that the ACA did not allow insurers to deny coverage to anyone with a pre-existing condition, insurers were concerned that insuring these individuals would cause wide swings in premiums each year as insurers learned what these individuals needed in terms of care, how to pay for that care, and how to adjust premiums to account for those costs. To keep premiums stable from year to year, the 3Rs were expected to cover some of the insurers’ losses.
Geisinger Health System’s ProvenExperience refund program
In November 2015, the Geisinger Health System in Danville, Pa., introduced its ProvenExperience program in which the health insurer and hospital system promised refunds to members who were dissatisfied with their care. At the time, Geisinger stated that its goal was to ensure the best customer experience in health care and the best customer experience in any industry. One year later, Geisinger executives reported first-year results in an article in the Harvard Business Review. In the article, the executives reported a 23 percent increase in communication between patients and patient experience advocates. Of these, 71 percent were complaints, 24 percent were requests for assistance, and 5 percent were compliments. Among the complaints, 20 percent related to trouble patients had making outpatient appointments and accessing care, 8.7 percent related to financial issues and billing, 8.4 percent involved difficulties accessing results or medical information, and 7.7 percent were complaints about provider behavior or attitude. Each month, the health insurer gets an average of 122 refund requests, averaging $464 each, amounting to about $680,000 such requests annually, they wrote.
Medicaid expansion and marketplace premiums
In an issue brief, The Effect of Medicaid Expansion on Marketplace Premiums, researchers from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation of the federal Department of Health and Human Services examined differences in Marketplace premiums among states that expanded Medicaid and those states that did not expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. The researchers estimated that Marketplace premiums were about 7 percent lower in expansion states.
National Health Expenditure Projections, 2015–25
Economy, Prices, And Aging Expected To Shape Spending And Enrollment A report from the federal Department of Health and Human Services shows that growth in national health expenditures is projected to average 5.8 percent for the period 2015 through 25, the authors said. This rate of increase will outpace growth in the gross domestic product by 1.3 percentage points and the health share of the economy is expected to climb from 17.5 percent in 2014 to 20.1 percent in 2025. One reason for this growth is that millions of Americans gained health insurance coverage in 2014 as a result of the Affordable Care Act and health spending growth reflected this change, increasing from 2.9 percent in 2013 to 5.3 percent in 2014. The expectation for the period 2017 through 2019 is for health spending growth to accelerate somewhat (averaging 5.7 percent), in part as a result of the effect of faster growth in health care prices. The report was published in Health Affairs.
Overview: Medicare Drug Spending
In this 10-page report, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, which advises Congress on Medicare spending, outlines how the Medicare program pays for medications and examines spending on drugs in each of Medicare’s various payment systems (fee for service, Part B), Medicare Advantage (Part C) and private drug plans (Part D). The report provides a useful snapshot for journalists seeking to track Medicare drug spending over time. It addition, the report shows how Medicare drug spending has increased since 2004 when Medicare Part D was introduced.
Improper Medicare payments
In a report, Medicare Advantage Fundamental Improvements Needed in CMS’ Effort to Recover Substantial Amounts of Improper Payments,” the U.S. Government Accountability Office showed that the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimated that it improperly paid $14.1 billion in 2013 to insurers running Medicare Advantage plans. The reason for the overpayments that health insurers could not provide documentation for the diagnoses used to support higher payments. CMS pays health plans based on the severity of illness among health plan members. Under this risk-score system, the health insurers submit diagnoses to CMS for the MA members covered under their contracts. In a series of articles, called Medicare Advantage Money Grab, journalists from the Center for Public Integrity have reported that insurers often tell CMS that their members have multiple chronic and costly conditions, thus using risk-adjusted payments to get CMS to overpay them.
The Health Care Cost Institute established this health care price comparison website from health insurers’ claims data. The goal of Guroo is to give consumers insight into health care costs and quality. The site offers information on the costs of health care services based on a consumer’s location.
Data from the Health Care Pricing Project show variations in hospital inpatient prices, and how market power affects what hospitals charge patients in 188 hospital referral regions (HRRs) nationwide. In particular, see the data on hospital inpatient prices which shows that prices in most expensive region are 400 times higher than they are in the least-expensive region. Data on market power show that when a hospital has a monopoly in a market, its prices are 15.3 percent higher than they are in areas with four or more hospitals. See also the presentation slides and the pricing graphs for 118 HRRs.
National Health Interview Survey
In September 2015, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics (pdf) reported that the uninsured rate among all Americans in the first quarter of the year dropped to 9.2 percent. This rate is estimated to be the lowest among all uninsured Americans of all ages since 1972, when the center began reporting such data from the National Health Interview Survey. The report said that among adults aged 18 to 64, the percentage uninsured droped from 16.3 percent in 2014 to 13.0 percent in the first quarter of 2015. At the same time, there was an increase in private coverage from 67.3 percent to 70.4 percent. Among children under 18 years of age, the percentage with private coverage increased from 52.6 percent in 2013 to 56.3 percent in the first quarter of 2015. This increase reversed a 14-year trend of declining rates of private coverage for children under 18.
From 2002 through 2012, the use complementary medicine, such as acupuncture, chiropractic care and massage therapy increased among adults who did not have health insurance for these services, according to the CDC’s National Health Interview Survey. The NHIS found no change in use of these services among Americans who had health insurance.
Health insurance coverage for individuals seeking complementary health approaches has not been widely studied. The most recent national data on this topic was released 20 years ago, the NHIS said.
Among adults who saw a chiropractor, 60 percent had some health insurance coverage. But for those getting acupuncture, only 25 percent of adults had insurance for acupuncture and for those getting massage therapy, only 15 percent had coverage such therapy. Adults received acupuncture and chiropractic care were likely to have only partial coverage, the survey showed.
The annual State of Health Care Quality Report from the National Committee for Quality Assurance focuses on quality issues health plans face in using evidence-based care. The 2015 report documents performance trends over time, tracks variation in care and recommends quality improvements based on data collected in 2014 by NCQA’s Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS), a health plan performance improvement tool. The report summarizes the quality and consumer satisfaction results of health plans covering more than 171 million people, or 54 percent of the U.S. population. Among the 136 quality improvement measures in the report, NCQA showed that over three to five years, health plans had statistically significant improvements in performance on 46 measures (34 percent of the total) and plans had statistically significant declines in performance on 12 measures (9 percent of the total).
Provider Utilization and Payment Data
CMS has released a data set on Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Referring Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics and Supplies (DMEPOS) Public Use File. It contains information on products and services provided to Medicare beneficiaries ordered by physicians and other health care professionals.
An Analysis of Popular Legal Arguments Against Price Transparency
Along with the Report Card on State Price Transparency Laws, July 2015, the Catalyst for Payment Reform (CPR) and the Health Care Incentives Improvement Institute included An Analysis of Popular Legal Arguments Against Price Transparency. This four-page analysis should be useful to journalists covering state legislation designed to improve transparency because it will allow reporters to refute the arguments that health insurers, hospitals, physicians, and other providers make when opposing price transparency laws. Insurers and providers often argue, for example, that pricing information should not be made public because it is confidential by contract (which is often true) or protected as trade secrets (which it is not). In addition, the information that would be most useful is that of the largest insurers and provider organizations and they are often the most successful in keep price information out of the public domain, the report says.
Report Card on State Price Transparency Laws, July 2015
This report from the Catalyst for Payment Reform (CPR) and the Health Care Incentives Improvement Institute shows little progress since 2014, and in some cases, states regressed. In the report, CPR and HCI3 say the report shows the need for more pricing transparency. The 2015 report is based on legislation enacted in 2014, but the researchers also say that many proposed price transparency laws never pass because of pressure from health insurers, hospitals, physician groups and others who benefit from keeping price data opaque. “That pressure often rests on spurious arguments about price as a trade secret and/or the potential for a state law on price transparency to violate contracted terms between payers, providers, and suppliers—arguments legislators and the media often accept,” the report said. In the report, CPR and HCI3 gave failing grades to 45 states. Only New Hampshire got an A; Colorado and Maine got Bs; and Vermont and Virginia got Cs.
Medical Cost Trend: Behind the Numbers 2016
In this report, researchers from PwC’s Health Research Institute predict that spending on health care in 2015 will reach $2.9 trillion but the growth in spending will be lower in 2016 than it was in 2015, but it will still outpace overall economic inflation. Despite the full implementation of the Affordable Care Act in 2014, affordable health care remains out of reach for many consumers. The researchers identified three factors that are expected to reduce the rate of growth in health care spending in 2016 and two factors that may increase spending in 2016. The first of the three factors that will reduce spending are the “Cadillac tax,” an excise tax on employers’ high-cost benefit plans that is set to go into effect in 2018 unless congress acts to eliminate the tax or slow the implementation data. This tax may cause employers to change their benefit design to avoid paying a 40 percent tax on health plan premiums over $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for family coverage. The other two factors are virtual care such as remote monitoring and telehealth and new health advisers who help employees of large companies to use the health care system more efficiently. The two factors that could increase spending in 2016 are the high price of specialty medications and large-scale security breaches of health insurers and health care providers.
Utilization of products, services by Medicare beneficiaries
CMS has released a data set on Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Referring Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics and Supplies (DMEPOS) Public Use File. It contains information on products and services provided to Medicare beneficiaries ordered by physicians and other health care professionals.
Enhancing the State Health Insurance Markets: State Progress Reports
The National Health Council (NHC) created state-specific progress reports to assess the patient-centeredness of health insurance markets across states. These reports show the variability across insurance marketplaces and identify states where changes could improve access to coverage and care for patients. These reports also can identify leading states that set best practices for patient-friendly requirements.
Q4 2014 TransUnion Healthcare Report
A survey of 7,400 Americans showed that 54 percent of respondents were confused by bills from health care providers, 64 percent received surprise health care bills, and only 25 percent received a cost estimate before receiving health care services. Among respondents, 80 percent said cost estimates would be helpful.
In addition, to the survey results, the report said consumers had less credit available to pay for health care services despite an improving economy. Consumers’ ability to pay for medical procedures decreased by more than 11 percent in 2014 as health care costs rose and revolving credit became less available, said TransUnion Healthcare, a division of TransUnion, a credit-rating company. The company uses a ratio to compare consumers’ available revolving credit to select health care costs. The report showed that consumers’ available credit declined 11 percent from 2013 to 13.5 to 1 at the end of 2014. The ratio means that for every $100 in health care costs, consumers had $1,350 in revolving credit to use to make those payments in the last quarter of 2014.
Also, the report showed, the average deductible has risen steadily since the second quarter of 2013 from rose $1,055 to $1,133 by the fourth quarter of 2014 and that the average price of major joint replacement surgeries rose steadily in the same period from $2,535 in the second quarter of 2013 to $3,135 in the fourth quarter of 2014.
NCQA State of Health Care Quality Report 2014
The National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) publishes the an annual report that summarizes results from its Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set. HEDIS is a performance measurement tool for health plans. The State of Health Care Quality Report 2014 (pdf) shows results from calendar year 2013 that were collected from 814 HMOs and 353 PPOs nationwide. The number of Americans enrolled in health plans that report HEDIS data has doubled in 11 years to more than 171 million, or 54 percent of the U.S. population, NCQA said.
Performance remains low in many areas, NCQA reported, adding that too few Americans receive efficient, effective care or recommended tests and treatments. Performance on mental health care and addiction treatment metrics is weakest, NCQA reported. But more children with ADHD are receiving recommended treatment than ever before, a rare highlight amid many poor results on behavioral healthcare measures, the committee said.
Consumer Reports National Research Center: Survey on surprise medical bills
In March 2015, Consumers Reports National Research Center surveyed 2,200 U.S. consumers and found that in the past two years about one third of privately insured Americans received a surprise medical bill, meaning their health plan paid less than expected. In this group, nearly one out of four got a bill they did not expect. For journalists, these findings may be worthwhile when writing about how the rising cost of health care affects consumers. The Surprise Medical Bills Survey report (pdf) is available online.
In particular, the survey findings suggest that many consumers are confused about their rights when they decide to fight surprise bills. And they showed that insurers often don’t pay when consumers have payment disputes with their insurance companies over bills from out-of-network providers. These providers often do what’s called ‘balance billing’ of consumers, meaning they bill consumers for whatever amount the insurance company does not pay. These balance billing amounts can be quite high.
The survey showed that only 28 percent of privately insured Americans with billing issues were satisfied with how their issues were resolved. More than half (53 percent) of those who received surprise medical bills reported that the issue was either not resolved at all or not resolved as they would have liked. Among these consumers 57 percent paid the bill in full. Here are some of the significant findings from the survey:
Two-thirds (67 percent) of privately insured Americans who responded to the survey did not know which state entity was responsible for resolving health insurance billing issues.
Most (87 percent) of respondents didn’t know the state agency responsible for addressing health insurance complaints.
Many (72 percent) were unsure if they had a right to appeal to the state or an independent medical expert if their health plan refused coverage for medical services.
Among respondents, 1 in 7 were surprised to find a doctor, lab, or other health care facility they thought was in-network, was in fact out-of-network.
Many (63 percent) assumed that doctors working at an in-network hospital are in-network doctors. In fact, not all doctors working at in-network hospitals are in the same network.
Most (85 percent) respondents said hospitals should notify patients if a doctor or technician involved in a procedure performed at that hospital is out-of-network.
Consumers Union supports legislation in such states as California and Texas that would strengthen protections against surprise medical bills.
A report, Problems Paying Medical Bills Among Persons Under Age 65, from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that the percentage of persons under age 65 in families having problems paying medical bills decreased from 21.3 percent (56.5 million) in 2011 to 17.8 percent (47.7 million) in the first 6 months of 2014. Among those under age 65 struggling to pay medical bills in the first 6 months of 2014, 31.2 percent were uninsured, 24.2 percent had public coverage, and 12.4 percent had private coverage, the report showed. The data in this report is based on information collected during the first six months of 2014.
In a report in November 2014, the National Institute for Health Care Management showed in a series of charts how 1 percent of the U.S. population accounts for nearly 23 percent of overall health care spending. The data from the 2012 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and from the federal Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality (AHRQ), also shows that 5 percent of Americans are responsible for a 50 percent of all spending. As the NIHCM report says, “Any meaningful effort to control spending growth must account for this extreme concentration.” For health care journalists these numbers are instructive in particular because the lowest-spending half of the population accounts for less than 3 percent of total spending, about $234 per person, per year. This chart show the top spenders, the factors that drive high spending, and why these patterns of spending persist over time.
In September 2014, the U.S. Government Accountability Office reported on the range of base health insurance premiums in the individual market for each county in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. These numbers were published on the HealthCare.gov Plan Finder as of January 2013 for 14 categories of consumers, GAO said. Health care reporters may find this report useful when covering how much health insurance premium rates changed after 2013 when the Affordable Care Act became effective.
Before the Affordable Care Act was implemented on Jan. 1, 2014, insurers could vary individuals’ premium rates in most states based on age, gender, health status, geographic region, and other factors. When underwriting based on health status, insurers often charged individuals with health conditions much more than they charged consumers who were relatively healthy, and they could deny coverage to individuals with pre-existing conditions. Under the ACA, insurers can no longer use gender or health status to set premiums and are restricted in how much they can vary premiums based on age and tobacco use. The 7-page GAO letter report includes a link to an interactive map of each state.
Leapfrog Group releases new safety scores for 2,500 general hospitals
The Leapfrog Group assigns A, B, C, D and F grades to hospitals based on their ability to prevent errors, injuries and infections. The data show performance on actual outcomes has lagged but hospitals have made improvements in processes and safe practices, such as instituting hand-hygiene policies and physician staffing in intensive care units. Visit Hospital Safety Score for more information or to find specific scores.
The Rise of Retail Coverage: Report shows why some employers will shift to private exchanges
A report, The Rise of Retail Health Coverage, by the consulting firm PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLP shows that about one third of employers are considering moving health insurance benefits for their active employees to a private health insurance exchange in the next three years. The growth of private health insurance exchanges will allow more employers to shift to defined-contribution plans, thus helping them control costs more effectively and move away from having a strong role in managing employee benefits, the report explains. Moving health benefits for employers to a private exchange will allow employers to shift from defined-benefit plans, in which they pay for certain health insurance benefits, to defined-contribution plans, in which they give employees cash so employees can buy health insurance benefits for themselves and their families.
In many ways, the movement to defined-contribution plans is like the shift that occurred beginning in the mid- to late-1980s when employers moved away from traditional pension plans to 401(k) plans, PwC said. Under traditional defined-benefit pension plans, employers provided lifetime payments to former workers upon retirement. Under 401(k) plans, they could give employees funds that could be used for retirement plans and could stop paying when employees retired or were otherwise no longer employed. Shifting responsibility for retirement planning and health benefits gives employers more control over rising costs, the report said.
Not all employers will shift benefits to private exchanges, the report added. Small employers may be able to shift to a public exchange without penalty, for example, and some of the largest employers will still prefer to manage their own benefits. The report was based on PwC's 2014 Touchstone Survey of more than 1,200 employers from 35 industries in the United States.
Report outlines flaws in pay for performance and CMS’ value-based purchasing program
A report (pdf) by Harold D. Miller, president and CEO of the Center for Healthcare Quality and Payment Reform, thoroughly explains the problems inherent in such payment strategies as pay for performance (P4P), CMS’ value-based payment program (VBP), and in fee-for-service. Titled, Measuring and Assigning Accountability for Healthcare Spending, the report raises questions about CMS’ value-based purchasing program and pay for performance in general while also explaining the deep flaws in fee for service payment. The report outlines what’s wrong with how commercial and government insurers pay for health care and how their methods of payment are not designed to produce the most desirable outcome: better patient health. Miller identifies and explains the fundamental problems with current spending methods and also gives examples of payment methods that would address these flaws.
Consultants explain the factors that will drive up health care costs in 2015
In 2015, health care costs will rise by about 6.8 percent, according to a report from the Health Research Institute at PriceWaterhouseCoopers. The report also outlines some of the reasons why costs will rise. As the economy improves, for example, health care costs will increase as well, the report says. Other reasons costs will rise include the increased us of costly specialty medications and the fact that more cancer patients are getting medications in hospitals today rather than in physicians’ offices where they had received these medications in years past. Hospitals are a more expensive setting than physicians’ offices, the report says. The report, Medical cost trend: Behind the numbers 2015, is available for download, although free registration is required. See also the accompanying charts in a separate download, Medical cost trend: Behind the numbers 2015 chart pack (pdf).
Report Card on State Price Transparency Laws
All but five states received a failing grade of F (on a scale from A to F), according to the 2014 Report Card on State Price Transparency Laws (PDF), released March 25. No state earned an A grade, and there were only two Bs and three Cs, according to the report from the Catalyst for Payment Reform (CPR) and the Health Care Incentives Improvement Institute (HCI3). With a few exceptions, state efforts to collect and publish price information have failed, the report said. In addition, many of the transparency tools that states make available to consumers are not user-friendly.
Characteristics of the Population With Consumer-Driven and High-Deductible Health Plans, 2005–2013; Labor-Force Participation Rates of the Population Ages 55 and Older, 2013
In a report published in April 2014, the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) collects data on who has consumer-driven health plans. This report finds that when compared to those in traditional health plans, enrollees in consumer-driven health plans tend to have higher incomes and better education, and are in better health. Consumer-driven health plans (CDHPs) typically consist of health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) or health savings accounts (HSAs), the report says. About 26.1 million individuals with private insurance are either in a CDHP or they are in an HSA-eligible plan, the report says. These 26.1 million individuals represent 15 percent of the health insurance market. The report includes data from EBRI surveys going back to 2005, the report examines the population with a CDHP and how it differs from the population with traditional health coverage. The report is available online from EBRI.
Private Health Insurance: The Range of Base Premiums for Individuals Age 19 and 64 in the Individual Market by State in January 2013
In a report released Feb. 4, 2014, the Government Accountability Office issued a report on the range of base premiums before health insurers conducted underwriting for individuals. The report, Private Health Insurance: The Range of Base Premiums for Individuals Age 19 and 64 in the Individual Market by State in January 2013, is available for download as a PDF. The data in the report came from the HealthCare.gov Plan Finder in January 2013 and showed the base premiums for individuals aged 19 and 64 in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The base premiums reflected data submitted by insurers to the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Health care journalists may find this report useful because the premium numbers represent the lowest amounts that would have been available to individuals in different categories. They can compare what individuals would pay in each state andwhat individuals would have paid before the Affordable Care Act became effective one year later, on Jan. 1, 2014. The numbers do not, however, represent the actual premium amounts that consumers would pay. Consumers likely would pay more after insurers completed underwriting for health conditions and other factors, the GAO said. Also, in 2013, some individuals would have been denied coverage, although such denials were outlawed under the Affordable Care Act as of Jan. 1, 2014.
Behavioral Health Barometer: United States
In December, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) of the Department of Health and Human Services published the first Behavioral Health Barometer: United States, a publication that provides a snapshot of the state of behavioral health in the nation. Note also that SAMHSA also published a Behavioral Health Barometer for each state and for the District of Columbia. These reports present data on substance use and mental health indicators collected by SAMHSA (from its National Survey on Drug Use and Health and its National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services), from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (from the CDC’s Youth Risk Behavior Survey), and from the Monitoring the Future survey by the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Also included are data from the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services on how Medicare enrollees use mental health and substance-abuse treatment services. SAMHSA intends to update these reports regularly to reflect the state of the science and incorporate new measures of interest.
The reports show trends among teens and adults regarding smoking status and the use of prescription painkillers, for example. They also include data on youth rates of the use of cigarettes, illicit drugs, marijuana, and nonmedical pain relievers; the age at first use; mental health and treatment, depression and depression treatment; and on adult rates of mental health and treatment, including thoughts of suicide, serious mental illness and treatment, alcohol dependence and abuse, illicit drug dependence and abuse, and heavy alcohol use, among other data.
Open for business: Insurers prepare for new consumer market
A recent report, Open for business: Insurers prepare for new consumer market (PDF), from Price Waterhouse Coopers thoroughly explains the role that health insurers are playing in new government-run and new private health insurance exchanges. The new way of purchasing health insurance coverage on public and private exchanges is reshaping the health insurance industry, the report says, and these changes show that some non-traditional health insurers may benefit from using these new exchanges to enroll consumers.
HCI3 issue brief on physician quality transparency
A report, “State Report Card on Transparency of Physician Quality Information,” from the Health Care Incentives Improvement Institute (HCI3) sheds light on the problem many consumers face with trying to assess the level of quality that physicians deliver. There is very little information available publicly on the quality of physician care, yet the federal government and commercial health plans have been collecting data on quality measures for years. “There are commercial websites that provide some information on the quality of physician care, but there’s often a fee to pay for the full report, and the objectivity of the data on those sites has been questioned by many researchers,” the report says. In this new report,MinnesotaandWashingtonstate got the highest grade (an A),Californiagot a C, and all others got Ds or Fs.
Trends in Insurance Coverage, Source of Private Coverage Among Young Adults
This report shows that, since September 2010 – when adults aged 19–25 were able to obtain dependent private health insurance coverage through a provision of the ACA – the percentage of young adults with private insurance increased and the percentage without insurance decreased. The increase in the percentage with private insurance occurred at about the same time (January–June 2011) as a temporary increase in the percentage of privately insured young adults who had been uninsured at some time in the past 12 months. This suggests that those newly insured were previously uninsured or had a period of no insurance in the past year. After this spike, the percentage of young adults with a period of no insurance did not return to pre-2011 levels but rather declined to levels consistent with slightly older adults. The data comes from the National Health Interview Survey, 2008–2012.
NCQA State of Health Care Quality Report 2013
The State of Health Care Quality Report 2013 from the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) was released in October and shows trends in how managed care plans deliver care. These reports each year are a rich source of data for health care journalists. The latest report is based on 2012 data from NCQA’s Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS), a performance improvement tool that health plans use to report quality scores to their employer clients. In 2012, NCQA collected HEDIS data from 1,151 health plans, a 9 percent increase over the 1,057 plans that participated in 2011. HEDIS scores covered a record 136 million people, or 43 percent of Americans.
The report provides information on rates of overuse and appropriateness of procedures, rates on the management of patients with chronic conditions, measures of care for children and adolescents, and measures of care for adults. The appendices report on rates of variation in plan performance, and aggregate data from HEDIS and from the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey.
AHRQ report from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey
Statistical Brief #421: Differentials in the Concentration in the Level of Health Expenditures across Population Subgroups in the U.S., 2010
Through this year, spending for health care will continue to rise slowly, according to a recent article published in Health Affairs by officials from the Office of the Actuary at the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).
But slow growth will not continue. Starting next year and continuing until at least until 2022, costs will rise again as they did earlier, said the authors of the report, “National Health Expenditure Projections, 2012–22: Slow Growth Until Coverage Expands And Economy Improves.”
The slow growth rates through this year are a factor of a weak economy and a slow recovery, limited growth in private health insurance enrollment, and increased provisions that consumers share in the costs of care. The report includes detailed discussions about projected spending for Medicare, Medicaid, physician services, hospitals, prescription drugs, and private insurance premiums.
“For the period 2014–22, national health spending is projected to rebound to growth rates observed prior to the recession, although growth will still be slower than that experienced over the longer term,” the authors wrote. “This rebound in growth is based on improving economic conditions, coverage expansions in the Affordable Care Act, and the aging of the baby-boom generation. Expected growth for 2014 is 6.1 percent, with an average projected growth of 6.2 percent per year thereafter.”
To arrive at these projections, the authors used actuarial and econometric modeling and judgments about events and trends that influence health spending. “The projections use the economic and demographic assumptions from the 2013 Medicare Trustees Report,” the authors wrote. Included in the assumptions are estimates based on the full implementation of the Affordable Care Act and the one-year delay of the employer mandate, they added.
Of the nine authors of the report, five are economists, three are actuaries, and one is the deputy director of the National Health Statistics Group.
Employee Benefits Research Institute
The Employee Benefits Research Institute (EBRI) has published the EBRI Databook on Employee Benefits since 1990. EBRI says the databook is maintained online and updated when new data are available. The date next to each chapter link indicates when data or links were added. The databook is compiled from dozens of sources, showing all the various functions of employee benefits. It includes more than 400 tables and charts on the employee benefit system, including employer-sponsored benefits; health insurance, government programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid; labor force and demographic trends; and retirement. Perhaps most useful for journalists are the sections showing how the population is aging, which is broken down by region, and tables on employment trends among women of childbearing age, veterans, and the disabled.
Leapfrog Group for Patient Safety
This is a group supported by large employers that contract with hospitals nationwide and thus are interested in promoting higher quality and a safer and more efficient health care system. The group collects data on safety and quality from voluntary surveys and publishes its results online. Not all hospitals participate in Leapfrog Group surveys. In 2009, 1,206 hospitals across the country completed The Leapfrog Hospital Survey.
The Leapfrog Hospital Survey assesses hospital performance based on national performance measures and practices that are of specific interest to employers, other health care purchasers, and consumers. The survey results are publicly reported, by hospital, here.
The Hospital Safety Score is used to grade hospitals on their overall performance in keeping patients safe from preventable harm and medical errors. The grades are derived from analysis of publicly available data using 26 evidence-based, national measures of hospital safety, the group says. It is the only hospital ratings methodology to be peer-reviewed and published, Leapfrog claims. Journalists should note, however, that Hospital Safety Scores cannot be republished without written permission from The Leapfrog Group.
Payment Reform Scorecard
Health insurers recognize that the fee-for-service (FFS) payment system is deeply flawed. FFS drives up spending because it provides an incentive for physicians and other providers to deliver more care whether more care is needed or not. Critics charge that under FFS, providers get paid for doing more and not necessarily for providing appropriate care.
Recognizing the inherent flaws in FFS, four organizations in 2013 called for an end to fee-for-service payment and instead move the health care system shifts from volume to value. The Report of the National Commission on Physician Payment Reform from the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) said FFS payment is at the heart of what’s wrong. SGIM called for adopting new payment methods over five years (from 2013 through 2017) and eliminating FFS by 2023.
The forms of payment that will replace FFS include bundled payment but these other forms of payment represent only about 11 percent of all forms of pay to providers, according the National Scorecard on Payment Reform, a report issued by Catalyst for Payment Reform (CPR) in San Francisco. “Almost 90% of payments remain in traditional fee for service, paying providers for every test and procedure they perform regardless of necessity or outcome,” CPR said.
CPR says its scorecard provides a baseline against which health plans and employers can measure future progress toward payment reform. In 2010, for example, CPR reported that only about 3 percent of payments reflected provider performance, meaning 97 percent of spending was not used as payment for value. CPR has predicted that, by 2020, 20 percent of commercial payment would be related to value.
EBRI report tracks health insurance coverage from 1995 through March 2012
The Employee Benefit Resource Institute published a report, “Tracking Health Insurance Coverage by Month: Trends in Employment-Based Coverage Among Workers, and Access to Coverage Among Uninsured Workers, 1995–2012,” in July 2013. Available as a PDF for download, the 24-page report examines employment-based, health-benefit-coverage rates each month from December 1995 to March 2012. The data allow for identification of changes in trends and shows the effects of recessions and unemployment on changes in coverage.
Commonwealth Fund report outlines how the health system works for low-income Americans
A report published by The Commonwealth Fund in September 2013 evaluates how well state health care systems are working for low-income Americans and finds wide disparities in access to care and health care quality. The stark differences in health care access, quality, and outcomes in the report result in a substantial loss of lives and missed opportunities to improve health and quality of care. If all states reached the benchmarks set by the leading states, 30 million more low-income adults and children would have health insurance coverage, reducing the number of uninsured by more than half, the report shows.
Lower-income Americans in top performing states would be better off than higher-income people in lagging states, and millions of Americans would have better care and healthier lives if all states could do as well as the top performers, the report shows.
For health care journalists seeking information on women’s health insurance coverage and women’s health in general, the Office on Women’s Health from the federal Department of Health and Human Services provides an interactive system for searching for health data called Quick Health Data Online. The system is useful for anyone seeking health data. Free training is available on how to use the interactive system on certain dates in October, November, and December 2013. The last schedule training date is Dec. 19, 2013.
The system provides state- and county-level data on women’s health issues, including health insurance for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and United States territories and possessions. The health insurance information includes data on access to insurance for children and adults, and statistics on the number of percentage of children below poverty.