News
Article
Author(s):
Over the course of the last 20 years, high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) have undergone an evolution. Today’s plans, with more high-value services covered predeductible, can improve care for people with chronic diseases, said panelists at the 2024 Value-Based Insurance Design (V-BID) Summit.
High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) have been around for 20 years, during which time the US health care system has undergone some dramatic changes, including the introduction of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and its provisions.
The theme of the University of Michigan’s Center for Value-Based Insurance Design (V-BID)’s 2024 V-BID Summit was “Overcoming Financial Toxicity,” starting with a discussion around the successes and challenges of HDHPs based on research from the past 20 years and the evolutions to the products.
In the simplest terms, HDHPs have higher deductibles and lower premiums. Typically, they have a deductible of at least $1000 for an individual and $2000 for families and most services are subject to the deductible. Even early on, most HDHPs had some value-based exclusions, such as primary care visits and preventive care; however, when the ACA was passed into law in 2010, evidence-based preventive care was required to have $0 cost sharing, explained Frank Wharam, MD, MPH, professor of medicine at Duke University.
Approximately two-thirds of the privately insured population is in an HDHP, half of which have health savings accounts (HSAs). This amounts to approximately one-third of the total US population, he explained. This large proportion of the population in HDHPs is important because there are concerns about the effects HDHPs might have on reducing utilization and causing financial and physical harm.
Understanding about the potential effect of HDHPs starts even farther back than 20 years ago with the RAND Health Insurance Experiment, which took place in the 1970s and 1980s and evaluated the impact of high cost sharing. The experiment enrolled 8000 adults who were randomly assigned to very high cost sharing, very low cost sharing, or various levels in between.
The high-level takeaway was that “very high out-of-pocket [OOP] cost obligations were sort of a blunt instrument [that reduced] all types of care whether they were needed and high value or less needed and low value,” Wharam explained.
There were some exceptions, such as high-severity emergency department care, but generally all services went down. Overall, it was unsurprising that high cost sharing reduced health care spending simply because it reduced utilization.
Another important takeaway was that there was no observable impact on health outcomes. The only exception was for a subgroup of people who had low income with high morbidity who were predicted to have adverse health outcomes.
Stemming from the RAND Health Insurance Experiment and beyond, there are 7 major questions around HDHPs:
Overall, the research on HDHPs presents a mixed picture of the effects they have on patient health.
“There’s no evidence of high-deductible health plans making the overall population sicker,” Wharam said. “But, on the other hand, they don’t make members healthier, and they might worsen health outcomes for low-income, high-morbidity patients based on existing research.”
Stephen Parente, PhD, MPH, MS, professor in the Department of Finance and Minnesota Insurance Industry Chair of Health Finance in the Carlson School of Management at University of Minnesota, first started his research in this area when HDHPs were actually called medical savings accounts, and no one wanted to sign up for them.
When he moved to Minnesota in the 2000s, he worked with some new employers who were trying out HDHPs. The interesting thing was that they knew about the RAND Health Experiment and made primary prevention a requirement in the benefit design to avoid the issues seen in the experiment.
Looking at a selection of plans, having a chronic condition did not keep people away from these plans, as initially thought. Income level was a bigger correlate of whether or not someone decided to go into the plan.
A concern about HDHPs remained how they would affect people with chronic conditions, such as diabetes, asthma, and depression. More than 10 years ago, Parente and the V-BID Center modeled a benefit design that made secondary prevention available predeductible, and they determined that such a design would save money and more people would move into it.
In 2019, following on that research, the US Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service expanded the list of preventive care benefits that could be provided by HDHPs predeductible with an additional 14 drugs and services. However, there were still complaints that the expanded list of these so-called HDHP plus (HDHP+) designs should have included more.
Researchers know that people are picking HDHP+ plans, but there isn’t claims information to know if costs are going up or down, if health outcomes are being affected, or if people are getting the services they need. Parente is now working on understanding what would happen if that coverage was expanded even more. This includes adding more drugs for chronic conditions and full primary care and some specialty care for people with chronic conditions predeductible.
In 2003, the Medicare Modernization Act created the HSA market. In HDHP-HSA plans, members pay OOP with the pre-tax HSA money, but preventive care was excluded and could be covered predeductible. However, the definition of what constituted good preventive care was very narrow at the time, explained Katy Spangler, principal at Spangler Strategies.
The reason why it was so important to expand the list of what can be provided predeductible is because previously a patient could be screened for a disease, but once a diagnosis was made, treating the condition could not be delivered predeductible, she said.
In the years since the previous administration expanded the list of predeductible benefits in 2019, there has been work to understand what happened. The Smarter Healthcare Coalition, of which Spangler is a codirector, partnered with AHIP to survey its members and found that 75% to 80% of health plans and employers had changed their benefit designs to offer more chronic disease prevention predeductible. The top change was offering help to manage diabetes followed by heart disease.
A month later, the Employee Benefit Research Institute confirmed those findings with a separate survey where 76% of respondents said they added more predeductible coverage.
Now, there is a push to expand flexibility for high-value services, such as mental and behavioral health counseling, naloxone to treat drug overdoses, and some primary care and even specialty care visits.
“One thing that we have heard…it's great that [a patient’s] insulin could be offered predeductible, but the visit for the prescription for the insulin is not [covered] predeductible and that creates a new barrier for some patients,” Spangler said.