CASE STUDY 1: THE PROBLEM OF HIGH DEDUCTIBLES AND CONSUMER DIRECTED HEALTH CARE IN U.S. HEALTH INSURANCE

In 2006, about one in 10 employees had a health insurance deductible over

This study is forcing economists to rethink high-deductible health insurance Updated by Sarah Kliff [email protected] Oct 14, 2015, 10:00am EDT

(Shutterstock)

This study is forcing economists to rethink high-deductible healt... https://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9528441/high-deductible-ins...

1 of 9 10/13/17, 12:18 PM

$1,000. Today? About half do.

To health economists, this sounded like good news; they've long theorized that

higher deductibles would force down health-care costs. The idea was that higher

deductibles would make patients become smarter shoppers: If they had to pay

more of the cost, they'd likely choose something closer to the $1,529

appendectomy than the $186,955 appendectomy (yes, some hospitals really do

charge that much). This would push the really expensive doctors to lower their

prices so cheaper physicians didn't steal their business.

This was, however, just a theory. And a massive new study suggests it might have

been all wrong.

Economists Zarek Brot-Goldberg, Amitabh Chandra, Benjamin Handel, and

Jonathan Kolstad studied a firm that, in 2013, shifted tens of thousands of

workers into high-deductible insurance plans. This was a perfect moment to look

at how their patterns of care changed — whether they did, in fact, use the new

shopping tools their employer gave them to compare prices.

Turns out they didn't. The new paper shows that when faced with a higher

deductible, patients did not price shop for a better deal. Instead, both healthy and

sick patients simply used way less health care.

"I am a little bit surprised at just how poorly patients were able to do when looking

at very similar products, like MRI scans, and with a shopping tool," says Kolstad, an

economist at University of California Berkeley and one of the study's co-author.

"Two years in, and there's still no evidence they're price shopping."

This raises a scary possibility: Perhaps higher deductibles don't lead to smarter

This study is forcing economists to rethink high-deductible healt... https://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9528441/high-deductible-ins...

2 of 9 10/13/17, 12:18 PM

shoppers but rather, in the long run, sicker patients.

Higher deductibles mean sick people use less health care

(Shutterstock)

Kolstad and his co-authors looked at the case of a large, unnamed company that

shifted more than 75,000 workers and their dependents from a plan with no

This study is forcing economists to rethink high-deductible healt... https://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9528441/high-deductible-ins...

3 of 9 10/13/17, 12:18 PM

deductible to one with a $3,750 deductible. When the change happened, workers

received a $3,750 subsidy to a health savings account — money they could spend

freely on whatever health costs they incurred. The company also gave workers

online tools to look up prices for doctor visits, tests, and other services they might

need.

Workers' health spending dropped, and did so quickly. Average per-patient

spending fell from $5,222.60 in 2012 to $4,446.08 in 2013. That's about a 15

percent decline in a single year — and it held true across all types of health

services. Between 2012 and 2014, there was a 25 percent drop in emergency

room spending, an 18 percent decline in physician office visits, and a 6 percent

decrease in mental health services.

WITH A HIGH-DEDUCTIBLE PLAN, SPENDING DROPPED 15 PERCENT IN ONE YEAR

In one sense, then, the high-deductible plan did accomplish a key goal: lower

health spending. But when the researchers looked at why spending dropped, they found it had nothing to do with smarter shopping. The average price of a doctor

visit wasn't dropping.

Instead, under the high-deductible

plan, workers just went to the doctor

way less. The paper finds that

"spending reductions are entirely due

to outright reductions in quantity."

Workers did use less "potentially

wasteful care," like imaging services,

but they also cut back on "potentially

valuable care," like preventive visits.

This study is forcing economists to rethink high-deductible healt... https://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9528441/high-deductible-ins...

4 of 9 10/13/17, 12:18 PM

Even more striking: The sickest workers were those who were most likely to

reduce their use of care while still under the deductible — even though this is the

group that needs lots of care and is most likely to blow through the deductible by

the end of the year. Once these sick workers actually exceeded their deductible,

though, use of medical services rebounded.

"People who are the most likely to go past the deductible also cut back by the

most, and they did that entirely under the deductible," Kolstad says. "They

respond to the spot pricing [the price of receiving care right then], and that leads

to a very large reduction in care. We don't find any evidence they look for a lower

cost. They just don't go."

Why does a deductible cause sick patients to forgo care?

This was the point, to me, that was most baffling in this new paper. Sick patients

would likely have some sense that they needed a lot of medical care — and that

they were probably going to hit their deductible. So why did they reduce the care

they received in the start of the year instead of ponying up the costs, hitting the

deductible early, and getting the care they thought they needed?

In some cases, you could chalk this up to a liquidity issue: A worker might not have

enough money in her checking account to pay for all the care below the $3,750

deductible. But that explanation doesn't work here: In this case, the employer put

a $3,750 subsidy in workers' health savings accounts.

Why wouldn't this group get the care they wanted, pay for it with the HSA, and

just run through the out-of-pocket spending earlier in the year? Or, if they do want

to reduce spending, why wouldn't they at least shop for a lower-cost provider

instead of forgoing care altogether?

Kolstad doesn't have a definitive answer to this question, but he thinks it might

have a lot to do with the difficulty all of us have, as patients, guessing how much

we'll spend on health care in a certain year. This leads us to be more averse to

upfront spending.

This study is forcing economists to rethink high-deductible healt... https://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9528441/high-deductible-ins...

5 of 9 10/13/17, 12:18 PM

It's possible that even when we're sick, we tend to be optimistic. We might hope

that our care costs less this year, and that maybe we'll even be able to roll some of

our HSA account funds over to the next year.

"This is a difficult task for consumers to take on, and we now have very detailed

data to show that's the case," he says. "When we've thought about the

economics, we've generally thought this type of price change wouldn't be

problematic, that sicker people would just spend their deductible and get the care

they need. This research suggests that's not the case."

Americans aren't used to shopping for health care — and maybe we don't want to start

This study is forcing economists to rethink high-deductible healt... https://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9528441/high-deductible-ins...

6 of 9 10/13/17, 12:18 PM

One study a few years ago, from the Altarum Institute, showed that Americans tend to spend more time shopping for dishwashers than for doctors — despite the latter being a rather more consequential decision.

For one thing, most of us don't have access to tools that would let us shop for doctors. I can go on Amazon and pull up prices for dozens of different dishwashers. But there's no website I can hop on, right now, to find out what different radiologists around Washington, DC, would charge me for an X-ray.

This study tried giving workers both the tools to compare costs and a financial incentive to go with the less expensive option. And, at least in this instance, those nudges weren't enough to encourage patients to choose cheaper doctors. Instead of looking for a lower-cost option, workers simply decided not to go to the doctor at all.

For Kolstad, this makes him skeptical of "demand-side" interventions in health care — those that rely on consumer demands for lower health prices to ultimately lead to less medical spending.

What's more, interventions that reduce demand could have the unintended consequence of actually raising long-term health-care costs. Think of the sick worker in a high-deductible plan who forgoes care in the early part of the year. It's possible that skipping preventive care or not filling some prescriptions could worsen health conditions that necessitate costly interventions a few years down the line.

This study only looks at two years of a high-deductible plan, and in that time period it doesn't show this theory bearing out. Still, Kolstad says it could be a long term possibility that we just don't have enough data to know about yet.

"It's certainly plausible that you will see the cost changes later," he says. "That could manifest in lower productivity on the part of the worker, if you have people with worse health status.Those are long-run changes, but they are definitely a possibility."

This study is forcing economists to rethink high-deductible healt... https://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9528441/high-deductible-ins...

7 of 9 10/13/17, 12:18 PM

AD

This study is forcing economists to rethink high-deductible healt... https://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9528441/high-deductible-ins...

9 of 9 10/13/17, 12:18 PM