In This Issue |
- Employers Trying
New Approaches To
Control Health Care Costs
- Small Employers
With Poor Benefits
Risk Losing Employees
- Government Panel Advocates Basic Universal Health Care
|
|
Employers Charged More For Health CareDue To Low Medicare and Medicaid Payments
Medical
providers levy higher charges on private insurers to com-pensate for
low Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates, adding a cost burden of
more than $900 per private family plan per year, according to a study
conducted by Milliman Consultants and Actuaries for Seattle-based
Premera Blue Cross.
Researchers
analyzed Washington State hospital financial statements and physician
fee schedules from 1995 to 2004. Results showed that, in 2004,
commercial payers generated 56% of net patient service revenue reported
by hospitals, but accounted for only 48% of hospital expenses.
Meanwhile, Medicare and Medicaid generated 43% of hospital revenue, but
represented 52% of hospital expenses.
In
aggregate, the analysis showed, hospitals had a -15.4% margin on
Medicare business, a -15.6% margin on Medicaid business, and a 16.4%
margin on commercial business. If each segment had supplied revenue in
proportion to expenses, according to the analysis, Medicare and
Medicaid would have paid an additional $510 million and $227 million,
respectively, but commercial insurers would have paid $738 million less
than the actual figures.
For Washington
hospitals to main-tain the aggregate 2.4% net revenue margin they
reported for 2004, Medicare and Medicaid payments would have to rise by
18.2% and 18.5%, respectively, but payments by private insurers could
fall by 14.3%, according to the study.
The
additional levies on private insurers amounted to 13% of all commercial
hospital and physician costs, adding $902 to the cost of each private
family health insurance contract in 2004. Cost-shifting attributable to
underpayments by Medicare and Medicaid accounted for 29.9% of the
increase in hospital costs paid by Washington employers, the study
concluded.
"Some call it Medicare and
Medicaid cost-shifting; others call it a hidden tax,"said Gubby Barlow,
Premera CEO. "By any name, it’s a billion-dollar burden for Washington
employers and policyholders, and that burden is growing every year. It
threatens to undermine efforts by employers, employees and health care
providers to moderate the growing costs of medical care."
Other
research across the country has produced similar results. A comparable
study in California, also conducted by Milliman Consultants, found that
private insurers were charged an additional $738 billion
for
hospital care in 2004 to compensate for Medicare and Medicaid
underpayments. This study did not ac-count for physician charges.
According to Kenneth E. Thorpe, a health care economist at Emory
University, unpaid hospital bills across the nation, a majority of
which are for the underinsured, cost around $45 billion annually,
adding around 8.5% to the cost of health insurance for those who do pay
their bills.
24% of respondents reported they are now offering a consumer-directed health plan (CDHP) as a benefit option.
|
Employers Trying New Approaches
To Control Health Care Costs
Having
concluded that cost-shifting to employees alone is not enough to bring
their health care benefits expenditures under control, some large
employers are testing new health care purchasing models, according to a
report on health insurance benefits strategies by Deloitte Consulting
LLP and the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions.
A
survey of 152 large employers indicated that most respondents currently
offer PPOs (86%) and HMOs (57%) to some or all of their employees. In
addition, 24% of respondents reported they are now offering a
consumer-directed health plan (CDHP) as a benefit option. While the
majority of employees of the companies surveyed chose to participate in
PPO or HMO plans in 2006, results showed that 6% of employees had
enrolled in CDHPs.
When asked which type of
health plan they believe offers the most effective approach for
managing costs and maintaining quality, 40% of respondents chose a
CDHP; 35%, a PPO; and 18%, an HMO. Noting that a significant percentage
of respondents who rated CDHPs as effective do not yet offer them,
researchers speculated that growth in CDHP adoption will continue.
When
asked to identify the primary driver for their company’s health care
strategy in 2006, 87% of respondents cited cost; 11%, employee
recruitment and retention; and 3%, the cost of health plans for retired
employees. When asked which issue has the greatest impact on their
health care costs, 31% named rich plan design; 22%, increasing
utilization; 21%, catastrophic claims; and 16%, prescription drugs.
Shifting
costs to employees was found to be the common strategy for controlling
health care expenditures, with 49% of respondents citing either changes
in plan design or increases in employee contributions as their primary
method for controlling costs. However, researchers noted, 65% of
respondents in a 2003 survey reported using cost-shifting as their main
strategy, suggesting a fundamental shift in strategic direction could
be underway.
The findings also indicated that
growing numbers of employers are encouraging employees to become better
health care consumers, while instituting wellness and disease
management pro-grams. Nearly three-quarters (74%) of respondents said
they offer a disease management program, either through their health
plan or a specialty carrier, and 93% reported offering some sort of
wellness program, such as a flu shot, smoking cessation program, or
fitness program.
Small Employers With Poor Benefits Risk Losing Employees
Employees
of small companies are far more likely to express dissatisfaction with
their employer-provided benefits than workers at larger companies,
which could make it difficult for small businesses to retain valued
employees, according to MetLife’s annual Employee Benefits Benchmarking
Report.
Surveys of 1,213 full-time employees
and 1,514 employers showed that 57% of small companies (with under 50
em- ployees) cite "retaining employees" as their most important
employee benefits objective. However, of the small company employees
surveyed, just 29% indicated they are satisfied with their
employer-provided benefits, and only 16% said their employer is
effective in educating them about benefits. In contrast, 48% of
surveyed employees at the largest companies (with more than 25,000
employees) reported feeling satisfied with their benefit packages, and
39% said they consider their company’s benefits communications to be
effective.
Of the small company employees
surveyed, just 29% indicated they are satisfied with their
employer-provided benefits, and only 16% said their employer is effective in educating them about benefits.
|
"To some extent, employers need to shoulder responsibility for this
disconnect in employees’ appreciation of benefits programs, since less
than one-third of employees believe their benefits communications
effectively educate their work-force," said Randy Stram, vice
president, institutional business, MetLife. "Many companies are falling
short in their bene-fits program goals to increase participation and
satisfaction. All too often, benefits communication is pushed to the
back burner, yet it is often the backbone of a successful program."
Results
also showed that big employers are more likely to offer a greater
variety of work/life benefits than small companies. While 54% of the
largest companies surveyed said they encourage telecommuting and other
flexible working practices, just 35% of the smallest companies reported
offering similar benefits.
"The competition
for talent is expected to intensify, and with benefits high on
employees’ priority lists, employers should re-examine areas for
improvement and consider using new strategies such as targeting
benefits information to employees at different life stages," Stram
said. "Helping employees understand the value and cost of their
benefits will go a long way in meeting costand retention objectives."
The group also called for the
creation of a "core" package of
physical, mental, and dental health
benefits that would be established
using a fair, independent, transparent, and scientific process.
|
Government Panel Advocates Basic
Universal Health Care
In
an interim report released in June, a committee set up by Congress to
gauge public opinion on the current health care system and formulate a
plan for achieving reform advocated providing basic universal health
care coverage for all Americans by 2012.
Created
by the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act
of 2003 and appointed by the U.S. Comptroller General, the Citizens’
Health Care Working Group is made up of 14 members chosen to represent
diverse perspectives, including those of consumers, business, labor,
health care providers, and the disabled. In addition to hearing the
testimonies of health care experts and public officials, the panel
collected ex-tensive input from the public through community hearings,
surveys, and individual commentaries on health care matters.
The
group will present its final recommendations to the president and
Congress following a 90-day public com-ment period ending August 31.
The pres-ident will then submit a report on the recommendations to
Congress within 45 days of receiving them, and five con-gressional
committees will hold hearings on the findings.
The
panel asked members of the public for their opinions on what health
benefits should be provided, how health care should be delivered, how
coverage should be financed, and what trade-offs in benefits or
financing would be justifiable to ensure access to affordable,
high-quality health care coverage and services.
"A
picture has been sketched for us of a health care system that is
unintelligible to most people," panel members said in the report."They
see a rigid system with a set of ingrained operating procedures that
long ago became disconnected from the mission of providing people with
humane, respectful and technically excellent health care."
The
group recommended that Americans be provided with access to a set of
affordable and appropriate core health services by 2012, with financial
assistance given to those who need it. Across every venue, the report
said, the panel heard a common message: "Americans should have a health
care system where everyone participates, regardless of their financial
resources or health status, with benefits that are sufficiently
comprehensive to provide access to appropriate, high-quality care
without endangering individual or family financial security."
In
their report, the group acknowledged that new dedicated revenue streams
would likely be needed to support these comprehensive health care
initiatives, which may include enrollee contributions, income taxes,
business or payroll taxes, or value-added taxes. At the same time,
panel members emphasized the need for broad strategies to improve
quality of care and efficiency.
To ensure
that no one is impoverished by health care costs, the panel recommended
the establishment of a national program, private or public, that would
offer financial protection for all Americans. The program would provide
universal coverage, protection against very high out-of-pocket medical
costs, and additional assistance for low income individuals and
families.
The group also called for the
creation of a "core" package of physical, mental, and dental health
benefits that would be established using a fair, independent,
transparent, and scientific process. In addition, the group advocated
the de-velopment of integrated community networks of health care
providers aimed at providing care to vulnerable populations, and a
restructuring of the financing and provision of end-of-life services,
to better accommodate the individual wishes of the terminally ill.
"We
recognize that the issues involved are complex and challenging, and
that it will take time and a great deal of technical expertise, as well
as political will, to make the changes we think are necessary," panel
members said in the report.
Over the 90-day
comment period, the members added, "we will continue to actively pursue
public input as we deliberate and further refine these proposals.
During this process, we will provide greater detail andexplanation of
our recommendations, as well as further analysis of what we are hearing
from the American people, before issuing the finalrecommendations to
the Congress and the President."
|