Healthcare price transparency tools
may only offer savings to payers if insurance companies improve utilization
rates.
August 11, 2017 - As
out-of-pocket costs for patients continue to rise alongside payer spending on
services, many health insurance companies are turning to online price
transparency tools to help beneficiaries decide how to purchase low cost, high
quality care.
While price
transparency tools are generally viewed as a cost-effective way for payers to
trim spending, they may not be as effective as they could be. Low awareness and
scant utilization rates are limiting the effectiveness of comparison shopping
tools, says a new study
published in Health Affairs, leaving payers without the savings they’re
looking for.
How can insurance
companies improve their member engagement and financial education strategies to
ensure that price transparency tools can cut spending on both sides of the
equation?
To better
understand how price transparency tools are affecting healthcare spending, a
team of researchers from Harvard Medical School and the Harvard T.H. Chan
School of Public Health analyzed user data from Castlight, the CalPERS
(California Public Employees’ Retirement System) commercial price transparency
tool, offered to beneficiaries in the public employee Anthem PPO plan.
They found that
only 0.3 percent of lab tests and 1 percent of office visits and advanced
imaging services were preceded by an online price search.
And beneficiaries
who searched for prices tended not to save much money. Adjusted average
savings between users and non-users was approximately $2, the study found.
Imaging services
were a notable exception, however. Average imaging prices were $846 when
preceded by a search and $967 when not preceded by a search. The adjusted price
difference associated with searching for an imaging service was a 14 percent
savings.
“Price transparency
tools may result in lower prices for a selected set of services, but the tools
have little impact on overall spending because of the small percentage of
people who use them,” the team explained.
While the overall
savings seem insignificant, price transparency tools could make a difference if
payers change their engagement and messaging strategies, the researchers
pointed out.
According to the
study authors, patients are more likely to act on price information if it is
presented at the point of decision making instead of before booking
appointment. Payers have also found early success by contacting patients with
scheduled imaging appointments and encouraging them to switch to lower-cost
providers, they added.
Payers can improve
their point-of-sale engagement through effective
healthcare marketing and communications that make purchasing and
price checking user-friendly.
The research also
suggests that payers can create positive price transparency experiences by
combining price checking tools with alternative benefit designs. These
alternative designs include reference-based pricing initiatives that cover
services up to a given price, and hold the enrollee responsible for the
remaining costs. Other alternative benefit designs include programs that offer
cash bonuses to patients who switch to lower-cost providers.
Large employers
that provide health plans to thousands of employees are relying on similarly
new benefit designs to drive general
healthcare costs savings over the next few years. Employers that
integrate price transparency tools into new alternative benefit programs could
increase the effectiveness of comparison shopping options, according to the
Harvard research.
Ultimately, payers
will not benefit from price transparency tools unless their beneficiaries
access and utilize them, the study concluded. Online comparison options
must be presented at the right moment in the healthcare decision-making process
and should offer meaningful information to members looking to access quality
care.
“For price
transparency tools to have a more substantive impact on spending, a much larger
percentage of patients would have to use the tools, and there would need to be
a broader array of services, in addition to imaging, for which patients could
effectively use price information,” the Harvard team said.
No comments:
Post a Comment