Insurance Coverage & Costs
Costs
The Uninsured
Private Coverage
Employer Sponsored
Individual
Public Coverage
Medicare
Medicaid and SCHIP
Access to Care
Quality & Care Delivery
Health Care Markets
Issue Briefs
Data Bulletins
Research Briefs
Policy Analyses
Community Reports
Journal Articles
Other Publications
Surveys
Site Visits
Design and Methods
Data Files
|
What’s the Difference Between HMOs and Non-HMOs?: National Survey of Consumers Finds Limited Disparities with Non-HMO Plans
Conference Executive Summary
March 16, 2000
ASHINGTON, DC - Contrary to public perception, health
maintenance organizations (HMOs) provide the same levels
of hospital, surgical and emergency room care as do other
types of health plans, according to a large nationwide
study recently released by the Center for Studying Health
System Change (HSC). While the study findings allay
concerns that HMOs stint on costly but necessary
treatment, they also raise questions about HMOs ability
to manage care and control costs. At the same time, the
study identifies important trade-offs that consumers face
when choosing between HMOs and other types of insurance,
including preferred provider organizations (PPOs) and
indemnity plans.
These and other research findings were released at a
March 9 conference, "Do HMOs Make a Difference?
Comparing Access, Service Use and Satisfaction Between
Consumers in HMOs and Non-HMOs." HSC researchers
provided an overview of results from HSCs 1996-1997
Community Tracking Study Household Survey, which included
interviews with nearly 36,000 people throughout the
country who have private insurance. Their study, "Do
HMOs Make a Difference?," appears in the Winter
1999/2000 issue of the journal Inquiry.
Following the presentation, a roundtable of health policy
experts discussed the studys implications for pending
patient protection proposals, the decisions of private
purchasers and the future of managed care. The
discussants included Linda Bilheimer, Ph.D., senior
program officer at The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation;
Janet Corrigan, Ph.D., director of health care services
at the Institute of Medicine; Robert Reischauer, Ph.D.,
president of the Urban Institute; and John Rother,
director of legislation and public policy for AARP.
Comparisons Along Key Dimensions
The rapid growth of managed care enrollment during the
past decade has fuelled a backlash, with consumers
complaining that HMOs restrict their choice of providers
and limit their access to needed services.
"Yet much of the information both policymakers and
consumers receive are from anecdotes," says HSC
senior researcher and study co-principal investigator
James Reschovsky. "This HSC study fills an important
gap because it was designed to produce objective,
evidence-based information on how HMOs affect consumers
access to care, use of health care services and
satisfaction with care, as compared to other kinds of
plans."
Specific study findings include:
- Service Use. The study investigators
found no differences in the use of hospitals,
emergency rooms or surgery under HMOs versus
other types of health plans. HMOs did however
reduce the use of specialty services, and
they increased the use of ambulatory care and
preventive care.
- Barriers to Care. Those enrolled in
HMOs did not report significantly higher
levels of unmet care or delayed care than
consumers in other plans, however, the nature
of the barriers to care differed. Families
enrolled in HMOs had significantly lower
out-of-pocket costs than those enrolled in
non-HMOs. Specifically, 10 percent of
families enrolled in HMOs paid more than
$1,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, compared
with 17 percent of families enrolled in other
types of plans. Consequently, HMO enrollees
were less likely to cite financial problems
as a barrier to care. However, they were more
likely to report administrative barriers to
care.
- Consumers Assessments of Care.
Enrollee satisfaction with overall care was
lower among HMOs, which also received fewer
excellent ratings from enrollees regarding
their visits with physicians. In addition,
HMO enrollees were less confident that their
physicians would refer them to needed
specialty care than were consumers in non-HMO
plans. All together, HMOs scored lower on
eight out of nine satisfaction measures, with
differences ranging from 3 to 7 percentage
points.
Reality versus Perception
HSC vice president and co-principal investigator Peter
Kemper offered two possible reasons for the lack of
differentiation between HMOs and non-HMOs in service use
and access. First, HMOs may be affecting how providers in
local markets treat all of their patients, regardless of
whether they are enrolled in HMOs. Second, intense
competition has spurred health plans of all types to
adopt cost control techniques originally developed under
managed care. As a result, there are fewer differences
between HMO and non-HMO products.
How, then, to explain consumers lower assessments of HMO
care? One reason may be that enrollees assessments are
shaped more by a generally negative impression of HMOs
than by their actual experiences with HMOs. In addition,
where there are differences between HMOs and non-HMOs-for
example, HMOs more assertive use of care management
tools and stricter access to specialty care-those may be
the key differences that strike a negative chord with
consumers.
For HMOs, thats both good and bad news. Although the
findings show that, except for specialty care, HMOs
provide the same levels of care as other plans, they also
indicate that HMOs continue to have problems with
customer service and public perception.
"Consumers can find some comfort in these
findings," said Corrigan. "But there remains a
disconnect between peoples negative views about HMOs and
what the data tell us about their overall experiences.
Clearly, HMOs have to do a better job of focusing on
service and convenience and on allaying the fears of the
public." In addition, she said, a strong external
appeals process is needed to serve people enrolled in all
types of health plans-not just HMOs.
Defining Trade-Offs for Consumers
Taken together, the HSC findings articulate some
trade-offs for consumers that stem from differences in
plan design. Because of their reliance on care management
techniques to control costs, HMOs generally control use
of services by affecting the behavior and availability of
health care providers. As a result, care is less
expensive for consumers in HMOs than other types of
plans, but enrollees face increased administrative
barriers to care, such as having to get a referral.
Non-HMOs, on the other hand, make greater use of consumer
cost-sharing, through deductibles and coinsurance for
instance, to control use of services, but with less
specific oversight of service use. And while HMOs place
more emphasis on primary and preventive services,
non-HMOs provide more specialty services.
"Consumers, employers and policy makers should be
aware that these trade-offs exist," said Kemper.
"Different people will value these trade-offs
differently. In and of themselves, these trade-offs argue
for giving consumers a choice of health plans and
allowing them to decide for themselves which trade-offs
they prefer to make."
Choice, however, is not without its disadvantages,
acknowledged Kemper, including higher administrative
costs and issues that arise from favorable or adverse
selection among product types.
"Choice alone is not an adequate solution for all
of the problems in our health care system," agreed
Rother. Whats needed, he added, is a broader policy
debate that attempts to address serious problems that
affect all sectors of the health insurance industry,
rather than narrowly focusing on HMOs. "It may be
that the policy debate, which has been fuelled by a
perception that there are huge differences between HMOs
and other forms of insurance, has missed the mark: there
are some real opportunities to improve the quality of
health care in this country, regardless of the type of
insurance."
Whos Managing Care?
The HSC study raises important questions regarding the
use of care management techniques by HMOs. In theory,
HMOs are supposed to control health care costs by
reducing inappropriate care or shifting care to
appropriate but less costly settings. But if the HSC data
are any indication, thats not happening.
"Where is the evidence of care management?"
said Rother. "Where is the evidence that organized
systems of care are actually helping consumers navigate a
very complex health care system? It doesnt appear to be
there." Corrigan suggested that current care
management methods may not be sufficiently advanced to
reduce unnecessary services without creating
inappropriate barriers to care. "The tools that we
have right now are simply not good enough to do that
effectively," she said.
In addition, consumers and providers alike are loathe to
accept techniques that restrict enrollees choice of
providers and access to specialty care. Some plans have
responded by broadening their provider networks and
loosening their restrictions on specialty services. While
these actions may mollify consumers, they diminish plans
ability to control costs. "The managed care debate
is changing the nature of the trade-offs that consumers
face," said Bilheimer. "Managed care
organizations are becoming kinder and gentler, but there
are costs associated with less aggressive management of
care."
HSC president Paul B. Ginsburg, Ph.D., predicted that
managed care plans would proceed carefully as they try to
walk the line between managing costs and pleasing
consumers. "Advances in care management will have to
be friendly to patients and to physicians as well,"
he said.
Implications for Policy and Research
The HSC findings underscore the need for policy makers
to do a better job of framing public debate on consumer
protection, Corrigan said. "In some ways, weve
given the American public a false sense of assurance with
so-called seals of approval such as licensure and
accreditation, which, though necessary and useful, fall
far short of guaranteeing good care and are targeted at
discrete parts of the system," she said.
"People need to understand that there is a lot of
variability out there in terms of quality of care, and
that these differences are not isolated to specific
health plans or providers. They stem from serious flaws
in our overall health care system."
Rother agreed. Consumer protection, he said, should cut
across all types of plans. "What I think consumers
want when they enroll in a health plan is peace of
mind," he said. "They want to know that theyre
going to be treated fairly, regardless of what kind of
plan theyre enrolled in." Bilheimer noted that many
people dont know what kind of health plan they have.
HSC researchers are continuing to explore questions
raised by this study. Kemper and Reschovsky said that
they plan to investigate more closely the effects of
different types of plans on various vulnerable groups,
such as people in bad health. They also cited a broad
need for researchers to assess clinical outcomes among
different types of plans and determine what plan
attributes and techniques lead to better care. Answers to
these and other questions will help policy makers to
better understand the tradeoffs faced when managed care
plans are regulated and help purchasers and consumers to
make better informed decisions about the health care
choices available to them.
|