|  
  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 PlansConference Executive SummaryMarch 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 PerceptionHSC 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.
 |