The Effect of a Customized Advocacy Product on Downstream Medical Expenditures and Utilization

J. Navratil-Strawn, Stephen K. Hartley, S. MacLeod, A. Lindsay
{"title":"The Effect of a Customized Advocacy Product on Downstream Medical Expenditures and Utilization","authors":"J. Navratil-Strawn, Stephen K. Hartley, S. MacLeod, A. Lindsay","doi":"10.30953/TMT.V6.250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The complexity of today’s healthcare system has led to the growth of an emerging healthcare function known as healthcare advocacy. A telephonic healthcare advocate or advisor can play an essential role in care coordination, a better understanding of health benefits, and ease in navigating the healthcare system. A healthcare advocate’s role may be filled by clinical staff (i.e., registered nurses), non-clinical staff, or both, with varying levels of training depending on the intended scope of service.\nObjective: With a higher number of employers seeking customized health advocacy programing, this study serves to determine if more favorable healthcare outcomes offset the additional operating costs associated with a more dedicated delivery system. Therefore, this study’s primary objective was to evaluate the impact of patient access to a customized health advocacy program on downstream medical costs and healthcare utilization compared to a control (CON) group without access to this service. The secondary aim was to provide information to employers on whether a higher investment in a more complex customized delivery model provides significant value compared to a less customized program.\nMethods: The study treatment (TRT) group included 89,372 individuals with access to a customized advocacy program for employees, while the CON group of 115,465 had access to a non-customized program. Key outcomes included total healthcare expenditures, hospital admissions, emergency room visits, and physician office visits 12 months after the advocacy start date compared to 6 months before the start date. Researchers evaluated the impact the customized advocacy intervention had on expenditures by comparing differences in pre- and post-expenditures between customized health advisor and non-customized health advisor groups after controlling for various demographic, socioeconomic, and health status characteristics. Inverse propensity score weighting helped minimize differences in characteristics between the TRT and CON groups.\nResults: With the customized advocacy product, healthcare expenditures increased by only $2.03 per member per month (PMPM) compared with a $26.35 PMPM larger increase for controls with a non-customized product. Also, customized health advisor participants experienced reduced hospital admissions and ER visits compared with the CON group.\nConclusions: Study participants with access to customized healthcare advocacy services experienced significant healthcare cost savings, along with fewer ER visits, and reduced inpatient admissions compared with the CON group. Thus, these findings suggest that healthcare advocacy programs justify the increased delivery cost and can lead to reduced healthcare costs and utilization, along with the potential to improve health outcomes and quality of life.","PeriodicalId":320236,"journal":{"name":"Telehealth and Medicine Today","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telehealth and Medicine Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30953/TMT.V6.250","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The complexity of today’s healthcare system has led to the growth of an emerging healthcare function known as healthcare advocacy. A telephonic healthcare advocate or advisor can play an essential role in care coordination, a better understanding of health benefits, and ease in navigating the healthcare system. A healthcare advocate’s role may be filled by clinical staff (i.e., registered nurses), non-clinical staff, or both, with varying levels of training depending on the intended scope of service. Objective: With a higher number of employers seeking customized health advocacy programing, this study serves to determine if more favorable healthcare outcomes offset the additional operating costs associated with a more dedicated delivery system. Therefore, this study’s primary objective was to evaluate the impact of patient access to a customized health advocacy program on downstream medical costs and healthcare utilization compared to a control (CON) group without access to this service. The secondary aim was to provide information to employers on whether a higher investment in a more complex customized delivery model provides significant value compared to a less customized program. Methods: The study treatment (TRT) group included 89,372 individuals with access to a customized advocacy program for employees, while the CON group of 115,465 had access to a non-customized program. Key outcomes included total healthcare expenditures, hospital admissions, emergency room visits, and physician office visits 12 months after the advocacy start date compared to 6 months before the start date. Researchers evaluated the impact the customized advocacy intervention had on expenditures by comparing differences in pre- and post-expenditures between customized health advisor and non-customized health advisor groups after controlling for various demographic, socioeconomic, and health status characteristics. Inverse propensity score weighting helped minimize differences in characteristics between the TRT and CON groups. Results: With the customized advocacy product, healthcare expenditures increased by only $2.03 per member per month (PMPM) compared with a $26.35 PMPM larger increase for controls with a non-customized product. Also, customized health advisor participants experienced reduced hospital admissions and ER visits compared with the CON group. Conclusions: Study participants with access to customized healthcare advocacy services experienced significant healthcare cost savings, along with fewer ER visits, and reduced inpatient admissions compared with the CON group. Thus, these findings suggest that healthcare advocacy programs justify the increased delivery cost and can lead to reduced healthcare costs and utilization, along with the potential to improve health outcomes and quality of life.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
定制化宣传产品对下游医疗支出和利用的影响
背景:当今医疗保健系统的复杂性导致了一种新兴的医疗保健功能的增长,即医疗保健倡导。电话医疗保健倡导者或顾问可以在护理协调、更好地了解健康益处和轻松导航医疗保健系统方面发挥重要作用。医疗保健倡导者的角色可以由临床工作人员(即注册护士)、非临床工作人员或两者同时担任,根据预期的服务范围,他们接受过不同程度的培训。目的:随着越来越多的雇主寻求定制的健康宣传计划,本研究旨在确定更有利的医疗保健结果是否抵消了与更专门的交付系统相关的额外运营成本。因此,本研究的主要目的是评估患者获得定制健康宣传计划对下游医疗成本和医疗保健利用率的影响,与没有获得该服务的对照组(CON)相比。第二个目的是向雇主提供信息,说明在更复杂的定制交付模式上进行更高的投资是否比在定制程度较低的项目上提供更大的价值。方法:研究治疗(TRT)组包括89,372人,他们可以参加为员工定制的倡导计划,而CON组的115,465人可以参加非定制计划。主要结果包括在倡导开始日期后12个月与开始日期前6个月的医疗保健总支出、住院次数、急诊室就诊次数和医生办公室就诊次数。研究人员在控制了各种人口统计学、社会经济和健康状况特征后,通过比较定制健康顾问组和非定制健康顾问组在支出前和支出后的差异,评估了定制倡导干预对支出的影响。反向倾向评分加权有助于最小化TRT组和CON组之间的特征差异。结果:与使用非定制产品的对照组相比,使用定制产品的对照组每个成员每月的医疗保健支出仅增加了2.03美元,而使用非定制产品的对照组则增加了26.35美元。此外,与CON组相比,定制健康顾问参与者的住院率和急诊室就诊率也有所降低。结论:与CON组相比,获得定制医疗倡导服务的研究参与者显著节省了医疗成本,减少了急诊室就诊次数,减少了住院人数。因此,这些研究结果表明,医疗保健宣传计划证明了增加的分娩成本是合理的,可以降低医疗保健成本和利用率,并有可能改善健康结果和生活质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Near-Term Digital Health Predictions: A Glimpse into Tomorrow’s AI-driven Healthcare Telehealth for Equitable Obstetric Care Pragmatic Approaches to Interoperability – Surmounting Barriers to Healthcare Data and Information Across Organizations and Political Boundaries Patient Satisfaction and Perception of Physician Empathy in Outpatient Community General Neurology Telemedicine Remote Patient Monitoring in India
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1