SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
COVID-19 hospitalizations could mean significant out-of-pocket medical costs for many Americans:
For their study, the researchers analyzed out-of-pocket costs for pneumonia and other upper respiratory illness hospitalizations from January 2016 through August 2019 as a potential indicator of likely COVID-19 costs. The researchers found that these out-of-pocket costs were particularly high for so-called consumer-directed health plans -- which typically feature lower premiums, compared to standard plans, but higher deductibles that can be paid via tax-advantaged health savings accounts.
[...] Many big-name health insurers have voluntarily waived out-of-pocket cost sharing for COVID-19 treatment. However, employer-sponsored "self-insured" health insurance plans are not required to adhere to such waivers. Thus, tens of millions of Americans have high-deductible insurance plans that, in cases of COVID-19 hospitalization, may expose them to relatively high out-of-pocket costs.
[...] To get a sense of the likely cost burden on patients hospitalized for COVID-19, Eisenberg and colleagues examined de-identified insurance claims for 34,395 unique hospitalizations from January 2016 through August 2019. They looked at out-of-pocket costs incurred by people who had been hospitalized during the 2016-2019 study period with pneumonia, acute bronchitis, lower respiratory infections, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. (Claims data on actual COVID-19 cases were not available in the database at the time of the study.) The cases examined did not include those for people ages 65 and over, who are normally covered by Medicare. The out-of-pocket costs included deductible payments, copayments, and coinsurance payments.
The researchers found that average out-of-pocket spending for the 2016-2019 study period for these respiratory hospitalizations was $1,961 for patients with consumer-directed plans versus $1,653 for patients in traditional, usually smaller-deductible plans.
The out-of-pocket cost gap was lowest for older patients age 56 to 64, and greatest -- $2,237 vs. $1,685 -- for patients 21 and younger. The analysis was not designed to examine why the cost gap varied inversely with patient age, but one possible explanation proposed by the researchers was that, since younger patients are healthier on average, their hospitalizations may reflect more serious and thus more costly illness.
Journal Reference: Matthew D. Eisenberg, Colleen L. Barry, Cameron Schilling, Alene Kennedy-Hendricks. Financial Risk for COVID-19-like Respi- ratory Hospitalizations in Consumer-Directed Health Plans, American Journal of Preventive Medicine (2020), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2020.05.008
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2020, @09:51PM (12 children)
Plan overhead (~2%) and lower payments to providers makes Medicare (the US version) many times less expensive than private insurance.
You're just spouting a bunch of bullshit that your anarcho-capitalist corporate masters drill into you while you gargle their jizz. Good times!
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2020, @10:17PM (8 children)
> Plan overhead (~2%) and lower payments to providers makes Medicare (the US version) many times less expensive than private insurance.
Medicare was started in 1966 and now spends $740 billion/year on 60 million people. That is $12k per person per year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States)#Financing [wikipedia.org]
Before medicare the cost was ~$150 per person per year (2010 dollars). So lets say its $300 in 2020 dollars. Then it costs ~40x more with medicare than without.
https://www.businessinsider.com/healthcare-costs-have-exploded-since-1960-2014-4?op=1 [businessinsider.com]
So I don't see this decrease in expense that you claim. Do you mean the individual pays less with the taxpayer and debt covering the rest?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2020, @11:13PM
But the US is 40x healthier now compared to 1960.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by sjames on Tuesday June 16 2020, @11:20PM (1 child)
In order to really decrease the costs, we'll have to socialize the part that keeps jacking up the charges as well, but $12K per person for the group with the highest medical needs on average is actually a savings.
People in their 20s and 30s (a group with low medical needs on average) pay nearly that much for a great deal less healthcare.
In countries where they finished the job rather than the half measures in the U.S., costs are less than half those in the U.S.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2020, @11:28PM
The US has the reserve currency so I wouldnt really compare costs to other counties. Also they falsify their budget so you cant tell if the money spent on healthcare was actually spent on spying, bioweapons, etc.
https://constitution.solari.com/fasab-statement-56-understanding-new-government-financial-accounting-loopholes/ [solari.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2020, @11:49PM (3 children)
Your blather about increased medical costs (which have increased much faster than inflation), while true, is orthogonal* to that statement.
You're just parroting back a bunch of talking points because you apparently don't have an original thought in your head.
More's the pity.
*If you're having problems with the longer words, try here [dictionary.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2020, @11:55PM (2 children)
> Your blather about increased medical costs (which have increased much faster than inflation), while true, is orthogonal* to that statement.
Here is the original statement: "When did more federal gov involvement make something cheaper?"
So you agree that the comparison of medicare to private is orthogonal to the original topic of discussion (increasing government intervention making something cheaper). Yes, I knew that when I responded, and was sure to respond to the original topic.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2020, @12:14AM (1 child)
I'm going to assume you're stupid rather than trolling and explain.
No. The fact that medical costs have increased faster than inflation over the last fifty years is orthogonal to whether or not something can be done more cheaply by government
That the Medicare (government) program has overhead many times lower than private insurance, and is, in fact much cheaper is *directly* related to the question of whether or not government can do something less expensively than the private sector, in that the Medicare program does just that.
It is, in fact, specifically answering the question asked. Much more so than any comparison of current vs. historical medical costs.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2020, @01:28AM
No one mentioned whether the government can do something cheaper. Stop bringing up semirelated stuff.
Fact is that healthcare is about 40x more expensive now than before medicare. So thats not an example of the gov getting involved then something getting cheaper.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday June 17 2020, @09:37AM
By the early 70s, even Nixon realised this was unsustainable, so he tried to do something about it, but bizarrely he thought the way to make it sustainable was by trying to sustain it. Everyone since then just followed his lead. Go put your mike next to your speakers - how you liking that feedback?
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Tuesday June 16 2020, @11:05PM (2 children)
There's lower overhead with Medicare, but that private insurance overhead also equals oversight, so I think what's being missed is that more unnecessary testing gets done with Medicare since they know they won't get denied. Private insurance companies have a strong incentive to deny claims for bogus shit. Medicare doesn't.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2020, @11:22PM
AFAIK Medicare has strong limits on what treatments can be billed by hospitals for what condition. There are so many customers on Medicare that there are optimized processes in hospitals to deal with it.
Private insurers on the other hand can deny claims for random stuff, but then the patient is still on the hook to the provider.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2020, @11:32PM
There. FTFY.