Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday June 16 2020, @04:53PM   Printer-friendly
from the first-world-health-care? dept.

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


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by legont on Tuesday June 16 2020, @10:37PM (3 children)

    by legont (4179) on Tuesday June 16 2020, @10:37PM (#1008892)

    What you described is really scary.

    --
    "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Booga1 on Wednesday June 17 2020, @06:53AM (2 children)

    by Booga1 (6333) on Wednesday June 17 2020, @06:53AM (#1009052)

    The biggest single benefit of the Affordable Care Act(Obamacare) in the US was the stipulation removing pre-existing conditions as a reason to deny coverage. A buddy of mine has had cancer twice now and would possibly be dead without it.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2020, @02:41PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2020, @02:41PM (#1009133)

      Insurance companies who designed this would have said it was the guaranteed income due to the compulsory nature and the $600 noncompliance fee. Which Trump cancelled.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2020, @05:01PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2020, @05:01PM (#1009204)

        No, the insurance companies deliberately attempted to torpedo the noncompliance fee and were very supportive of what Trump did. Because that makes the entire 'marketplace' concept dead - the few plans which calculated they can profit at it can do so only because of the volume of *everybody* being required to participate. Most all the mainstream performers left the field already, gambling that they could topple the system. Too many people will gamble on their remaining healthy to participate. The marketplace fails and everything goes back to the way it was before. Except that the insurance companies will keep the increased premium and deductible prices very high because then they profit by that.

        Insurance companies loved the removal of the penalty clause.