Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34371523›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2022

Paying patients to use lower-priced providers.

Christopher Whaley, Neeraj Sood, Michael Chernew, Leanne Metcalfe, Ateev Mehrotra

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Paying patients to use lower-priced providers.Health services research · 2022
    Article
  4. Estimating the Impact of New Health Price Transparency Policies.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher WhaleyRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9405-1989
Neeraj SoodSchaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, Sol Price School of Public Policy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9805-213X
Michael ChernewNational Bureau of Economic Research, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9473-1100
Leanne MetcalfeHealth Science Center, The University of Texas at Tyler, Texas, USA.
Ateev MehrotraDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2223-1582
Harvard University · USNational Bureau of Economic Research · USRAND Corporation · USThe University of Texas at Tyler · USUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

The Effects of Insurance Benefit Design Innovation on Patient HealthK01AG061274 · NIA · RAND CORPORATION · PI WHALEY, CHRISTOPHER · 2019 to 2023
$649k
NIA NIH HHS K01 AG061274
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMany employers have introduced rewards programs as a new benefit design in which employees are paid $25-$500 if they receive care from lower-priced providers. Our goal was to assess the impact of the rewards program on procedure prices and choice of provider and how these outcomes vary by length of exposure to the program and patient population. STUDY

settingA total of 87 employers from across the nation with 563,000 employees and dependents who have introduced the rewards program in 2017 and 2018. STUDY

designDifference-in-difference analysis comparing changes in average prices and market share of lower-priced providers among employers who introduced the reward program to those that did not. DATA COLLECTION

methodsWe used claims data for 3.9 million enrollees of a large health plan. PRINCIPAL

findingsIntroduction of the program was associated with a 1.3% reduction in prices during the first year and a 3.7% reduction in the second year of access. Use of the program and price reductions are concentrated among magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) services, for which 30% of patients engaged with the program, 5.6% of patients received an incentive payment in the first year, and 7.8% received an incentive payment in the second year. MRI prices were 3.7% and 6.5% lower in the first and second years, respectively. We did not observe differential impacts related to enrollment in a consumer-directed health plan or the degree of market-level price variation. We also did not observe a change in utilization.

conclusionsThe introduction of financial incentives to reward patients from receiving care from lower-priced providers is associated with modest price reductions, and savings are concentrated among MRI services.

Indexed as

MotivationAdultCost SavingsCost SharingHealth Benefit Plans, EmployeeHumansMaleOrganizational PolicyPatient ParticipationPatient Preferenceprice shoppingprice variationrewards programs

Identifiers

PMID34371523
PMCPMC8763296
OpenAlexW3188530826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.