Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

W G Manning

Publications and source records attributed to W G Manning.

72 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
PubMed1986

How cost sharing affects the use of ambulatory mental health services.

The less generous insurance coverage for mental health care has generated some controversy. The major unresolved question is how the demand for outpatient mental health care responds to cost sharing. We used data from a randomized trial of fee-for-service health insurance for the nonelderly to address this question. The study enrolled 5809 persons. The results are based on 19 819 person-years of data. One hundred thirty-three percent more is spent on outpatient psychotherapy when care is free to patients than when they pay 95% of the fee, subject to an annual catastrophic limit. But, the absolute level of expenditure is low on all plans; $32 per person per year with free care. The response to psychotherapy services to cost sharing is insignificantly larger than that for outpatient general medical services. We found no evidence that more generous coverage for outpatient psychotherapy decreases total health expenditures.

Ambulatory Care↗
PubMed1986

Sociodemographic factors and the use of outpatient mental health services.

What are the effects of sociodemographic factors on the use of outpatient mental health services when different demographic groups have identical health insurance coverage? The authors answer this question using data from the Rand Health Insurance Experiment. Health insurance was randomly assigned to families representative of the nonaged, noninstitutionalized civilian population in six U.S. sites. Income has no significant total effect on use when all income groups have the same coverage. When the effects of variables correlated with socioeconomic status are removed, users with higher socioeconomic status are significantly more likely to choose a mental health specialist rather than only general medical providers for their mental health care (P less than 0.05); among those who visit mental health specialists, those with higher socioeconomic status incur significantly greater expenses (P less than 0.10). Women use significantly more mental health services than men (P less than 0.05), who in turn use significantly more mental health services than children (P less than 0.05), even after controlling for demographic factors, health status, and insurance coverage. Similarly, there are large differences (roughly sixfold) by site in outpatient mental health expenses even when all sites have identical coverage.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1986

Use of outpatient mental health services by a general population with health insurance coverage.

Characteristics of use of mental health services by 4,254 persons enrolled in the Rand Health Insurance Study were analyzed in an attempt to predict patterns of use by a general population with assigned insurance coverage. Families in the study, whose members ranged in age from birth through 62 years, were randomly assigned to one of 14 insurance plans covering a wide variety of services by all licensed provider groups. During a one-year period less than 4 percent of the enrollees visited a mental health specialist, and only 7.1 percent saw any provider for mental health care. About half of those receiving outpatient mental health care visited general medical providers only. Annual outpatient mental health expenses per enrollee were about $25 (1983 dollars). The authors compare their findings with those of other studies and discuss their implications for insurance coverage of mental health services.

Ambulatory Care↗
PubMed1986

Use of outpatient mental health services in HMO and fee-for-service plans: results from a randomized controlled trial.

Does a prepaid group practice (PGP) deliver less outpatient mental health care than the fee-for-service (FFS) sector when they serve comparable populations with comparable benefits? To examine this issue, we used data from the Rand Health Insurance Study, which randomized families into a prepaid group practice or FFS insurance plans. Participants in a FFS plan with no cost sharing (i.e., free care) are equally likely to visit a mental health specialist in a year, but incur 2.8 times the costs of prepaid participants (p less than .05). This difference is due to fewer visits per user, substitution of psychiatric social workers for psychiatrists and psychologists, and reliance on group rather than individual therapies in the prepaid plan. Because of the experimental design, these differences are due to institutional and incentive differences rather than adverse selection. We found no evidence of appreciable or significant adverse selection into or out of the prepaid group practice. A full evaluation of the desirability of prepaid or fee-for-service care requires data on health outcomes, which are not presented here.

Adult↗
PubMed1985

The impact of cost sharing on emergency department use.

We studied the effect of insurance coverage on the use of emergency department services, using data from a national trial of cost sharing in health insurance. A total of 3973 persons below the age of 62 years were randomly assigned to fee-for-service health insurance plans with coinsurance rates of 0, 25, 50, or 95 per cent, subject to an income-related upper limit on out-of-pocket expenses. Persons with no cost sharing had emergency department expenses that were 42 per cent higher than those for persons on the 95 per cent plan (P less than 0.01) and about 16 per cent higher than those for persons with smaller amounts of cost sharing. Without cost sharing, emergency department visits for less serious diagnoses (e.g., abrasions) increased three times as much as did visits for more serious diagnoses (e.g., lacerations). After control for insurance, persons in the lower third of the income distribution had emergency department expenses that were 64 per cent higher than those in the upper third (P less than 0.001) and received a greater proportion of their ambulatory care in the emergency department. We conclude that the absence of cost sharing results in significantly greater emergency department use than does insurance with cost sharing. A disproportionate amount of the increased use involves less serious conditions.

Ambulatory Care↗
PubMed1985

The demand for prescription drugs as a function of cost-sharing.

This paper estimates how cost-sharing affects the use of prescription drugs. The data for this analysis are derived from the Rand Health Insurance Experiment (HIE), a randomized controlled trial that randomly assigned participants to insurance plans with varying coinsurance rates and deductibles. Therefore, the cost-sharing they faced was independent of their health and demographic characteristics. The paper used HIE data from four sites to estimate how drug expenditures vary by insurance plan, and to compare the plan response for drugs with that for all ambulatory expenses. The findings show that: (1) individuals with more generous insurance buy more prescription drugs; (2) the cost-sharing response for drugs is similar to the response for all ambulatory medical services; (3) the Dayton, Ohio site had significantly greater drug expenditures per capita than the other sites studied and a significantly higher proportion of drugs sold by physicians; and (4) the proportion of brand-name drugs among all drugs purchased in pharmacies was not a function of insurance plan. In the Dayton, Ohio site, a significantly higher proportion of the drugs purchased in pharmacies were brand-name rather than generic.

Deductibles and Coinsurance↗
PubMed1985

The demand for dental care: evidence from a randomized trial in health insurance.

Using data from a randomized trial in health insurance, this paper examines the effect of cost sharing on use of dental services. The data come from a sample of the nonaged, noninstitutionalized civilian population of six urban and rural sites. We find that: reducing the level of cost sharing increases demand for dental services; and dental expenses rise 46% when the coinsurance rate falls from 95% to 0%, subject to a catastrophic limit on out-of-pocket expenses. Of this increase, two-thirds is attributable to an increase in the likelihood of visiting a dentist during the year. Moreover, there is a substantial surge in demand during the first year of more generous coverage. The first-year response to cost sharing is nearly twice the second-year response.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1985

Effect of cost-sharing on the use of medical services by children: interim results from a randomized controlled trial.

Health care expenditures of 1,136 children whose families participated in a randomized trial, The Rand Health Insurance Experiment, are reported. Children whose families were assigned to receive 100% reimbursement for health costs spent one third more per capita than children whose families paid 95% of medical expenses up to a family maximum. Outpatient use decreased as cost-sharing rose for a variety of use measures: the probability of seeing a doctor, annual expenditures, number of visits per year, and numbers of outpatient treatment episodes. Hospital expenditures did not vary significantly among children insured with varying levels of cost-sharing. Episodes of treatment for preventive care were as responsive to cost-sharing as episodes for acute or chronic illness. The results give no reason not to insure preventive care as liberally as care for acute illness.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1984

A controlled trial of the effect of a prepaid group practice on use of services.

Does a prepaid group practice deliver less care than the fee-for-service system when both serve comparable populations with comparable benefits? To answer this question, we randomly assigned a group of 1580 persons to receive care free of charge from either a fee-for-service physician of their choice (431 persons) or the Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound (1149 persons). In addition, 733 prior enrollees of the Cooperative were studied as a control group. The rate of hospital admissions in both groups at the Cooperative was about 40 per cent less than in the fee-for-service group (P less than 0.01), although ambulatory-visit rates were similar. The calculated expenditure rate for all services was about 25 per cent less in the two Cooperative groups (P less than 0.01 for the experimental group, P less than 0.05 for the control group). The number of preventive visits was higher in the prepaid groups, but this difference does not explain the reduced hospitalization. The similarity of use between the two prepaid groups suggests that the mix of health risks at the Cooperative was similar to that in the fee-for-service system. The lower rate of use that we observed, along with comparable reductions found in non-controlled studies by others, suggests that the style of medicine at prepaid group practices is markedly less "hospital-intensive" and, consequently, less expensive.

Fees, Medical↗
PubMed1984

The sensitivity of mental health care use and cost estimates to methods effects.

The authors determined the sensitivity of estimates of the use and cost of outpatient mental health care to two methods effects: the definition of a mental health visit and strategies for allocating mental health care costs. They use data from the Rand Health Insurance Study, which has a random sample of the nonaged noninstitutionalized civilian population in six United States sites. Estimates of the use of mental health specialists are insensitive to alternative methods. However, estimates of the use and cost of the mental health care delivered by nonpsychiatrist physicians (e.g., internists) are quite sensitive to methods effects. Nevertheless, the cost of care from nonpsychiatrist physicians is so low that the total cost of outpatient mental health care is not meaningfully affected by methods effects.

Community Mental Health Services↗
PubMed1984

Factors affecting laboratory test use and prices.

The use of clinical laboratory tests has more than doubled during the past decade. Some observers of the health system feel that this growth is excessive and is a result of current payment systems. This article examines the effects of current reimbursement policies with regard to the use of laboratory tests and prices charged for tests. The results suggest the following: The method of financing medical care, including cost sharing and prepaid group practice arrangements, affects the volume of laboratory testing through the number of patient contacts with the medical care system rather than through the number of tests used per patient contact. Fee ceilings on physician time appear to be partially offset by higher test prices. Cost-based reimbursement for hospital services is associated with higher charges in hospital laboratories.

Clinical Laboratory Techniques↗
PubMed1981

Some interim results from a controlled trial of cost sharing in health insurance.

A total of 7706 persons are participating in a controlled trial of alternative health-insurance policies. Interim results indicate that persons fully covered for medical services spend about 50 per cent more than do similar persons with income-related catastrophe insurance. Full coverage leads to more people using services and to more services per user. Both ambulatory services and hospital admissions increase. Once patients are admitted to the hospital, however, expenditures per admission do not differ significantly among the experimental insurance plans. In addition, hospital admissions for children do not vary by plan. The income-related cost sharing in the experimental plans affects expenditure by different income groups similarly, but adults' total expenditure varies more than children's. Sufficient data are not available on whether higher use by persons with free care reflects overuse, or whether lower use by those with income-related catastrophe coverage reflects underuse. Both may well be true.

Ambulatory Care↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Hospital utilization in Ontario and the United States: the impact of socioeconomic status and health status.

UNLABELLED: We compared hospital use in Ontario and the United States for persons with different socioeconomic and health status. METHODS: Cross-sectional study using the 1990 Ontario Health Survey and the 1990 National Health Interview Survey. RESULTS: Admission rates averaged 31% higher in Ontario than in the United States, but international differences varied markedly across income and health status. At each level of health status, poor Canadians received one quarter to one third more admissions than their counterparts in the United States. However, higher income Canadians reporting excellent to good health had 50% more admissions than Americans, whereas those reporting fair or poor health had 10% fewer admissions. CONCLUSIONS: The observation that higher income sick persons receive less hospital care in Ontario than in the U.S. provides support at the population level for what has been observed for specific technologies. This represents, in part, a redistribution of inpatient care to those most vulnerable to illness, such as the poor, who receive substantially more hospital care in Ontario.

Adult↗