Can a New Approach to a Healthcare Claims Database Help Control Costs?

As congressmen and stakeholders across the country continue to debate the best methods for quality improvement and cost containment in the U.S. healthcare system, four of the nation’s largest health insurers have come together to provide access to data that has the potential to significantly bend the cost curve.

A long awaited announcement came last week from  Aetna, Humana, Kaiser Permanente and UnitedHealth Group  revealing that they will be providing access to over 5 billion de-identified claims from over 5,000 U.S. hospitals totaling $1 trillion of healthcare costs incurred since 2000. This data will be made available to researchers and distinguished healthcare economists via the newly formed nonprofit group, Health Care Cost Institute (HCCI).

According to the HCCI web site, its mission is to promote independent research and analysis on the causes of rising US health spending, to provide policy makers, consumers, and researchers with better, more transparent information on what is driving health care costs, to help ensure that, over time, the nation is able to get greater value from its health spending.

Last week I spoke with Dr. Stephen T. Parente, PhD., Professor in the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota and member of the governing board of HCCI. He described the multi-stage approach of the HCCI which includes collecting and aggregating data from the participating private insurers and establishing a database for entities interested in getting a handle on health care costs and utilization.  The HCCI is also designing “rules of the road” related to research protocols, access and review..

Until now, claims data has been limited to federally provided data on Medicare. But with over half of healthcare expenditures coming from private pay insurers, this restricted view hasn’t been broad enough to draw meaningful conclusions.   As its content evolves, the HCCI will publish a bi-annual scorecard to help researchers identify trending information at levels of detail rarely (if ever) seen before.

We’re actively working with healthcare innovators, many of which are working toward the same healthcare cost-saving goal,, and thought it would be useful to list our view of where  we predict the HCCI could (in the near term) positively impact payers, providers and patients related to healthcare cost and quality:

• Develop evidence-based care recommendations and best practices (Providers and patients)
• Design multi-payer quality improvement strategies and evaluate their effectiveness (Payers and patients)
• Understand key bottlenecks along the care continuum where patients spend the most time and dollars (Payers and patients)
• Determine specific diseases, conditions and treatments that are driving the largest cost trends (Payers and patients)
• Identify the most cost-effective providers and medical procedures as well as geographical variations (Payers and patients)
• Isolate cost variances between Medicare/Medicaid and private health plans and help appropriately align pricing with private pay (Taxpayers)
• Analyze healthcare cost trends over time at an heightened level of specificity (Everyone)
• Evaluate the effectiveness and draw comparisons between different types of disease management programs and treatment procedures(Payers, providers and patients)

Our long term outlook on the value of this data is that it can create new metrics of clinical and care performance standards based largely on historical and real-time reporting on claims. We’re hopeful that as such analyses are developed and recognized on a broader stage, they will be used to inform policy on a much more direct basis and make a huge impact on the costs of healthcare.

Have a great week.

Emma Daugherty

Emma Daugherty is a Senior Analyst at TripleTree covering the life sciences sector with a focus on provider technologies and patient safety.  You can contact her at edaugherty@triple-tree.com.

Read Full Post »

While Obamacare Exchanges Remain Controversial; Opportunities Exist for Commercial Insurance Exchanges

With the seating of the new Congress, much attention has been given to the Republican pledge to repeal Obamacare, or at least their desire to defund major parts of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). High on the list of defunding targets are the state mandated health insurance exchanges (section 1311).

The state exchanges are designed to be a marketplace where people not covered through their employers would shop for and purchase health insurance, and if qualified, would receive subsidies.  The PPACA mandates that all states must establish insurance exchanges for individuals to purchase insurance by 2014, or the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will establish and run the exchange for the states who aren’t compliant.

The exchanges remain one of the most controversial aspects of the PPACA because of the large unfunded mandates they place on the states, in addition:

• The exchanges are the vehicle for supporting the Individual Mandate (the portion of the Reform Act that requires all US citizens to be covered under health insurance), and because of the very ambiguous rules legislated in the establishment of the exchanges.
• Half of the U.S. State Attorneys General are suing the federal government to block the mandate to implement insurance exchanges, claiming the rules are too ambiguous, that the unfunded mandate will bankrupt the states, and that the mandate is an overreach of federal powers.

The national debate on healthcare and popular sentiment to make health insurance more accessible and affordable has forced the health insurance companies to re-think how they market and sell their products.  As we have spoken about many times in the last year, the health insurance market is at the forefront of a fundamental shift to a retail business model from its legacy wholesale roots.

Despite the public scrutiny being paid to the insurance exchange mandate and congressional risks to rejigger the entire legislation, TripleTree is seeing a much more interesting dynamic forming in the healthcare insurance marketplace – early steps to establish alternative insurance exchange marketplaces by commercial entities.

A commercial healthcare exchange is a private venture between one or more insurance companies and a retailer (such as Walmart), bank, property and casualty insurance company.  It could in reality, include a range of consumer-oriented entity that unite to create a health insurance marketplace.

In the individual and small group market, consumers may find much higher value (and savings) in bundled insurance products (i.e. property, auto, life and health) than they would in singulary buying health insurance in the state dictated and controlled exchange.   Complicating things, this is especially true for consumers that would not qualify for the federal or state subsidies that can only be received if insurance is purchased in the public state exchange.

Today, most property and casualty holders get a discount for carrying multiple policies from the same carrier (e.g. homeowners and auto combined might yield a 15% discount on both policies).   Our research has led to many discussions with property and casualty insurers interested in bundling health insurance though a partnership (rather than direct underwriting).  Their goal?…aggregate and manage a larger share of consumer spend on insurance products.

Similarly, we are aware of large national retailers seeking to implement a proprietary insurance marketplace of as a way of extending a service mix to their customers, building brand loyalty and retaining customers within their own pharmacies.  While some retailers may form single entity partnerships, others see themselves as a marketplace for multiple carriers competing for business.  We anticipate seeing these commercial insurance exchange marketplaces begin rolling out sometime in 2011.

Though these commercial exchanges may not solve the adverse selection problem that the PPACA exchanges were designed to address, they should prove a successful partnership for the retailer and the insurance company that otherwise has difficulty marketing directly to consumers.  While states dither and politics hinder the roll-out of the public exchanges, many forward thinking commercial business recognize the market opportunity to provide a better insurance buying experience and are moving quickly to meet a market need – the way that free economies are supposed to work.

This is a thorny, emotional issue – and our research and sell-side mandates are paying close attention as technology-based solutions emerge.

Let us know what you think and have a great week!

Scott Donahue

Scott Donahue is a Vice President at TripleTree covering infrastructure and application technologies across numerous industries and specializes in assessing the “master brands” of IT and Healthcare. Follow Scott on Twitter or e-mail him at sdonahue@triple-tree.com

Read Full Post »

Meaningful Use Considerations Are Just Small Part of a Broad Compliance Landscape – 08/03/10

The subject of compliance conjures an image of a massively fragmented arena where technologies, workflows and processes are intertwined to address economic, legislative and vertical industry mandates.  Because healthcare is one of the thorniest industries on the planet (and fraught with considerable legislative hurdles), its complexities are significant.

“Meaningful Use” has been in the press of late, and is one of a host of significant compliance initiatives impacting clinical reporting requirements in healthcare. As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Congress included up to $34 billion in incentives for eligible hospitals and physicians to implement and use certified electronic health record (“EHR”) solutions.  Known as HITECH, the provision requires that providers achieve meaningful use through a staged roll-out of the program through 2015. While the exact parameters of the program have not been established, the following broadly outlines the objective of each stage:

Stage 1 criteria focus on electronically capturing health information in a coded  format, using that information to track key clinical conditions, communicating that  information for care coordination purposes, and initiating the reporting of clinical quality measures and public health information (for more on the proposed Stage 1 meaningful use criteria see the Appendix).

Stage 2 expands on Stage 1 criteria in the areas of disease management, clinical decision support, medication management, support for patient access to their health information, transitions in care, quality measurement & research, and bi-directional communication with public health agencies.

Stage 3 will focus on achieving improvements in quality, safety and efficiency, focusing on decision support for national high priority conditions, patient access to self management tools, access to comprehensive patient data, and improving population health outcomes.

The roll-out of meaningful use requirement sets varies depending on the provider’s initial payment year. For example, providers can satisfy Stage 1 meaningful use standards as late as 2014, but must adhere to Stage 3 requirements in 2015 to receive the incentive payment.

Meaningful use has far reaching implications for providers and remains an area within reform that our team is watching.  Two recent articles that touch on the topic can be found here and here.

In the coming weeks, look for our team to write more on these pages about the four sub-sectors within the Compliance landscape:  Clinical Auditing, Consumer Engagement, Anti-Fraud & Recovery and the emergence of ICD-10.

Until then, let us know if you have any questions and have a great week!

Chris Hoffmann

Chris Hoffmann

Chris Hoffmann is Research Director at TripleTree covering Cloud, SaaS and enterprise applications and specializes in CRM, loyalty and collaboration solutions across numerous industries. Follow Chris on Twitter or e-mail him at choffmann@triple-tree.com.

Read Full Post »