Objective: To understand US hospitals' initial strategic responses to the federal price transparency rule that took effect January 2021. Data Sources and Study Setting: Primary interview data collected from 12 not-for-profit hospital organizations in six US metropolitan markets. All but one organization were multihospital systems; the 12 organizations represent a total of 81 hospitals. Study Design: Exploratory, cross-sectional, qualitative interview study of a convenience sample of hospital organizations across six geographically and compliance diverse markets. Data Collection/Extraction Methods: In-depth, semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 16 key informants across sampled organizations between November 2021 and March 2022. Interviews solicited data about internal organizational factors and external market factors affecting strategic responses. Transcribed interviews were de-identified, coded, and analyzed using the constant comparative method. Principal Findings: Hospitals' strategic responses were influenced internally by the degree of the regulation's alignment with organizational values and goals, and task complexity visa -vis available resources. We found extensive variation in organizational capabilities to comply, and all but one organization relied on consultants and vendors to some degree. Key external factors driving strategic responses were hospi-tals' variable perceptions about how available price information would affect their competitive position, bottom line, and reputation. Organizations with more confidence in their interpretation of the environment, including how peers or purchasers would behave, and greater clarity in their own organization's position and goals, had more definitive initial strategic responses. In the first year, organizations' strategic responses skewed toward compliance, especially for the rule's consumer shopping requirements. Conclusions: A deeper understanding of the realities of operationalizing price transparency policy for hospitals is needed to improve its impact.

As of January 1, 2021, most U.S. hospitals are required to publish pricing information on their website to promote more informed decision making by consumers regarding their care. In a nationally representative sample of 470 hospitals, we analyzed whether hospitals met price transparency information reporting requirements and the extent to which complete reporting was associated with ownership status, bed size category, system affiliation, and location in a metropolitan area. Fewer than one quarter of sampled hospitals met the price transparency information requirements of the new rule, which include five types of standard charges in machine-readable form and the consumer-shoppable display of 300 shoppable services. Our analyses of hospital reporting by organizational and market attributes revealed limited differences, with some exceptions for nonprofit and system-member hospitals demonstrating greater responsiveness with respect to the consumer-shoppable aspects of the rule.

Background: Over 15.3 million Americans relied on the individual health insurance market for health coverage in 2021. Yet, little is known about the relationships between the organizational characteristics of individual market health insurers and quality of coverage, particularly with respect to clinical outcomes. Objective: To examine variation in marketplace insurers’ quality performance and investigate how performance varies by insurer organizational characteristics. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Participants: 381 insurer products, representing 184 unique insurers in 50 states in 2019 and 2020. Main Measures: Marketplace plan clinical quality measures reported in the 2019–2020 CMS Plan Quality Rating System dataset and insurer-product organizational attributes identified from several data sources, including non-profit ownership, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association membership, Medicaid focus and whether or not the insurer product is vertically integrated with a provider organization. Key Results: Among the 381 insurer products in this study, 35% are part of a provider-sponsored health plan (PSHP) and 70% of these entities received four stars or above for overall quality performance. Overall, PSHPs exhibited higher quality than non-PSHPs for both clinical quality management (0.36 increased on a 5-point scale; 95% CI = 0.11 to 0.62; P = 0.005) and enrollee experience (0.27; 95% CI = 0.03 to 0.50; P = 0.03) summary indicators. Medicaid focused insurers were associated with lower performance on enrollee experience, plan administration, and various outcomes related to clinical quality. Conclusions: Provider-sponsored health plans in the health insurance marketplaces are associated with higher-quality care, as measured by CMS clinical quality measures.

Background

As of January 1, 2021, most U.S. hospitals are required to publish pricing information on their website to promote more informed decision making by consumers regarding their care. In a nationally r...

Purpose:Small employers, while motivated to implement wellness programs, often lack knowledge and resources to do so. As a result, these firms rely on external decision-making support from insuranc...

<p>Performance improvement on clinical quality outcomes typically requires significant effort by personnel in health care organizations. Understanding the cost of quality improvement is important given diffusion of value-based contracting. This study investigates the organizational costs and benefits associated with planning and implementing the Ask about Aspirin intervention to increase use of low-dose aspirin in clinically recommended patient populations. Data from 4 health systems in Minnesota were used to estimate personnel effort and labor resource costs as well as corresponding benefits, measured as the change in aspirin use among eligible candidates during the study period. Overall personnel effort across the 4 systems was approximately 3900 hours with corresponding resource costs estimated to be $214,385. Aspirin use increased 4.7% overall, corresponding to roughly 1530 new users in the aspirin candidate population. Significant variation was observed by system in total hours reported, distribution of effort by activity type, and in benefits realized from the intervention.</p>

Objective:Using 2019 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data, the authors analyzed performance on behavioral health care quality measures among 168 marketplace insurers offering 185 product...

The individual and small-group health insurance markets have experienced considerable changes since the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, affecting access, choice, and affordability for enrollees in these markets. We examined how health plan access, choice, and affordability varied between the individual on-Marketplace, individual off-Marketplace, and small-group markets in 2018. We found relatively similar outcomes across the three markets with respect to deductibles and out-of-pocket spending maximums. However, the small-group market maintained greater plan choice and lower premiums—outcomes that appear to be associated with higher insurer participation. States may consider a variety of policy proposals such as reinsurance or the introduction of a public option to increase insurer participation and improve the plan choices offered in the individual market.

State and Territorial Health Departments (SHDs) have a unique role in protecting and promoting workers' health. This mixed-methods study presents the first systematic investigation of SHDs' activities and capacity in both Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) and Workplace Health Promotion (WHP) in the United States (US). National survey of OSH and WHP practitioners from each of 56 SHDs, followed by in-depth interviews with a subset of survey respondents. We calculated descriptive statistics for survey variables and conducted conventional content analysis of interviews. Seventy percent (n = 39) of OSH and 71% (n = 40) of WHP contacts responded to the survey. Twenty-seven (n = 14 OSH, n = 13 WHP) participated in follow-up interviews. Despite limited funding, staffing, or organizational support, SHDs reported a wide array of activities. We assessed OSH and WHP surveillance activities, support that SHDs provided to employers to implement OSH and WHP interventions (implementation support), OSH and WHP services provided directly to workers, OSH follow-back investigations, and OSH standard and policy development. Each of the categories we asked about (excluding OSH standard and policy development) were performed by more than half of responding SHDs. Surveillance was the area of greatest OSH activity, while implementation support was the area of greatest WHP activity. Respondents characterized their overall capacity as low. Thirty percent (n = 9) of WHP and 19% (n = 6) of OSH respondents reported no funds at all for OSH/WHP work, and both groups reported a median 1.0 FTEs working on OSH/WHP at the SHD. Organizational support for OSH and WHP was characterized as “low” to “moderate”. To increase SHDs' capacity for OSH and WHP, interview respondents recommended that OSH and WHP approaches be better integrated into other public health initiatives (e.g., infectious disease prevention), and that federal funding for OSH and WHP increase. They also discussed specific recommendations for improving the accessibility and utility of existing funding mechanisms, and the educational resources they desired from the CDC. Results revealed current activities and specific strategies for increasing capacity of SHDs to promote the safety and health of workers and workplaces – an important public health setting for reducing acute injury and chronic disease.

OBJECTIVE To examine level of participation and satisfaction with the Healthy Savings Program (HSP), a programme that provides price discounts on healthier foods. DESIGN For Study 1, a survey was distributed to a random sample of adults who were invited to participate in a version of the HSP that provided a discount for the purchase of fresh produce and discounts on other healthier foods. In Study 2, interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of adults invited to participate in a version of the HSP that provided price discounts on specific products only (no fresh produce discount). SETTING The HSP is provided to all employer-based insurance plan members of a large health plan. Employers can choose to enhance the version of the HSP that their employees receive by paying for a weekly discount on fresh produce. SUBJECTS Employees in employer groups that received the enhanced HSP (Study 1) and employees in an employer group (Study 2) that received the standard HSP. RESULTS Among survey respondents in Study 1, 69·3 % reported using the HSP card. Most were satisfied with the fresh produce discount and ease of use of the HSP card. Satisfaction was lower for selection of participating stores, amounts of discounts and selection of discounted products. In Study 2, barriers to the use of the HSP card cited included the limited number of participating stores and the limited selection of discounted products. CONCLUSIONS Satisfaction with some elements of the HSP was high while other elements may need improvement to increase programme use.