Background The Government Employees Medical Scheme (GEMS) introduced an EDO named the Emerald Value Option (EVO) in January 2017. The option was introduced to contain the cost of care whilst simultaneously improving the quality of care by championing care coordination. Aim This study aimed to assess the impact of introducing an EDO such as EVO as a cost-containment strategy using contracted provider networks and coordinated care. Setting The study was conducted using aggregated data from GEMS. Government Employees Medical Scheme is a restricted medical scheme available to government employees in South Africa. Methods This is a descriptive pairwise comparison study between the Emerald benefit option (the parent option), which does not have embedded care coordination, and its derivative, EVO. Results Membership and claims data for 2018 were analysed. Expenditure per life per month in 2018 on the EVO amounts to R1357.01. After adjusting for the risk profile of beneficiaries on the EVO, expenditure per life per month would be expected to be R1621.73 (based on the conventional Emerald option). This translates to a savings of 16.3%. Similarly, health outcomes for EVO were more favourable than expected, actual admission rates were lower at 23.2% versus 26.2% expected. Conclusions The EVO benefit design has succeeded in lowering the cost of care through network provider contracting and care coordination. The EVO has saved approximately R490 million in healthcare costs in 2018. If applied across the medical schemes industry, it is estimated that EVO contracting, and care coordination principles could save R20 billion per annum.
Background: Efficiency Discount Options (EDO) offer a contribution discount to medical scheme members in return for restriction to a contracted network of healthcare providers. The Government Employees Medical Scheme (GEMS) introduced an EDO named the Emerald Value Option (EVO) in January 2017. The option was introduced to contain the cost of care whilst simultaneously improve the quality of care by championing care coordination. Aim: This study aimed to assess the impact of introducing an EDO such as EVO as a cost-containment strategy using contracted provider networks and coordinated care. Setting: The study was conducted using aggregated data from GEMS. GEMS is a restricted medical scheme available to government employees in South Africa.Methods: This is a descriptive pairwise comparison study between the Emerald benefit option (the parent option), which does not have embedded care co-ordination, and its derivative, EVO. Comparisons are considered after risk adjustment. Risk adjustment is necessary to account for differences in the risk profile of beneficiaries. Risk adjustment factors include age, gender and the number of chronic conditions.Results: Membership and claims data for 2018 were analysed. Expenditure per life per month in 2018 on the EVO amounts to R1 357.01. After adjusting for the risk profile of beneficiaries on the EVO, expenditure per life per month would be expected to be R1 621.73 (based on the conventional Emerald option). This translates to a savings of 16.3%. Similarly, health outcomes for EVO were more favourable than expected, actual admission rates were lower at 23.2% vs. 26.2% expected, specialist visit rates were much lower at 0.51 vs the expected 0.62 visits per beneficiary annum, and lastly, the General practitioner (GP) consultations per specialist consultation were 6.67 compared to the expected 5.26 per beneficiary per annum.Conclusions: The EVO benefit design has succeeded in lowering the cost of care through network provider contracting and care coordination. The EVO has saved approximately R490 million in healthcare costs in 2018. If applied across the medical schemes industry, it is estimated that EVO contracting, and care coordination principles could save R20 billion per annum.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.