Rising Use Of Observation Care Among The Commercially Insured May Lead to Total And Out-Of-Pocket Cost Savings

Abstract

Proponents of hospital-based observation care argue that it has the potential to reduce health care spending and lengths-of-stay, compared to short-stay inpatient hospitalizations. However, critics have raised concerns about the out-of-pocket spending associated with observation care. Recent reports of high out-of-pocket spending among Medicare beneficiaries have received considerable media attention and have prompted direct policy changes. Despite the potential for changed policies to indirectly affect non-Medicare patients, little is known about the use of, and spending associated with, observation care among commercially insured populations. Using multipayer commercial claims for the period 2009-13, we evaluated utilization and spending among patients admitted for six conditions that are commonly managed with either observation care or short-stay hospitalizations. In our study period, the use of observation care increased relative to that of short-stay hospitalizations. Total and out-of-pocket spending were substantially lower for observation care, though both grew rapidly-and at rates much higher than spending in the inpatient setting-over the study period. Despite this growth, spending on observation care is unlikely to exceed spending for short-stay hospitalizations. As observation care attracts greater attention, policy makers should be aware that Medicare policies that disincentivize observation may have unintended financial impacts on non-Medicare populations, where observation care may be cost saving.

Untapped Potential for Emergency Department Observation Unit Use: A National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) Study

“…It is important to note, however, that for commercially insured patients, observation units reduce total out-of-pocket expenses. 23 Increasing the use of observation services may require further expanding the number of EDOUs in the US and evaluating payment options for Medicare beneficiaries.…”

Same-Day Outpatient Lower-Extremity Joint Replacement

“…The financial responsibilities for patients differ under the OPPS compared with the IPPS, with a shifting of payments from Medicare Part A (with a fixed inpatient deductible of $1,316 in 2017) to Part B (20% coinsurance for each service). While hospital-based outpatient surgery has a cap on the copayment that is similar to the inpatient deductible, there is no cap on ASC charges, so the 20% coinsurance rate can be charged for each service rendered, resulting in the possibility of paying multiple deductibles for different services related to a single TJA procedure 115,116 . One study of minor hand procedures found a lower average cost in the ASC relative to outpatient hospital setting ($709 versus $1,216) but a small increase in out-of-pocket expense for patients ($140 versus $116) for 1 private insurance provider 117 .…”

Hospital based physician advisor program sheds new light on observation rate

“…Similarly, for some patients with commercial insurance, the total and out-of-pocket spending has the potential to be much lower with observation care compared to hospital admission. [8] Regardless of the pros and cons of observation services for each individual patient, hospitals must adhere to Medicare rules, not patient requests. [9] An important role that UM departments play is ensuring regulatory compliance with state and federal laws and compliance with insurance contracts.…”