Does gatekeeping control costs for privately insured children? Findings from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

Susmita Pati, Steven Shea, Daniel Rabinowitz, Olveen Carrasquillo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. Gatekeeping requirements were widely adopted by health insurers in an attempt to control costs in the mid-1990s, but empirical evidence demonstrating decreased health expenditures for children enrolled in such plans is lacking. Methods. We analyzed data from 3254 children with private health insurance sampled in the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) to compare total per capita health expenditures among gatekeeping versus indemnity plan enrollees. This sample represents 40.4 million privately insured American children. Total expenditures were defined as payments from all sources, including third-party and out-of-pocket payments, but excluding administrative costs. MEPS data are based on information provided by patients, health care providers, and hospitals. Gatekeeping plans included all children enrolled in health maintenance organizations or other plans requiring a primary care gatekeeper. All others were considered indemnity plan enrollees. Results. Mean total per capita annual expenditures for children in gatekeeping versus indemnity plans differed by <1% ($887 vs $881, respectively). Third-party payments by gatekeeping plans on behalf of their beneficiaries were $636 versus $595 by indemnity plans. Out-of-pocket payments were on average $62 less for gatekeeping enrollees than for indemnity enrollees. After multivariate adjustment, mean per capita expenditures were approximately 4% lower for gatekeeping enrollees than for indemnity enrollees. Conclusion. In 1996, total per capita annual health expenditures for children in gatekeeping plans were approximately $8 less than for those in indemnity plans. These data indicate that gatekeeping is not an effective cost-containment method for children.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)456-460
Number of pages5
JournalPediatrics
Volume111
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Gatekeeping
Cost Control
Health Expenditures
Insurance
Surveys and Questionnaires
Health Insurance Reimbursement
Insurance Carriers
Health Maintenance Organizations
Health Insurance
Health Personnel
Primary Health Care
Patient Care

Keywords

  • Child health expenditures
  • Gatekeeping
  • Managed care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Cite this

Does gatekeeping control costs for privately insured children? Findings from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. / Pati, Susmita; Shea, Steven; Rabinowitz, Daniel; Carrasquillo, Olveen.

In: Pediatrics, Vol. 111, No. 3, 01.03.2003, p. 456-460.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ba6d1b2fa33647b0a0df1e33c69d532d,
title = "Does gatekeeping control costs for privately insured children? Findings from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey",
abstract = "Objective. Gatekeeping requirements were widely adopted by health insurers in an attempt to control costs in the mid-1990s, but empirical evidence demonstrating decreased health expenditures for children enrolled in such plans is lacking. Methods. We analyzed data from 3254 children with private health insurance sampled in the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) to compare total per capita health expenditures among gatekeeping versus indemnity plan enrollees. This sample represents 40.4 million privately insured American children. Total expenditures were defined as payments from all sources, including third-party and out-of-pocket payments, but excluding administrative costs. MEPS data are based on information provided by patients, health care providers, and hospitals. Gatekeeping plans included all children enrolled in health maintenance organizations or other plans requiring a primary care gatekeeper. All others were considered indemnity plan enrollees. Results. Mean total per capita annual expenditures for children in gatekeeping versus indemnity plans differed by <1{\%} ($887 vs $881, respectively). Third-party payments by gatekeeping plans on behalf of their beneficiaries were $636 versus $595 by indemnity plans. Out-of-pocket payments were on average $62 less for gatekeeping enrollees than for indemnity enrollees. After multivariate adjustment, mean per capita expenditures were approximately 4{\%} lower for gatekeeping enrollees than for indemnity enrollees. Conclusion. In 1996, total per capita annual health expenditures for children in gatekeeping plans were approximately $8 less than for those in indemnity plans. These data indicate that gatekeeping is not an effective cost-containment method for children.",
keywords = "Child health expenditures, Gatekeeping, Managed care",
author = "Susmita Pati and Steven Shea and Daniel Rabinowitz and Olveen Carrasquillo",
year = "2003",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1542/peds.111.3.456",
language = "English",
volume = "111",
pages = "456--460",
journal = "Pediatrics",
issn = "0031-4005",
publisher = "American Academy of Pediatrics",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does gatekeeping control costs for privately insured children? Findings from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

AU - Pati, Susmita

AU - Shea, Steven

AU - Rabinowitz, Daniel

AU - Carrasquillo, Olveen

PY - 2003/3/1

Y1 - 2003/3/1

N2 - Objective. Gatekeeping requirements were widely adopted by health insurers in an attempt to control costs in the mid-1990s, but empirical evidence demonstrating decreased health expenditures for children enrolled in such plans is lacking. Methods. We analyzed data from 3254 children with private health insurance sampled in the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) to compare total per capita health expenditures among gatekeeping versus indemnity plan enrollees. This sample represents 40.4 million privately insured American children. Total expenditures were defined as payments from all sources, including third-party and out-of-pocket payments, but excluding administrative costs. MEPS data are based on information provided by patients, health care providers, and hospitals. Gatekeeping plans included all children enrolled in health maintenance organizations or other plans requiring a primary care gatekeeper. All others were considered indemnity plan enrollees. Results. Mean total per capita annual expenditures for children in gatekeeping versus indemnity plans differed by <1% ($887 vs $881, respectively). Third-party payments by gatekeeping plans on behalf of their beneficiaries were $636 versus $595 by indemnity plans. Out-of-pocket payments were on average $62 less for gatekeeping enrollees than for indemnity enrollees. After multivariate adjustment, mean per capita expenditures were approximately 4% lower for gatekeeping enrollees than for indemnity enrollees. Conclusion. In 1996, total per capita annual health expenditures for children in gatekeeping plans were approximately $8 less than for those in indemnity plans. These data indicate that gatekeeping is not an effective cost-containment method for children.

AB - Objective. Gatekeeping requirements were widely adopted by health insurers in an attempt to control costs in the mid-1990s, but empirical evidence demonstrating decreased health expenditures for children enrolled in such plans is lacking. Methods. We analyzed data from 3254 children with private health insurance sampled in the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) to compare total per capita health expenditures among gatekeeping versus indemnity plan enrollees. This sample represents 40.4 million privately insured American children. Total expenditures were defined as payments from all sources, including third-party and out-of-pocket payments, but excluding administrative costs. MEPS data are based on information provided by patients, health care providers, and hospitals. Gatekeeping plans included all children enrolled in health maintenance organizations or other plans requiring a primary care gatekeeper. All others were considered indemnity plan enrollees. Results. Mean total per capita annual expenditures for children in gatekeeping versus indemnity plans differed by <1% ($887 vs $881, respectively). Third-party payments by gatekeeping plans on behalf of their beneficiaries were $636 versus $595 by indemnity plans. Out-of-pocket payments were on average $62 less for gatekeeping enrollees than for indemnity enrollees. After multivariate adjustment, mean per capita expenditures were approximately 4% lower for gatekeeping enrollees than for indemnity enrollees. Conclusion. In 1996, total per capita annual health expenditures for children in gatekeeping plans were approximately $8 less than for those in indemnity plans. These data indicate that gatekeeping is not an effective cost-containment method for children.

KW - Child health expenditures

KW - Gatekeeping

KW - Managed care

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037339660&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037339660&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1542/peds.111.3.456

DO - 10.1542/peds.111.3.456

M3 - Article

C2 - 12612221

AN - SCOPUS:0037339660

VL - 111

SP - 456

EP - 460

JO - Pediatrics

JF - Pediatrics

SN - 0031-4005

IS - 3

ER -