Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Essential Health Benefits
ESSENTIAL HEALTH BENEFITS
BALANCING COVERAGE AND COST
Cheryl Ulmer, John Ball, Elizabeth McGlynn, and Shadia Bel Hamdounia, Editors
Committee on Defining and Revising an Essential Health Benefits Package for Qualified Health Plans
Board on Health Care Services
INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
THE NATIONAL PRESS
Washington D.C.
www.nap.edu
OCR for page R2
Essential Health Benefits
___________
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
This study was supported by Contract No. HHSP 23320042509XI, Task Order HHSP23337027T between the National Academy of Sciences and the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organizations or agencies that provided support for this project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-21914-3
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-21914-0
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu.
For more information about the Institute of Medicine, visit the IOM home page at: www.iom.edu.
Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
The serpent has been a symbol of long life, healing, and knowledge among almost all cultures and religions since the beginning of recorded history. The serpent adopted as a logotype by the Institute of Medicine is a relief carving from ancient Greece, now held by the Staatliche Museen in Berlin.
Suggested citation: IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2012. Essential Health Benefits: Balancing Coverage and Cost. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
OCR for page R3
Essential Health Benefits
___________
OCR for page R4
Essential Health Benefits
___________
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
www.national-academies.org
OCR for page R5
Essential Health Benefits
COMMITTEE ON DEFINING AND REVISING AN ESSENTIAL HEALTH
BENEFITS PACKAGE FOR QUALIFIED HEALTH PLANS
JOHN R. BALL (Chair), Former Executive Vice President, American Society for Clinical Pathology
MICHAEL S. ABROE, Principal and Consulting Actuary, Milliman, Inc.
MICHAEL E. CHERNEW, Professor of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School
PAUL FRONSTIN, Director, Health Research & Education Program, Employee Benefit Research Institute
ROBERT S. GALVIN, Chief Executive Officer, Equity Healthcare, Blackstone Group
MARJORIE GINSBURG, Executive Director, Center for Healthcare Decisions
DAVID S. GUZICK, Senior Vice President for Health Affairs, and President, UF&Shands Health System, University of Florida
SAM HO, Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Officer, UnitedHealthcare
CHRISTOPHER F. KOLLER, Health Insurance Commissioner, State of Rhode Island
ELIZABETH A. McGLYNN, Director, Kaiser Permanente Center for Effectiveness & Safety Research
AMY B. MONAHAN, Associate Professor, University of Minnesota Law School
ALAN R. NELSON, Internist-Endocrinologist
LINDA RANDOLPH, President and Chief Executive Officer, Developing Families Center
JAMES SABIN, Clinical Professor, Departments of Psychiatry and Population Health, Harvard Medical School, and Director, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Ethics Program
JOHN SANTA, Director of Consumer Reports Health Ratings Center, Consumer Reports
LEONARD D. SCHAEFFER, Judge Robert Maclay Widney Chair and Professor, University of Southern California
JOE V. SELBY, Executive Director, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
SANDEEP WADHWA, Chief Medical Officer and Vice President of Reimbursement and Payer Markets, 3M Health Information Systems
Study Staff
CHERYL ULMER, Study Director
SHADIA BEL HAMDOUNIA, Research Associate
CASSANDRA L. CACACE, Research Assistant
ASHLEY McWILLIAMS, Senior Program Assistant (through July 2011)
ROGER C. HERDMAN, Director, Board on Health Care Services
OCR for page R6
Essential Health Benefits
This Page is blank
OCR for page R7
Essential Health Benefits
Reviewers
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Linda Burnes Bolton, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
Troyen Brennan, CVS Caremark
Jon Gabel, National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago
Neal Gooch, Utah Insurance Department
Jonathan H. Gruber, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Gail Gibson Hunt, National Alliance for Caregiving
Michael M. E. Johns, Emory University
Timothy S. Jost, Washington and Lee University School of Law
Robert Krughoff, Center for the Study of Services
Eric Larson, Group Health Research Institute
Jerry Elizabeth Malooley, Benefit Programs and Health Policy for the State of Indiana
Wendy K. Mariner, Boston University School of Public Health
Debra L. Ness, National Partnership for Women and Families
Peter Neumann, Tufts University School of Medicine
Sara Rosenbaum, The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services
Alice Rosenblatt, AFR Consulting, LLC
Joshua M. Sharfstein, Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, State of Maryland
Gail Wilensky, Project HOPE
Matthew Wynia, American Medical Association
OCR for page R8
Essential Health Benefits
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Christine K. Cassel, American Board of Internal Medicine and Donald M. Steinwachs, Johns Hopkins University. Appointed by the National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
OCR for page R9
Essential Health Benefits
Foreword
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act marks a milestone on a path toward substantially reducing the number of uninsured and underinsured individuals in this nation. The lack of health insurance is harmful to health, and equity in access to needed health care is one measure of a just society. But in creating the conditions for expanded insurance coverage, how, exactly, should one go about deciding what to include as essential in a health insurance plan?
This Institute of Medicine report Essential Health Benefits: Balancing Coverage and Cost answers this question. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act sets out parameters and guidance that serve as a point of departure and a constant reference for the committee’s deliberations. This report lays out criteria and methods to define and update the essential health benefits package. The committee’s recommendations aim at promoting evidence-based practices and prudent stewardship of resources. They encourage innovation and suggest ways to remain sensitive over time to evolving public preferences for coverage. This study was initiated at the request of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation at the Department of Health and Human Services, and we sincerely hope the report will prove useful in the implementation of broader insurance coverage.
I am grateful for the support of our sponsors and to the committee, led by John Ball, which grappled with the complexity of balancing coverage needs of individuals and the sustainability of the essential health benefits package. Their work was reinforced by staff working under the direction of Cheryl Ulmer and including Shadia Bel Hamdounia, Cassandra Cacace, and Ashley McWilliams. I commend both committee and staff for this product and believe it provides a sound basis for the defining, and future refining, of an essential health benefits package.
Harvey V. Fineberg, M.D., Ph.D.
President, Institute of Medicine
July 2011
OCR for page R10
Essential Health Benefits
This Page is blank
OCR for page R11
Essential Health Benefits
Preface
A critical element of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) is the set of health benefits—termed “essential health benefits” (EHB)—that must be offered to individuals and small groups in state-based purchasing exchanges and the existing market. If the package of benefits is too narrow, health insurance might be meaningless; if it is too broad, insurance might become too expensive. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) Committee on Defining and Revising an Essential Health Benefits Package for Qualified Health Plans concluded that the major task of the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in defining the EHB will be balancing the comprehensiveness of benefits with their cost.
Not surprisingly, the work of this committee drew intense public interest. Opportunity for public input was offered through testimony at two public hearings and through the Web. The presentations at the hearings reinforced for the committee the difficulty of the task of balancing comprehensiveness and affordability. On the one hand, groups representing providers and consumers urged the broadest possible coverage of services. On the other, groups representing both small and large businesses argued for affordability and flexibility. The committee thus viewed its principal task as helping the Secretary navigate these competing goals and preferences in a fair and implementable way.
The ACA sets forth only broad guidance in defining essential health benefits, and that guidance is ambiguous—some would say contradictory. First, the EHB “shall include at least” 10 named categories of health services per Section 1302. Second, the scope of the EHB shall be “equal to the scope of benefits provided under a typical employer plan.” Third, there are a set of “required elements for consideration” in establishing the EHB, such as balance and nondiscrimination. Fourth, there are several specific requirements regarding cost sharing, preventive services, proscriptions on limitations on coverage, and the like. Taken together, these provisions complicate the task of designing an EHB package that will be affordable for its principal intended purchasers—individuals and small businesses.
The committee’s solution is this: build on what currently exists, learn over time, and make it better. That is, the initial EHB package should be a modification of what small employers are currently offering. All stakeholders should then learn enough over time—during implementation and through experimentation and research—to improve the package. The EHB package should be continuously improved and increasingly specific, with the goal that it is based on evidence of what improves health and that it promotes the appropriate use of limited resources. The committee’s recommended modifications to the current small employer benefit package are (1) to take into account the 10 general categories of the ACA; (2) to apply committee-developed criteria to guide aggregate and
OCR for page R14
Essential Health Benefits
This Page is blank
OCR for page R15
Essential Health Benefits
Acknowledgments
The committee and staff are grateful for many individuals and organizations who contributed to the success of the report. Many thanks go to the numerous individuals to whom staff spoke before and during the study process, as well as those who submitted responses to the committee’s online comment form and other materials. In addition, the committee wants to thank those who testified before it during the two public workshops:
Jessica Banthin, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Carmella Bocchino, America’s Health Insurance Plans
Meg Booth, Children’s Dental Health Project
David Bowen, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Virginia Calega, BlueCross BlueShield Association
Arnold Cohen, American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
Rex Cowdry, Maryland Health Care Commission
Helen Darling, National Business Group on Health
Jina Dhillon, National Health Law Program
James Dunnigan, Utah State House of Representatives
Cindy Ehnes, California Department of Managed Health Care
John Falardeau, American Chiropractic Association
Linda Fishman, American Hospital Association
Marty Ford, The Arc and United Cerebral Palsy Disability Policy Coalition
Jean Fraser, San Mateo County Health System
Brian Gallagher, American Pharmacists Association
Alan Garber, Stanford University Center for Health Policy
Andrew George, California Department of Managed Health Care
Jonathan Gruber, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the National Bureau of Economic Research
Gerald Harmon, American Medical Association
Mark Hayes, Greenberg Taurig, LLP
Leah Hole-Curry, Washington State Health Technology Assessment Program
Carolyn Ingram, Center for Health Care Strategies
Louis Jacques, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
OCR for page R16
Essential Health Benefits
Jeffrey Kang, CIGNA Corporation
Jon Kingsdale, Wakely Consulting
Sharon Levine, The Permanente Medical Group
Jerry Malooley, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Robert McDonough, Aetna
Maureen McKennan, California Department of Managed Health Care
Sean Morrison, National Palliative Care Research Center
Robert Murphy, American Society of Plastic Surgeons
Samuel Nussbaum, WellPoint
Kavita Patel, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Semel Institute
Susan Philip, California Health Benefits Review Program
Joseph Piacentini, Employee Benefits Security Administration, Department of Labor (DOL)
Andrew Racine, American Academy of Pediatrics
Sara Rosenbaum, George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services
Somnath Saha, Portland VA Medical Center and Oregon Health Services Commission
Matthew Salo, The National Governors Association
Beth Sammis, Maryland Insurance Administration
Paul Samuels, Legal Action Center and Coalition for Whole Health
Cathy Schoen, The Commonwealth Fund
David Schwartz, Senate Finance Committee
Thomas Sellers, National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship
Jeanene Smith, Office of Oregon Health Policy and Research
Richard Smith, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America
Katy Spangler, U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Stuart Spielman, Autism Speaks
Peter Thomas, Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities
Jeffery Thompson, Washington State Department of Social and Health Services
Michael Turpin, USI Insurance Services
Gary Ulicny, The Shepherd Center
Barbara Warren, Consumers United for Evidence-Based Healthcare
Kenneth B. Wells, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA
William Wiatrowski, Bureau of Labor Statistics, DOL
Bruce Wolfe, Obesity Action Coalition
Anthony Wright, Health Access California
Troy Zimmerman, National Kidney Foundation
Funding for this study was provided by the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE). The committee appreciates ASPE’s support for this project and would like to especially thank Sherry Glied, Richard Kronick, Caroline Taplin, Lee Wilson, and Pierre Yong for their expertise and guidance on the project.
Lastly, many individuals within the Institute of Medicine were helpful throughout the study process, including Clyde Behney, Daniel Bethea, Patrick Burke, Marton Cavani, Greta Gorman, Laura Harbold, Abbey Meltzer, Elisabeth Reese, Vilija Teel, Stephanie Tioseco, and Lauren Tobias. We would also like to thank Florence Poillon for assisting in copyediting this report. Christine Stencel of the National Academies’ Office of News and Public Information provided substantial support in preparing for the public release of this consensus report and its companion workshop report; Rachel Marcus of the National Academies Press helped facilitate the publication of both manuscripts.
OCR for page R17
Essential Health Benefits
Contents
ABSTRACT
SUMMARY
1 INTRODUCTION
Committee Charge
Major Issues
Status of Current Health Insurance Coverage
Impact of the EHB Across Insurance Programs
Stakeholder Decisions Will Reshape Health Insurance Markets
Organization of the Report
References
2 APPROACHES TO DETERMINING COVERED BENEFITS AND BENEFIT DESIGN
Understanding Terms
Understanding Contributors to Costs
Illustrative Approaches to Coverage Decisions
References
3 POLICY FOUNDATIONS AND CRITERIA FOR THE EHB
Policy Foundations
Criteria
References
OCR for page R18
Essential Health Benefits
4 RESOLVING ACA INTENT
Finding the Meaning of Essential
10 Categories of Care vs. Typical
Essential vs. Nonessential
Boundaries or Not
Understanding Typical Specificity in Scope of Benefits
Typical Employer: Small vs. Large
State Mandates
Medical vs. Nonmedical
References
5 DEFINING THE EHB
Step 1: Develop the Starting Point
Step 2: Incorporate Cost into the Development of the Initial EHB
Step 3: Reconcile Initial List to the Premium Target
Step 4: Issue Guidance on Inclusions and Permissible Exclusions
Committee Recommendation on Defining the EHB
Other Areas for the Secretarial Guidance Related to the EHB
References
6 PUBLIC DELIBERATION
The Public Voice
Components of Public Deliberation Processes
Examples of Public Participation and Deliberative Processes
Summary of Guidelines for Public Participation
References
7 PROGRAM MONITORING AND RESEARCH
Setting a Research Framework for Data Collection and Analysis
Program Monitoring and Research
Broad Areas of Research
References
8 ALLOWANCE FOR STATE INNOVATION
Authority for State Variation
Flexibility in Determining the EHB
Criteria for Approving a State-Specific EHB Definition
Political Implications
References
9 UPDATING THE EHB
ACA Direction to the Secretary on Updating the EHB
Goals for Updating
Considering Typical Employer in the Future
Methods for Incorporating Costs into Updates to the EHB
Consequences for the EHB and ACA of Failing to Address Rising Health Care Costs
National Benefits Advisory Council
Conclusion
References
OCR for page R19
Essential Health Benefits
APPENDIXES
A Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Section 1302, and Web Questions for Public Input
B Stakeholder Decisions on Health Insurance
C Examples of Possible Degrees of Specificity of Inclusions in Small Group and Individual Markets
D Examples of Benefit Package Statutory Guidance
E Description of Small Group Market Benefits, Provided by WellPoint
F General Exclusions
G Medical Necessity
OCR for page R20
Essential Health Benefits
This Page is blank
OCR for page R21
Essential Health Benefits
Boxes, Figures, and Tables
Summary
Box
S-1 Essential Benefits Categories in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Figures
S-1 Four policy domains with associated foundational principles for thinking about essential health benefits development and implementation
S-2 Criteria for assessing content of essential health benefits (EHB) in the aggregate, for specific components, and for methods
Chapter 1
Boxes
1-1 Statement of Task for the Institute of Medicine Committee
1-2 Which Programs Incorporate Essential Health Benefits (EHB)?
Figures
1-1 Nonelderly population with selected sources of health insurance coverage, 2009
1-2 Different stakeholder considerations during implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)
1-3 Learning cycle for defining and revising essential health benefits (EHB)
Table
1-1 Transitions from Status Quo Insurance Status to Post-Reform Insurance Status
OCR for page R22
Essential Health Benefits
Chapter 2
Boxes
2-1 Understanding Basic Terms Used in This Chapter and Report
2-2 Description of Benefit Design
2-3 The BlueCross and BlueShield Association Technology Evaluation Center’s Clinical Coverage Criteria
2-4 UnitedHealthcare’s Hierarchy of Criteria for Benefit or Coverage Determination
2-5 Hierarchy of Evidence Employed by Washington State
2-6 Oregon Treatment-Condition Pair Examples
2-7 Inclusion Criteria for Oregon’s Value-Based Services (VBS)
Figures
2-1 Illustration of multiple medical management tools used by UnitedHealthcare
2-2 Real spending on health care in selected categories, 1965-2005
2-3 WellPoint, Inc. has various paths for reviewing benefit coverage to make medical policy decisions
Tables
2-1 Estimated Contributions of Selected Factors to Growth in Real Health Care Spending per Capita, 1940 to 1990
2-2 The State of Oregon Uses a Prioritized List of Services to Make Coverage Decisions
Chapter 3
Box
3-1 The American Medical Association’s (AMA’s) Ethical Force Program Five Content Areas for Performance Measurement in Designing and Administering Health Benefits
Figures
3-1 Four policy domains with associated foundational principles for thinking about essential health benefits development and implementation
3-2 Criteria for assessing content of essential health benefits (EHB) as a whole and for specific components
3-3 Criteria to guide methods for defining and updating the essential health benefits (EHB)
Table
3-1 Uses of Evidence for Decision Making
Chapter 4
Figure
4-1 Comparison of UnitedHealthcare (UHC) Federal Employees Health Benefit (FEHB) program plan offered in Virginia (VA) vs. other UHC small business plans offered in the state
Table
4-1 Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits, by Firm Size, 1999-2011
OCR for page R23
Essential Health Benefits
Chapter 5
Boxes
5-1 Steps in Recommended Process for Defining an Essential Health Benefits (EHB) Package
5-2 General Exclusions: Federal Employee Health Benefit Program Fee-for-Service Option
5-3 Selected Required Elements for Consideration
Tables
5-1 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Estimates of the Effect of the Law on Premiums in the Small Group Market, in November 2009 Letter to Senator Bayh
5-2 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Estimates of the Effect of the Law on Premiums in the Individual Market, in November 2009 Letter to Senator Bayh
5-3 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Estimated Premiums for Individual and Family Policies in Exchange Markets, in Letter to Senator Bayh, Converted to 2014 Dollars
5-4 Premiums for Single Coverage in the Exchange Market in the Absence of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) Compared with After Implementation of the ACA (in 2014 dollars)
5-5 Individual and Small Group Premiums in Exchange Markets When Risk Pools Are Split or Combined (in 2014 dollars)
5-6 Sample Approach to Incorporating Costs into the Definition of Essential Health Benefits
5-7 Key Elements in Definitions of Medical Necessity
Chapter 6
Tables
6-1 Summary of Opportunities for Patient or Public Input in Selected Technology Coverage Processes in Different Regions
6-2 CHAT Results from Medi-Cal Survey of Users’ Views (Adults with Disabilities) on Public Input in Areas of Budget Cut
Chapter 7
Figures
7-1 CIGNA coverage decisions and appeals for preauthorization of health benefits (2010)
7-2 Health Technology Assessment (HTA) program coverage decisions vary between Washington (WA) state and private insurers
Table
7-1 Comparison of 2010 Independent Medical Review (IMR) Results in California Managed Care
Chapter 9
Tables
9-1 Illustrative Comparison of Current and Future Scope of Benefits for the Essential Health Benefits (EHB)
9-2 Existing Entities Considered by the Committee to Advise the Secretary on Updates to the Essential Health Benefits (EHB)
Figures
9-1 U.S. health care expenditure trends
9-2 U.S. national health care spending relative to growth in gross domestic product (GDP)
OCR for page R24
Essential Health Benefits
This Page is blank
