Wang Annabel Z, Scherr Karen A, Wong Charlene A, Ubel Peter A
Duke University, Fuqua School of Business, Durham, NC.
Duke University, School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
MDM Policy Pract. 2017 Jan-Jun;2(1). doi: 10.1177/2381468317716441. Epub 2017 Jun 28.
Many health policy experts have endorsed insurance competition as a way to reduce the cost and improve the quality of medical care. In line with this approach, health insurance exchanges, such as HealthCare.gov, allow consumers to compare insurance plans online. Since the 2013 rollout of HealthCare.gov, administrators have added features intended to help consumers better understand and compare insurance plans. Although well-intentioned, changes to exchange websites affect the context in which consumers view plans, or choice architecture, which may impede their ability to choose plans that best fit their needs at the lowest cost.
By simulating the 2016 HealthCare.gov enrollment experience in an online sample of 374 American adults, we examined comprehension and choice of HealthCare.gov plans under its choice architecture.
We found room for improvement in plan comprehension, with higher rates of misunderstanding among participants with poor math skills (P < 0.05). We observed substantial variations in plan choice when identical plan sets were displayed in different orders (P < 0.001). However, regardless of order in which they viewed the plans, participants cited the same factors as most important to their choices (P > 0.9).
Participants were drawn from a general population sample. The study does not assess for all possible plan choice influencers, such as provider networks, brand recognition, or help from others.
Our findings suggest two areas of improvement for exchanges: first, the remaining gap in consumer plan comprehension and second, the apparent influence of sorting order - and likely other choice architecture elements - on plan choice. Our findings inform strategies for exchange administrators to help consumers better understand and select plans that better fit their needs.
许多卫生政策专家支持保险竞争,认为这是降低医疗成本和提高医疗质量的一种方式。按照这种方法,诸如医保网(HealthCare.gov)之类的医疗保险交易所允许消费者在线比较保险计划。自2013年医保网推出以来,管理人员增加了一些功能,旨在帮助消费者更好地理解和比较保险计划。尽管出发点是好的,但交易所网站的变化会影响消费者查看计划的背景,即选择架构,这可能会妨碍他们以最低成本选择最适合自己需求的计划。
通过在374名美国成年人的在线样本中模拟2016年医保网的参保体验,我们研究了在其选择架构下对医保网计划的理解和选择情况。
我们发现计划理解方面仍有改进空间,数学技能较差的参与者误解率更高(P < 0.05)。当相同的计划集以不同顺序展示时,我们观察到计划选择存在很大差异(P < 0.001)。然而,无论他们查看计划的顺序如何,参与者都将相同的因素视为对其选择最重要的因素(P > 0.9)。
参与者来自一般人群样本。该研究并未评估所有可能影响计划选择的因素,例如提供商网络、品牌认知度或他人的帮助。
我们的研究结果表明交易所存在两个需要改进的方面:第一,消费者对计划理解方面仍存在差距;第二,排序顺序以及可能的其他选择架构元素对计划选择有明显影响。我们的研究结果为交易所管理人员提供了策略依据,以帮助消费者更好地理解并选择更符合其需求的计划。