IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/fhecpo/v23y2020i1p14n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Switching Costs in Medicare Advantage

Author

Listed:
  • Atherly Adam
  • van den Broek-Altenburg Eline

    (University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Center for Health Services Reseach, Burlington, VT, USA)

  • Feldman Roger D.
  • Dowd Bryan

    (University of Minnesota – Twin Cities, Health Policy and Management, Minneapolis, MN, USA)

Abstract

This paper estimates the magnitude of switching costs in the Medicare Advantage program. Consumers are generally assumed to pick plans that provide the combination of benefits and premiums that maximize their individual utility. However, the plan choice literature has generally omitted prior choices from choice models. The analysis is based on five years of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, a nationally representative longitudinal dataset. The MCBS data were combined with data on Medicare Advantage Part C plan benefits and premiums. Individual choices are modeled as a function of individual characteristics, plan characteristics and prior year plan choices using a mixed logit model. We found relatively high rates of switching between plans within insurer (20%), although less switching between insurers. Prior year plan choices were highly significant at both the contract and plan level. Premium was negative and significant. Loyalty (contract and plan), premium and plan structure were found to be heterogeneous in preferences. We found a statistically significant willingness to pay for a lower prescription drug deductible and lower copays. Switching costs were higher for sicker individuals. Switching costs between plans offered by the same insurer are far lower than switching costs between insurers; beneficiaries will switch plans if an alternative is perceived as $233 a month better than the current choice and switch insurers if the alternative is perceived as $944 better than the current plan/contract, on average. Premium elasticities would be 34% greater in magnitude if prior choices were irrelevant. We provide evidence that the state dependence is structural rather than spurious.

Suggested Citation

  • Atherly Adam & van den Broek-Altenburg Eline & Feldman Roger D. & Dowd Bryan, 2020. "Switching Costs in Medicare Advantage," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 23(1), pages 1-14, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:fhecpo:v:23:y:2020:i:1:p:14:n:3
    DOI: 10.1515/fhep-2019-0023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/fhep-2019-0023
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/fhep-2019-0023?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kate Ho & Joseph Hogan & Fiona Scott Morton, 2017. "The impact of consumer inattention on insurer pricing in the Medicare Part D program," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(4), pages 877-905, December.
    2. Dunn, Abe, 2010. "The value of coverage in the medicare advantage insurance market," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 839-855, December.
    3. repec:mpr:mprres:3849 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Rosen, Sherwin, 2007. "Studies in Labor Markets," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226726304, December.
    5. Jason Abaluck & Jonathan Gruber, 2011. "Choice Inconsistencies among the Elderly: Evidence from Plan Choice in the Medicare Part D Program," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1180-1210, June.
    6. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, January.
    7. Gretchen Jacobson & Anthony Damico & Tricia Neuman & Marsha Gold, "undated". "Medicare Advantage 2017 Spotlight: Enrollment Market Update," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 26591c8eba9c4b719df846205, Mathematica Policy Research.
    8. Paul Klemperer, 1995. "Competition when Consumers have Switching Costs: An Overview with Applications to Industrial Organization, Macroeconomics, and International Trade," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 62(4), pages 515-539.
    9. Maria Polyakova, 2016. "Regulation of Insurance with Adverse Selection and Switching Costs: Evidence from Medicare Part D," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 165-195, July.
    10. Keane, Michael P, 1997. "Modeling Heterogeneity and State Dependence in Consumer Choice Behavior," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 15(3), pages 310-327, July.
    11. Steven D. Pizer & Austin B. Frakt & Roger Feldman, 2008. "Predicting risk selection following major changes in medicare," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(4), pages 453-468, April.
    12. Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Panel data discrete choice models of consumer demand," Economics Papers 2013-W08, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    13. Jason Abaluck & Jonathan Gruber, 2016. "Evolving Choice Inconsistencies in Choice of Prescription Drug Insurance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(8), pages 2145-2184, August.
    14. Jean‐Pierre Dubé & Günter J. Hitsch & Peter E. Rossi, 2010. "State dependence and alternative explanations for consumer inertia," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 417-445, September.
    15. Town, Robert & Liu, Su, 2003. "The Welfare Impact of Medicare HMOs," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(4), pages 719-736, Winter.
    16. Anna D. Sinaiko & Christopher C. Afendulis & Richard G. Frank, 2013. "Enrollment in Medicare Advantage Plans in Miami-Dade County: Evidence of Status Quo Bias?," NBER Working Papers 19639, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Coscelli, Andrea, 2000. "The Importance of Doctors' and Patients' Preferences in the Prescription Decision," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 349-369, September.
    18. Lamiraud , Karine, 2013. "Switching costs in competitive health insurance markets," ESSEC Working Papers WP1305, ESSEC Research Center, ESSEC Business School.
    19. Benjamin R. Handel, 2013. "Adverse Selection and Inertia in Health Insurance Markets: When Nudging Hurts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 2643-2682, December.
    20. Florian Heiss & Daniel McFadden & Joachim Winter & Amelie Wuppermann & Bo Zhou, 2016. "Inattention and Switching Costs as Sources of Inertia in Medicare Part D," NBER Working Papers 22765, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 10th August 2020
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2020-08-10 11:00:11

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ito, Yuki & Hara, Konan & Kobayashi, Yasuki, 2020. "The effect of inertia on brand-name versus generic drug choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 364-379.
    2. Martin Gaynor & Kate Ho & Robert J. Town, 2015. "The Industrial Organization of Health-Care Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(2), pages 235-284, June.
    3. Deuflhard, Florian, 2018. "Quantifying inertia in retail deposit markets," SAFE Working Paper Series 223, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    4. Jonathan D. Ketcham & Nicolai V. Kuminoff & Christopher A. Powers, 2016. "Estimating the Heterogeneous Welfare Effects of Choice Architecture: An Application to the Medicare Prescription Drug Insurance Market," NBER Working Papers 22732, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. M. Kate Bundorf & Maria Polyakova & Ming Tai-Seale, 2019. "How do Humans Interact with Algorithms? Experimental Evidence from Health Insurance," NBER Working Papers 25976, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Yeo, Jungwon & Miller, Daniel P., 2018. "Estimating switching costs with market share data: an application to Medicare Part D," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 459-501.
    7. Drake, Coleman & Ryan, Conor & Dowd, Bryan, 2022. "Sources of inertia in the individual health insurance market," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    8. Genakos, Christos & Roumanias, Costas & Valletti, Tommaso, 2023. "Is having an expert “friend” enough? An analysis of consumer switching behavior in mobile telephony," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 359-372.
    9. Tamara Bischof & Michael Gerfin & Tobias Mueller, 2021. "Attention Please! Health Plan Choice and (In-)Attention," Diskussionsschriften dp2111, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    10. Tomas Pedro Sanguinetti, 2019. "How Do Couples Choose Individual Insurance Plans? Evidence from Medicare Part D," 2019 Papers psa1760, Job Market Papers.
    11. Zarek Brot-Goldberg & Timothy Layton & Boris Vabson & Adelina Yanyue Wang, 2023. "The Behavioral Foundations of Default Effects: Theory and Evidence from Medicare Part D," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(10), pages 2718-2758, October.
    12. Keane, Michael & Ketcham, Jonathan & Kuminoff, Nicolai & Neal, Timothy, 2021. "Evaluating consumers’ choices of Medicare Part D plans: A study in behavioral welfare economics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 107-140.
    13. Sai Krishnan S. & Subramanian S. Iyer & Sai Balaji SMR, 2022. "Insights from behavioral economics for policymakers of choice‐based health insurance markets: A scoping review," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 115-143, June.
    14. Francesco Decarolis & Andrea Guglielmo & Clavin Luscombe, 2020. "Open enrollment periods and plan choices," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(7), pages 733-747, July.
    15. Kaufmann, Cornel & Müller, Tobias & Hefti, Andreas & Boes, Stefan, 2018. "Does personalized information improve health plan choices when individuals are distracted?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 197-214.
    16. Florian Heiss & Daniel McFadden & Joachim Winter & Amelie Wuppermann & Bo Zhou, 2016. "Inattention and Switching Costs as Sources of Inertia in Medicare Part D," NBER Working Papers 22765, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Maria Polyakova, 2016. "Regulation of Insurance with Adverse Selection and Switching Costs: Evidence from Medicare Part D," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 165-195, July.
    18. Nicholas Tilipman, 2022. "Employer Incentives and Distortions in Health Insurance Design: Implications for Welfare and Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(3), pages 998-1037, March.
    19. Dahl, Gordon B. & Forbes, Silke J., 2023. "Doctor switching costs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    20. Janssen, Aljoscha, 2020. "Switching Costs, Brand Premia and Behavioral Pricing in the Pharmaceutical Market," Working Paper Series 1317, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:fhecpo:v:23:y:2020:i:1:p:14:n:3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.