IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jrisks/v1y2013i1p34-42d26112.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding the “Black Box” of Employer Decisions about Health Insurance Benefits: The Case of Depression Products

Author

Listed:
  • Kathryn Rost

    () (Department of Mental Health Law and Policy, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, 13301 Bruce B. Downs Blvd., University of South Florida, Tampa FL 33612, USA)

  • Airia Papadopoulos

    () (Department of Mental Health Law and Policy, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, 13301 Bruce B. Downs Blvd., University of South Florida, Tampa FL 33612, USA)

  • Su Wang

    () (Department of Mental Health Law and Policy, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, 13301 Bruce B. Downs Blvd., University of South Florida, Tampa FL 33612, USA)

  • Donna Marshall

    () (Colorado Business Group on Health, 12640 West Cedar Drive, Lakewood, CO 80228, USA)

Abstract

In a randomized trial of two interventions on employer health benefit decision-making, 156 employers in the evidence-based (EB) condition attended a two hour presentation reviewing scientific evidence demonstrating depression products that increase high quality treatment of depression in the workforce provide the employer a return on investment. One-hundred sixty-nine employers participating in the usual care (UC) condition attended a similar length presentation reviewing scientific evidence supporting healthcare effectiveness data and information set (HEDIS) monitoring. This study described the decision-making process in 264 (81.2%) employers completing 12 month follow-up. The EB intervention did not increase the proportion of employers who discussed depression products with others in the company (29.2% versus 32.1%, p > 0.10), but it did significantly influence the content of the discussions that occurred. Discussion in EB companies promoted the capacity of a depression product to realize a return on investment (18.4% versus 4.7%, p = 0.05) and to improve productivity (47.4% versus 25.6%, p = 0.06) more often than discussions in UC companies. Almost half of EB and UC employers reported that return on investment has a large impact on health benefit decision-making. These results demonstrate the difficulty of influencing employer decisions about health benefits using group presentations.

Suggested Citation

  • Kathryn Rost & Airia Papadopoulos & Su Wang & Donna Marshall, 2013. "Understanding the “Black Box” of Employer Decisions about Health Insurance Benefits: The Case of Depression Products," Risks, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 1(1), pages 1-9, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:1:y:2013:i:1:p:34-42:d:26112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/1/1/34/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/1/1/34/
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item

    Keywords

    health benefits; insurance; depression; employers; return on investment; productivity; absenteeism; collaborative care;

    JEL classification:

    • C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods
    • G0 - Financial Economics - - General
    • G1 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets
    • G2 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services
    • G3 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance
    • M2 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics
    • M4 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting
    • K2 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jrisks:v:1:y:2013:i:1:p:34-42:d:26112. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (XML Conversion Team). General contact details of provider: http://www.mdpi.com/ .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.