The Effect of a Customized Advocacy Product on Downstream Medical Expenditures and Utilization

Background: The complexity of today’s healthcare system has led to the growth of an emerging healthcare function known as healthcare advocacy. A telephonic healthcare advocate or advisor can play an essential role in care coordination, a better understanding of health benefits, and ease in navigating the healthcare system. A healthcare advocate’s role may be filled by clinical staff (i.e., registered nurses), non-clinical staff, or both, with varying levels of training depending on the intended scope of service. Objective: With a higher number of employers seeking customized health advocacy programing, this study serves to determine if more favorable healthcare outcomes offset the additional operating costs associated with a more dedicated delivery system. Therefore, this study’s primary objective was to evaluate the impact of patient access to a customized health advocacy program on downstream medical costs and healthcare utilization compared to a control (CON) group without access to this service. The secondary aim was to provide information to employers on whether a higher investment in a more complex customized delivery model provides significant value compared to a less customized program. Methods: The study treatment (TRT) group included 89,372 individuals with access to a customized advocacy program for employees, while the CON group of 115,465 had access to a non-customized program. Key outcomes included total healthcare expenditures, hospital admissions, emergency room visits, and physician office visits 12 months after the advocacy start date compared to 6 months before the start date. Researchers evaluated the impact the customized advocacy intervention had on expenditures by comparing differences in pre- and post-expenditures between customized health advisor and non-customized health advisor groups after controlling for various demographic, socioeconomic, and health status characteristics. Inverse propensity score weighting helped minimize differences in characteristics between the TRT and CON groups. Results: With the customized advocacy product, healthcare expenditures increased by only $2.03 per member per month (PMPM) compared with a $26.35 PMPM larger increase for controls with a non-customized product. Also, customized health advisor participants experienced reduced hospital admissions and ER visits compared with the CON group. Conclusions: Study participants with access to customized healthcare advocacy services experienced significant healthcare cost savings, along with fewer ER visits, and reduced inpatient admissions compared with the CON group. Thus, these findings suggest that healthcare advocacy programs justify the increased delivery cost and can lead to reduced healthcare costs and utilization, along with the potential to improve health outcomes and quality of life.

Loneliness, Social Isolation, and All-Cause Mortality in a Large Sample of Older Adults.

OBJECTIVES: Using data from a large random sample of U.S. older adults (N = 7982), the effect of loneliness and social isolation on all-cause mortality was examined considering their separate and combined effects. METHODS: The UCLA-3 Loneliness Scale and the Social Network Index (SNI) were used to define loneliness and social isolation. Cox proportional hazards regression models were performed. RESULTS: Among study participants, there were 548 deaths. In separate, adjusted models, loneliness (severe and moderate) and social isolation (limited and moderate social network) were both associated with all-cause mortality. When modeled together, social isolation (limited and moderate social network) along with severe loneliness remained significantly associated with mortality. DISCUSSION: Results demonstrate that both loneliness and social isolation contribute to greater risk of mortality within our population of older adults. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, loneliness and social isolation should be targeted safely in efforts to reduce mortality risk among older adults.

The impact of COVID-19 on older adults: Results from an annual survey.

OBJECTIVES: Assess well-being among older adults through secondary analysis measured during an annual survey in 2018, 2019, and 2020, to determine trends from before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Mailed surveys sent annually included measures related to various psychosocial factors. MAIN FINDINGS: Response rates were 29% in 2018, 25% in 2019, and 24% in 2020. Most respondents reported average or high resilience (89% 2018-2020), high purpose (64% in 2018 and 2019, 63% in 2020), moderate optimism (46% in 2019, 44% in 2020) and low stress (88% in 2019 and 2020). Reported loneliness increased 13% from 2018 to 2020. In 2020, only 45% reported high comfort with technology, decreasing with age (>75). PRINCIPAL CONCLUSION: Psychosocial well-being of respondents were doing well despite changes related to COVID-19. However, increased loneliness may negatively impact long-term health outcomes; thus, a focus on technology options to stay socially connected and access healthcare are needed.

The Growing Burden of Informal Caregivers During COVID-19

Caregiver burden has negative effects on health outcomes and quality of life. Meanwhile, safety protocols during the COVID-19 pandemic created immediate impacts on informal caregiving with increasing burden on family caregivers. Our primary purpose was to describe the impacts of the pandemic on caregiver burden among informal caregivers, and their sudden shift in roles as a result. This review describes emerging effects on various aspects of health and explores future directions to support informal caregivers. A streamlined search was conducted to fit the scope of this review, with key terms determined to identify relevant publications. Common research databases and mainstream resources were utilized. We focused on research published since March 2020 to align with the timing of the pandemic in the US. Early research suggests that the pandemic has worsened caregiver burden among informal family caregivers. Reported health impacts include greater stress, pain, depression, sleep problems, and irritability, decreased social connectedness and quality of life. Informal family caregivers face negative health outcomes and distress as a result of greater caregiver burden and intensity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Immediate solutions are needed to alleviate this growing burden and provide ongoing support. Future work should explore the potential of boosting positive resources such as resilience and purpose to ease caregiver burden.

Cumulative Effect of Loneliness and Social Isolation on Health Outcomes among Older Adults

Loneliness and social isolation are described similarly yet are distinct constructs. Numerous studies examine each construct separately;however, less research has been dedicated to exploring their impacts together. Using survey and claims data among adults age 65+ (N=6,994), the cumulative effects of loneliness and social isolation on late-life health outcomes were examined using Chi-square and multivariate regression models. Loneliness and social isolation were measured using the UCLA-3 Loneliness Scale and the Social Network Index. Participants were grouped into four categories of loneliness and social isolation based on overlap, including: lonely only (L), socially isolated only (SI), both lonely and socially isolated (LSI), or neither (N). Outcomes included quality of life and healthcare utilization and costs. Among participants, 9.8% were considered L, 20.6% SI, 9.1% LSI, and 60.5% N. Respondents were primarily female (55.0%) and 70-74 years of age (27.1%). Those considered LSI were more likely to be older, female, less healthy, depressed, with lower quality of life and greater healthcare utilization patterns. Participants who were L or LSI had higher rates of emergency room visits compared to the N group;LSI had the highest medical costs. Results demonstrate the cumulative effects of loneliness and social isolation among older adults. Findings not only fill a gap in research exploring the impacts of these constructs later in life, but also confirm the need for approaches targeting older adults who are both lonely and socially isolated. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, this priority will continue to be urgent for older adults.

Cumulative effect of loneliness and social isolation on health outcomes among older adults.

OBJECTIVES: Loneliness and social isolation are described similarly yet are distinct constructs. Numerous studies have examined each construct separately; however, less effort has been dedicated to exploring the impacts in combination. This study sought to describe the cumulative effects on late-life health outcomes. METHOD: Survey data collected in 2018-2019 of a randomly sampled population of US older adults, age 65+, were utilized (N = 6,994). Survey measures included loneliness and social isolation using the UCLA-3 Loneliness Scale and Social Network Index. Participants were grouped into four categories based on overlap. Groups were lonely only, socially isolated only, both lonely and socially isolated, or neither. Bivariate and adjusted associations were examined. RESULTS: Among participants (mean age = 76.5 years), 9.8% (n = 684) were considered lonely only, 20.6% (n = 1,439) socially isolated only, 9.1% (n = 639) both lonely and socially isolated, and 60.5% (n = 4,232) neither. Those considered both lonely and socially isolated were more likely to be older, female, less healthy, depressed, with lower quality of life and greater medical costs in bivariate analyses. In adjusted results, participants who were both lonely and socially isolated had significantly higher rates of ER visits and marginally higher medical costs. CONCLUSION: Results demonstrate cumulative effects of these constructs among older adults. Findings not only fill a gap in research exploring the impacts of loneliness and social isolation later in life, but also confirm the need for approaches targeting older adults who are both lonely and socially isolated. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, this priority will continue to be urgent for older adults.

COVID-19 Era Social Isolation among Older Adults.

Risk of COVID-19 exposure and more severe illness are serious concerns for older adults. Social distancing has worsened existing social isolation, with severe impacts on connectedness among seniors. The pandemic is threatening to cause an extended health crisis, with impacts including serious health consequences. Our primary purpose is to summarize emerging research describing the impacts of the pandemic on social isolation among older adults. A streamlined search was conducted to fit the scope of this literature review. Common research databases and mainstream resources and websites were utilized to identify research published or released in 2020 to align with the pandemic. Early research indicates that the pandemic has worsened social isolation among older adults. Social isolation has become urgent, as seniors have lost their usual connections due to social distancing. While safety measures are critical to prevent virus exposure, this approach must be balanced with maintaining social connectedness. The pandemic highlights the importance of social connections, with significant impacts on both community-living older adults and those in nursing facilities. Safety protocols have created a paradox of reduced risk along with greater harm. Consequently, adapted approaches are urgently needed to address the consequences of a long-term social recession.