"You Have to Rob Peter to Pay Paul So Your Kid Can Breathe": Using Qualitative Methods to Characterize Trade-Offs and Economic Impact of Asthma Care Costs.

BACKGROUND: Economic analyses often focus narrowly on individual patients' health care use, while overlooking the growing economic burden of out-of-pocket costs for health care on other family medical and household needs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore intrafamilial trade-offs families make when paying for asthma care. RESEARCH DESIGN: In 2018, we conducted telephone interviews with 59 commercially insured adults who had asthma and/or had a child with asthma. We analyzed data qualitatively via thematic content analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Our purposive sample included participants with high-deductible and no/low-deductible health plans. We recruited participants through a national asthma advocacy organization and a large nonprofit regional health plan. MEASURES: Our semistructured interview guide explored domains related to asthma adherence and cost burden, cost management strategies, and trade-offs. RESULTS: Participants reported that they tried to prioritize paying for asthma care, even at the expense of their family's overall financial well-being. When facing conflicting demands, participants described making trade-offs between asthma care and other health and nonmedical needs based on several criteria: (1) short-term needs versus longer term financial health; (2) needs of children over adults; (3) acuity of the condition; (4) effectiveness of treatment; and (5) availability of lower cost alternatives. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that cost-sharing for asthma care often has negative financial consequences for families that traditional, individually focused economic analyses are unlikely to capture. This work highlights the need for patient-centered research to evaluate the impact of health care costs at the family level, holistically measuring short-term and long-term family financial outcomes that extend beyond health care use alone.

Strategies commercially-insured families use to manage the cost of asthma care: a qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: Families affected by asthma report difficulty adhering to care regimens because of high medication costs, coupled with increased cost sharing required by some insurance plans. To inform efforts to support adherence, we conducted a qualitative study to explore how families manage asthma care costs. METHODS: We conducted phone interviews with commercially-insured, US adults (n = 59) who had asthma and/or a child with asthma. Our purposive sample included participants with high- and low/no-deductible health plans. We analyzed data using thematic content analysis to identify strategies for managing asthma care costs and to assess strategies' implications for adherence. RESULTS: Our analysis identified four overarching strategies for managing asthma care costs. First, participants used prevention strategies to avoid costly acute care by minimizing exposure to asthma triggers and adhering strictly to preventive medication regimens. Second, participants used shopping strategies to reduce costs, including by comparing medication prices across pharmacies, using medication coupons or free samples, and switching to lower-cost medications. Third, budgeting strategies involved putting aside funds, including in tax-exempt health savings accounts, or taking on debt to pay for care. Finally, some participants sought to reduce costs by forgoing recommended care, including by skipping medication doses or replacing prescribed medications with alternative therapies. CONCLUSION: Commercially-insured families use a wide range of strategies to manage asthma care costs, with both positive and negative implications for adherence. Our typology of asthma cost management strategies can inform insurance redesign and other interventions to help families safely reduce costs and maximize adherence to recommended care.

"Pick a Plan and Roll the Dice": A qualitative study of consumer experiences selecting a health plan in the non-group market.

Background: For consumers without access to employer-sponsored or public insurance, health plan choices in the non-group (individual) insurance market that do not meet consumer needs have the potential for negative downstream implications for health and financial well-being. Objective: This qualitative interview study sought to understand consumers' experiences and challenges with choosing a non-group health plan, among those who later had negative experiences with the plan they chose. Methods: We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with a purposive sample of 36 participants from a large regional health insurance carrier in three states who enrolled in non-group plans in 2017 (21 in Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace plans and 15 enrolled off-Marketplace). Participants were included if they reported negative experiences using their plan after enrollment, such as higher-than-expected medical costs. Interviews explored challenges choosing a plan; information needed for choosing; usefulness of available tools; and preferred format for interventions to improve plan choice experiences. We analyzed interview transcripts using thematic content analysis. Results: Study participants reported experiencing substantial challenges to choosing an insurance plan. Key barriers included understanding insurance terms, finding relevant information, and making comparisons across plans. Participants valued the ability to make comparisons across carriers when using the Marketplace websites but were less satisfied with customer service. Suggestions for improvement included greater standardization of plans and language and availability of customized one-on-one assistance. Conclusion: Findings from this study suggest that health plan selection in the non-group market presents challenges to consumers that may be addressed through enrollment assistance and improved presentation of information. Personalized assistance to find and choose coverage may lead to plan choices that better meet consumer needs and increase confidence choosing a plan in subsequent enrollment periods.

Preventive drug lists as tools for managing asthma medication costs.

OBJECTIVES: Preventive drug lists (PDLs) are a value-based insurance design intended to help high-deductible health plan (HDHP) members by covering preventive medications at lower or no cost before deductibles are met. Because little is known about members' experiences using this new tool, we sought to evaluate benefits and challenges of using PDLs to manage asthma costs. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative interview study. METHODS: In 2018, we conducted telephone interviews with US adults (n = 22) who (1) were in HDHPs with PDLs and (2) had asthma and/or a child with asthma. We analyzed data using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Some members reported that PDLs provided financial benefit and facilitated adherence to preventive medications. Others experienced barriers to using PDLs. Notably, some PDLs did not include members' asthma medications or provided only modest cost coverage due to restrictions in underlying formulary structures. Members who were aware of having a PDL sometimes worked with their providers to switch to listed medications. However, many members were not aware of having a PDL. Finally, because PDLs did not cover nonmedication costs, some members still struggled to afford asthma care. CONCLUSIONS: PDLs are a promising tool for helping families in HDHPs manage their medication costs and, in turn, their asthma. However, given current limitations in coverage, members must be aware of the benefit to seek out listed medications, and they may still struggle with the remaining cost sharing. Attention to implementation, including member outreach and education, is likely needed to realize the full potential of PDLs.

A survey of risk tolerance to multiple sclerosis therapies.

OBJECTIVE: To determine tolerance to various risk scenarios associated with current multiple sclerosis (MS) therapies. METHODS: People with MS from the North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis Registry's online cohort and the National Multiple Sclerosis Society were invited to complete a questionnaire on tolerance to real-world risks associated with a hypothetical therapy. Multiple risks levels were presented, including skin rash, infection, kidney injury, thyroid injury, liver injury, and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). RESULTS: Both PML and kidney injury had the lowest risk tolerance (RT) at 1:1,000,000, and thyroid and infection risks had the highest tolerance at 1:1,000. Men, younger individuals, and participants with greater disability reported a higher tolerance to all risk scenarios. Those who were currently taking an MS therapy reported higher tolerance than those not taking any therapy. Participants taking infusion therapies reported high tolerance to all risks, and those taking injectables reported a lower tolerance. CONCLUSION: People with MS displayed a wide range of RT for MS therapies. Our study identified sex, age, disability, and current disease-modifying therapy use to be associated with RT.

The effect of administration mode on CAHPS survey response rates and results: A comparison of mail and web-based approaches.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare response rates, respondents' characteristics, and substantive results for CAHPS surveys administered using web and mail protocols. DATA SOURCES: Patients who had one or more primary care visits in the preceding 6 months. STUDY DESIGN/DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Patients for whom primary care practices had email addresses were randomized to one of four survey administration protocols: web via a portal invitation; web via an email invitation; combination of web and mail; and mail only. Another sample of patients without known email addresses was surveyed by mail. Samples of nonrespondents to the Internet and mail protocols were surveyed by telephone. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Response rates to surveys administered using the Internet protocols were lower than for the surveys administered by mail (20 percent vs over 40 percent). However, characteristics of respondents and survey answers were very similar across protocols. Respondents without email addresses were older, less educated, and more likely to be male than those with email addresses, and there were a few differences in their responses. There was little evidence of nonresponse bias in either the mail or web protocols. CONCLUSION: In this well-educated patient population, web protocols had lower response rates, but substantive results very similar to those from mail protocols.

Strategies for retaining midcareer nurses.

One method of reducing predicted shortages because of the aging nursing workforce is to increase retention. Few studies have examined the unique needs of midcareer nurses. A mixed-method approach including surveys and focus groups was used to identify key retention strategies and desires for midcareer nurses. Salary, benefits, positive working relationships, flexible scheduling, and the opportunity for continued education were identified as key retention strategies from this study. Registered nurses in this study reported higher perceptions of their work and work environment than licensed practical nurses did. Differences in work outcomes were evident across sectors, with community nurses reporting higher levels of job satisfaction and perceptions of work quality than nurses in acute and long-term care. Findings suggest that recruitment opportunities may exist with midcareer nurses seeking employment to return to work after time off to have a family. Proactive retention policies that focus on the needs of midcareer nurses would demonstrate a commitment and interest in keeping them in their work positions and in the profession.