Understanding the “Black Box” of Employer Decisions about Health Insurance Benefits: The Case of Depression Products
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 workfor...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
MDPI AG
2013-05-01
|
Series: | Risks |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/1/1/34 |
id |
doaj-ea0ed127bb1d4d8a8b9c7e8f9b19f238 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-ea0ed127bb1d4d8a8b9c7e8f9b19f2382020-11-24T21:16:59ZengMDPI AGRisks2227-90912013-05-0111344210.3390/risks1010034Understanding the “Black Box” of Employer Decisions about Health Insurance Benefits: The Case of Depression ProductsKathryn RostAiria PapadopoulosSu WangDonna MarshallIn 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.http://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/1/1/34health benefitsinsurancedepressionemployersreturn on investmentproductivityabsenteeismcollaborative care |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Kathryn Rost Airia Papadopoulos Su Wang Donna Marshall |
spellingShingle |
Kathryn Rost Airia Papadopoulos Su Wang Donna Marshall Understanding the “Black Box” of Employer Decisions about Health Insurance Benefits: The Case of Depression Products Risks health benefits insurance depression employers return on investment productivity absenteeism collaborative care |
author_facet |
Kathryn Rost Airia Papadopoulos Su Wang Donna Marshall |
author_sort |
Kathryn Rost |
title |
Understanding the “Black Box” of Employer Decisions about Health Insurance Benefits: The Case of Depression Products |
title_short |
Understanding the “Black Box” of Employer Decisions about Health Insurance Benefits: The Case of Depression Products |
title_full |
Understanding the “Black Box” of Employer Decisions about Health Insurance Benefits: The Case of Depression Products |
title_fullStr |
Understanding the “Black Box” of Employer Decisions about Health Insurance Benefits: The Case of Depression Products |
title_full_unstemmed |
Understanding the “Black Box” of Employer Decisions about Health Insurance Benefits: The Case of Depression Products |
title_sort |
understanding the “black box” of employer decisions about health insurance benefits: the case of depression products |
publisher |
MDPI AG |
series |
Risks |
issn |
2227-9091 |
publishDate |
2013-05-01 |
description |
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. |
topic |
health benefits insurance depression employers return on investment productivity absenteeism collaborative care |
url |
http://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/1/1/34 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT kathrynrost understandingtheblackboxofemployerdecisionsabouthealthinsurancebenefitsthecaseofdepressionproducts AT airiapapadopoulos understandingtheblackboxofemployerdecisionsabouthealthinsurancebenefitsthecaseofdepressionproducts AT suwang understandingtheblackboxofemployerdecisionsabouthealthinsurancebenefitsthecaseofdepressionproducts AT donnamarshall understandingtheblackboxofemployerdecisionsabouthealthinsurancebenefitsthecaseofdepressionproducts |
_version_ |
1726014907422343168 |