EBRI releases 2012 Health Confidence Survey

Posted on September 25, 2012 | No Comments

PDF Version
Details
Library
Implementation Briefs

According to the 2012 Health Confidence Survey published by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI), confidence regarding the various aspects of today’s health care system has remained fairly level before and after the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and has not been significantly impacted by the June 2012 Supreme Court decision.

Asked to rate the health care system, Americans offer a diverse perspective: 28 percent consider it to be “good,” 28 percent say “fair,” and 26 percent rate it “poor,” while 12 percent rate it very good and 5 percent say it is “excellent.” However, the 2012 Health Confidence Survey finds that the percentage of Americans rating the health care system as poor doubled between 1998 and 2004 (rising from 15 percent to 30 percent). Dissatisfaction with the health care system appears to be focused primarily on cost.

No Comments

Public comments are closed.

The Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) recently published a report that explores the primary drivers of health costs in the U.S. The report found that costs will increase in the coming years due to drivers such as population growth, utilization and intensity of health care services, and increasing prices. According to the report's authors, the Affordable Care Act's (ACA's) provisions to expand insurance coverage, create pilot programs to control costs, and engage in comparative effectiveness research will not be enough to bring health care costs under control. BPC's Health Care Cost Containment Initiative plans to issue recommendations early next year to address these drivers. The Initiative is led by former Senate Majority Leaders Tom Daschle and Bill Frist, former Senator Pete Domenici and former Congressional Budget Office Director Dr. Alice Rivlin.
The Health Care Cost Institute recently released the 2010 HCCI Health Care Cost and Utilization Report. This paper is the first of its kind to track changes in expenditures and utilization of health care services by those younger than 65 covered by employer sponsored, private health insurance (ESI). This report assesses the levels and changes in prices and utilization (including changes in the mix of services) focusing on 2009 and 2010. The report found...
According to an article recently published in Health Affairs, if the Affordable Care Act (ACA) had been in place in 2001-2008, people in the individual insurance market would have saved about $280 per year on out-of-pocket costs. These savings would have been even more significant for people aged 55-64, as this age group racks up higher medical bills, but is still ineligible for Medicare. The root of the savings under the ACA is in the creation of the new health insurance exchanges, which make coverage more accessible for consumers in the individual market. Plans distributed through exchanges must cover essential health benefits, which include benefits such as prescription drugs and certain preventive services without copayments. The essential health benefit requirement in the exchanges will make the individual policies more generous and will create significant annual out-of-pocket savings for consumers. In addition, the study reports that the ACA reduces the risk of incurring high out-of-pocket costs. The likelihood of having out-of-pocket expenditures on care exceeding $6,000 would have been reduced for all adults with individual insurance, and the likelihood of having expenditures exceeding $4,000 would have been reduced for many.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released today an update on the budgetary impact of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Although overall projections are similar to those released in prior years, there are several important changes in this year's updated estimates. For example, in March 2010 when the ACA was enacted, CBO estimated that the number of uninsured individuals would fall by 32 million by 2019. Now CBO estimates that the number will only fall by 31 million by 2019, but by 33 million by 2022. The projections regarding health insurance coverage has also changed...
In their 2011 Employer Health Benefits survey, the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) and the Health Research & Educational Trust (HRET) found that annual insurance premiums for family coverage were over $15,000 this year, which is up more than 9% since last year. This increase is also significant because it outpaced both general inflation and workers' wages. The survey also found that 1 in 4 workers (23%) are members of health insurance plans that changed their cost sharing requirements for preventive services as a result of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and 31% of workers are enrolled in plans that changed the preventive services offered because of the ACA. Additionally, 2.3 million young adults have been added to their parents' insurance plans in accordance with the provision in the ACA allowing children to be covered on their parents' plans until age 26.
In a study published in Health Affairs, Dartmouth researchers find that "group physicians affiliated with the [Council of Accountable Physician Practices] provided higher-quality care at a 3.6 percent lower annual cost" than those who were not part of an accountable care organization. http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/abstract/29/5/991
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the legislative branch agency responsible for estimating the cost of legislation, issued two reports on July 24th related to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The first report, revised cost and health insurance coverage estimates for the ACA in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling in NFIB v. Sebelius[1]. In that ruling, the Court concluded the individual requirement to purchase health insurance coverage, while not a reasonable exercise of congressional Commerce Clause authority, is constitutional as a tax under congressional Spending Clause authority. The Court also held that the ACA’s Medicaid expansion, requiring states to cover all non-elderly individuals with incomes below 133[2] percent of the federal poverty level was unconstitutional. However, rather than striking the requirement, the Court precluded the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from enforcing the mandate by withholding all Medicaid funds. As a result of the ruling, states now have the option of expanding coverage to 133 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL), and will receive enhanced federal matching funds as provided under the law, but are not required to expand coverage.[3]