Health plan and provider switching among depressed outpatients in the Medical Outcomes Study

by Roland Sturm, Elizabeth A. McGlynn, Lisa S. Meredith, Kenneth B. Wells, Willard G. Manning, William H. Rogers

Purchase Print Copy

 FormatList Price
Add to Cart Paperback29 pages Free

The authors analyze health care plan and individual provider switches between prepaid and fee-for-service for a panel of depressed outpatients in the longitudinal part of the Medical Outcomes Study. The authors found that payment system switches occurred at an annual rate of about 11% in both the FFS and the prepaid sector. Married, nonwhite, and wealthier individuals were significantly less likely to leave prepaid than fee-for-service care. Patients of mental health specialists in fee-for-service had the lowest adjusted rate of plan switching (8.1%), compared to fee-for-service general medical patients (13.5%) and prepaid patients (10.1-11.7%). Patients in prepaid plans at baseline were significantly more likely to change individual providers (55% during two years) than were fee-for-service patients (31% during two years); older, sicker, and more satisfied patients were less likely to change providers. However, there was no difference in the probability of changing providers between patients switching payment types and patients staying in the baseline system. Among patients receiving prepaid care at baseline, those who switched both provider and system were significantly more likely to report dissatisfaction with their original provider as a major cause for changing providers than those who changed providers but stayed in the system. No such difference existed in fee-for-service. Patients switching from prepaid to fee-for-service became more satisfied with their health care, whereas patients switching from fee-for-service to prepaid became less satisfied. The authors found no evidence that plan switching or provider changes had any effect on functioning outcomes.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Draft series. The unrestricted draft was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1993 to 2003 that represented preliminary or prepublication versions of other more formal RAND products for distribution to appropriate external audiences. The draft could be considered similar to an academic discussion paper. Although unrestricted drafts had been approved for circulation, they were not usually formally edited or peer reviewed.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.