Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 4/2005

01-12-2005 | Leading Article

How to present the business case for healthcare quality to employers

Authors: Sean Nicholson, Mark V. Pauly, Daniel Polsky, Catherine M. Baase, Gary M. Billotti, Ronald J. Ozminkowski, Marc L. Berger, Claire E. Sharda

Published in: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy | Issue 4/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

Many employers in the US are investing in new programmes to improve the quality of medical care and simultaneously shifting more of the healthcare costs to their employees without understanding the implications on the amount and type of care their employees will receive. These seemingly contradictory actions reflect an inability by employers to accurately assess how their health benefit decisions affect their profits. This paper proposes a practical method that employers can use to determine how much they should invest in the health of their workers and to identify the best benefit designs to encourage appropriate healthcare delivery and use. This method could also be of value to employers in other countries who are considering implementing programmes to improve employee health. The method allows a programme that improves workers’ health to generate four financial benefits for an employer — reduced medical costs, reduced absences, improved on-the-job productivity, and reduced turnover — and uses accurate estimates of the benefits of reducing absences and improving productivity.
Footnotes
1
1Mercer Human Resources Consulting, as cited in the Wall Street Journal, 20 October 2004.[14]
 
2
2Companies that are not able to raise enough money to finance all projects with a positive NPV will generally rank projects and pursue those with the largest NPV.
 
3
3Dow employees based in the US were surveyed in the summer of 2002.[21] The employees missed 1.1% of workdays because of a health condition, on average. Sixty-five percent of the workers reported having a chronic health condition and these employees reported that their productivity while at work was 11.5% lower than usual over the previous 4 weeks because of their health condition. The average hourly wage among the Dow workforce in 2002 was $US31.90.
 
4
4Villagra and Ahmed[22]estimate that a diabetes disease management programme reduced medical expenditures by 8%. Although Fireman and colleagues[23] report that medical expenditures increased 9 percentage points less over a 4-year period among enrolees with chronic conditions that were targeted by Kaiser Permanente’s disease management programmes relative to enrolees without a chronic condition, the authors caution that the programmes may not have been responsible for the cost savings. Goetzel et al.[24] report mixed evidence for 44 disease management programmes targeting five different conditions, with the largest and most consistent cost savings for congestive heart failure programmes and the weakest results for depression programmes. The Congressional Budget Office[25] reviewed the disease management literature and concluded that there is limited evidence that these programmes reduce medical expenditures, in large part because most studies focus on intermediate health outcomes (e.g. blood pressure or cholesterol levels) rather than medical costs. We assume a more modest expenditure reduction of 2%.
 
5
5Situations where a person is present for work but functioning at less than full productivity are sometimes referred to in the literature as ‘impaired presenteeism’.
 
6
6The seasonally adjusted national average turnover rate for June–August of 2004 was 2.4% according to a Bureau of Labor Statistics survey.[26]
 
7
7Pauly et al.[18] show that the cost to a firm when a worker is absent is the worker’s marginal revenue product, which would be equal to the daily wage if workers are never expected to miss work or if they are not paid when they are absent. Observed wages will usually be about 5–10% lower than a worker’s marginal revenue product because most workers are still paid (up to a specified number of days) when they are absent because of illness, vacation or a statutory holiday, and the expected absence rate will be considered when determining the wage per day paid.
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, editors; Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, Institute of Medicine. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2000 Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, editors; Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, Institute of Medicine. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2000
2.
go back to reference McGlynn EA, Asch SM, Adams J, et al. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. JAMA 2003; 348(26): 2635–45 McGlynn EA, Asch SM, Adams J, et al. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. JAMA 2003; 348(26): 2635–45
3.
go back to reference Institute of Medicine, Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2001 Institute of Medicine, Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2001
4.
5.
go back to reference Leatherman S, Berwick D, Iles D, et al. The business case for quality: case studies and an analysis. Health Aff 2003; 22(2): 17–30CrossRef Leatherman S, Berwick D, Iles D, et al. The business case for quality: case studies and an analysis. Health Aff 2003; 22(2): 17–30CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Berwick DM, DeParle NA, Eddy DM, et al. Paying for performance: Medicare should lead [letter]. Health Aff 2003; 22(6): 8–10CrossRef Berwick DM, DeParle NA, Eddy DM, et al. Paying for performance: Medicare should lead [letter]. Health Aff 2003; 22(6): 8–10CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Kaiser Family Foundation. Employer health benefits: 2003 annual survey. Menlo Park (CA): The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust, 2003 Kaiser Family Foundation. Employer health benefits: 2003 annual survey. Menlo Park (CA): The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust, 2003
8.
go back to reference Avi D, Encinosa W. Does cost sharing affect compliance? The case of prescription drugs. National Bureau of Economic Research working paper no. 10738. Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research, 2004 Sep Avi D, Encinosa W. Does cost sharing affect compliance? The case of prescription drugs. National Bureau of Economic Research working paper no. 10738. Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research, 2004 Sep
9.
go back to reference Goldman D, Joyce GF, Escarce JJ, et al. Pharmacy benefits and the use of drugs by the chronically ill. JAMA 2004; 291(19): 2344–50PubMedCrossRef Goldman D, Joyce GF, Escarce JJ, et al. Pharmacy benefits and the use of drugs by the chronically ill. JAMA 2004; 291(19): 2344–50PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Brook RH, Ware JE, Rogers WH, et al. Does free care improve adults’ health. N Engl J Med 1983; 309(23): 1426–33PubMedCrossRef Brook RH, Ware JE, Rogers WH, et al. Does free care improve adults’ health. N Engl J Med 1983; 309(23): 1426–33PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Loeppke R, Hymel P, Lofland J, et al. Health-related workplace productivity measurement: general and migraine specific recommendations from the ACOEM expert panel. J Occup Environ Med 2003; 45(4): 349–59PubMedCrossRef Loeppke R, Hymel P, Lofland J, et al. Health-related workplace productivity measurement: general and migraine specific recommendations from the ACOEM expert panel. J Occup Environ Med 2003; 45(4): 349–59PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Stewart W, Ricci J, Chee E, et al. Lost productive work time costs from health conditions in the United States: results from the American Productivity Audit. J Occup Environ Med 2003; 45: 1234–46PubMedCrossRef Stewart W, Ricci J, Chee E, et al. Lost productive work time costs from health conditions in the United States: results from the American Productivity Audit. J Occup Environ Med 2003; 45: 1234–46PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Goetzel RZ, Long SR, Ozminkowski RJ, et al. Health, absence, disability, and presenteeism cost estimates of certain physical and mental health conditions affecting US employers. J Occup Environ Med 2004; 46(4): 398–412PubMedCrossRef Goetzel RZ, Long SR, Ozminkowski RJ, et al. Health, absence, disability, and presenteeism cost estimates of certain physical and mental health conditions affecting US employers. J Occup Environ Med 2004; 46(4): 398–412PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Landro L. Does disease management pay off? Wall Street Journal 2004 Oct 20: D4 Landro L. Does disease management pay off? Wall Street Journal 2004 Oct 20: D4
15.
go back to reference Greenberg PE, Finkelstein SN, Berndt ER. Economic consequences of illness in the workplace. Sloan Manage Rev 1999; 36(4): 26–38 Greenberg PE, Finkelstein SN, Berndt ER. Economic consequences of illness in the workplace. Sloan Manage Rev 1999; 36(4): 26–38
16.
go back to reference McGlynn EA, McDonald T, Champagne L, et al. The business case for a corporate wellness program: a case study of General Motors and the United Auto Workers Union. The Commonwealth Fund [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cmwf.org [Accessed 2003 Sep] McGlynn EA, McDonald T, Champagne L, et al. The business case for a corporate wellness program: a case study of General Motors and the United Auto Workers Union. The Commonwealth Fund [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​cmwf.​org [Accessed 2003 Sep]
17.
go back to reference Ungar WJ, Coyte PC, Pharmacy Medication Monitoring Program Advisory Board. Measuring productivity loss days in asthma patients. Health Econ 2000; 9(1): 37–46PubMedCrossRef Ungar WJ, Coyte PC, Pharmacy Medication Monitoring Program Advisory Board. Measuring productivity loss days in asthma patients. Health Econ 2000; 9(1): 37–46PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Pauly MV, Nicholson S, Xu J, et al. A new general model of the impact of absenteeism on employers and employees. Health Econ 2002; 11(3): 221–31PubMedCrossRef Pauly MV, Nicholson S, Xu J, et al. A new general model of the impact of absenteeism on employers and employees. Health Econ 2002; 11(3): 221–31PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Nicholson S, Pauly MV, Polsky D, et al. Measuring the effects of workloss on productivity with team production. Health Econ. Epub 2005 Sep 30 Nicholson S, Pauly MV, Polsky D, et al. Measuring the effects of workloss on productivity with team production. Health Econ. Epub 2005 Sep 30
20.
go back to reference Parry T. On the brink of change: how CFOs view investments in health and productivity. San Francisco (CA): Integrated Benefits Institute, 2002 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ibiweb.org [Accessed 2003 Sep] Parry T. On the brink of change: how CFOs view investments in health and productivity. San Francisco (CA): Integrated Benefits Institute, 2002 [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​ibiweb.​org [Accessed 2003 Sep]
21.
go back to reference Collins JJ, Baase CM, Sharda CE, et al. The impact of chronic health conditions on worker productivity. J Occup Environ Med 2005; 47(6): 547–57PubMedCrossRef Collins JJ, Baase CM, Sharda CE, et al. The impact of chronic health conditions on worker productivity. J Occup Environ Med 2005; 47(6): 547–57PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Villagra VG, Ahmed T. Effectiveness of a disease management program for patients with diabetes. Health Aff 2004; 23(4): 255–66CrossRef Villagra VG, Ahmed T. Effectiveness of a disease management program for patients with diabetes. Health Aff 2004; 23(4): 255–66CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Fireman B, Bartlett J, Selby J. Can disease management reduce health care costs by improving quality? Health Aff 2004; 23(6): 63–75CrossRef Fireman B, Bartlett J, Selby J. Can disease management reduce health care costs by improving quality? Health Aff 2004; 23(6): 63–75CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Goetzel RZ, Ozminkowski RJ, Villagra V, et al. Return on investment in disease management: a review. Health Care Financ Rev 2005; 26(4): 1–19PubMed Goetzel RZ, Ozminkowski RJ, Villagra V, et al. Return on investment in disease management: a review. Health Care Financ Rev 2005; 26(4): 1–19PubMed
25.
go back to reference Congressional Budget Office. An analysis of the literature on disease management programs. Washington, DC: Congressional Budget Office, 2004 Oct 13 Congressional Budget Office. An analysis of the literature on disease management programs. Washington, DC: Congressional Budget Office, 2004 Oct 13
27.
go back to reference Goetzel RZ, Guindon AM, Turshen IJ, et al. Health and productivity measurement: establishing key performance measures, benchmarks, and best practices. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43(1): 10–7PubMedCrossRef Goetzel RZ, Guindon AM, Turshen IJ, et al. Health and productivity measurement: establishing key performance measures, benchmarks, and best practices. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43(1): 10–7PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Burton WN, Conti D, Chen C, et al. The role of health risk factors and disease on worker productivity. J Occup Environ Med 1999; 41: 863–77PubMedCrossRef Burton WN, Conti D, Chen C, et al. The role of health risk factors and disease on worker productivity. J Occup Environ Med 1999; 41: 863–77PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Lynch W, Riedel J. Measuring employee productivity: a guide to self-assessment tools. Scottsdale (AZ): William M. Mercer Inc. and the Institute for Health and Productivity Management, 2001 Lynch W, Riedel J. Measuring employee productivity: a guide to self-assessment tools. Scottsdale (AZ): William M. Mercer Inc. and the Institute for Health and Productivity Management, 2001
30.
go back to reference Turpin RS, Ozminkowski RJ, Sharda CE, et al. Reliability and validity of the Stanford presenteeism scale. J Occup Environ Med 2004; 46(11): 1123–33PubMedCrossRef Turpin RS, Ozminkowski RJ, Sharda CE, et al. Reliability and validity of the Stanford presenteeism scale. J Occup Environ Med 2004; 46(11): 1123–33PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
How to present the business case for healthcare quality to employers
Authors
Sean Nicholson
Mark V. Pauly
Daniel Polsky
Catherine M. Baase
Gary M. Billotti
Ronald J. Ozminkowski
Marc L. Berger
Claire E. Sharda
Publication date
01-12-2005
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy / Issue 4/2005
Print ISSN: 1175-5652
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1896
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00148365-200504040-00003

Other articles of this Issue 4/2005

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 4/2005 Go to the issue

Review Article

What value health?

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgement