Abstract
Population-based risk adjustment, as applied to reimbursement in managed care settings, may reduce pressures for adverse selection by managed care organisations. Using insurance claims data from 184 340 plan members, we compared the performance of three risk-adjustment methods. We present a model for measuring the impact of risk adjustment on the likelihood that individual members will be at risk for adverse selection. These results are compared with resource allocation based on age/sex. The predictive ability of alternative allocation schemes increased from an R(2) of 1.2% for age-sex allocation to 11.4% based on risk adjustment using diagnostic cost groups. However, the impact of risk adjustment on the proportion of members at risk for adverse selection was small. At an absolute threshold loss of $US2400 per year, 8.3% to 8.6% of members were at risk for adverse selection compared with 9.3% based on age-sex allocation. The limited impact of risk adjustment on the likelihood of adverse selection suggests that other strategies for reducing adverse selection may be required.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.