Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 May;30(5):683-8.
doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-3127-z. Epub 2014 Dec 4.

Impact of out-of-pocket spending caps on financial burden of those with group health insurance

Kevin R Riggs  1 , Christine Buttorff, G Caleb Alexander
Affiliations

Impact of out-of-pocket spending caps on financial burden of those with group health insurance

Kevin R Riggs et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2015 May.

Abstract

Background: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandates that all private health insurance include out-of-pocket spending caps. Insurance purchased through the ACA's Health Insurance Marketplace may qualify for income-based caps, whereas group insurance will not have income-based caps. Little is known about how out-of-pocket caps impact individuals' health care financial burden.

Objective: We aimed to estimate what proportion of non-elderly individuals with group insurance will benefit from out-of-pocket caps, and the effect that various cap levels would have on their financial burden.

Design: We applied the expected uniform spending caps, hypothetical reduced uniform spending caps (reduced by one-third), and hypothetical income-based spending caps (similar to the caps on Health Insurance Marketplace plans) to nationally representative data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS).

Participants: Participants were non-elderly individuals (aged < 65 years) with private group health insurance in the 2011 and 2012 MEPS surveys (n =26,666).

Main measures: (1) The percentage of individuals with reduced family out-of-pocket spending as a result of the various caps; and (2) the percentage of individuals experiencing health care services financial burden (family out-of-pocket spending on health care, not including premiums, greater than 10% of total family income) under each scenario.

Key results: With the uniform caps, 1.2% of individuals had lower out-of-pocket spending, compared with 3.8% with reduced uniform caps and 2.1% with income-based caps. Uniform caps led to a small reduction in percentage of individuals experiencing financial burden (from 3.3% to 3.1%), with a modestly larger reduction as a result of reduced uniform caps (2.9%) and income-based caps (2.8%).

Conclusions: Mandated uniform out-of-pocket caps for those with group insurance will benefit very few individuals, and will not result in substantial reductions in financial burden.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Short PF, Banthin JS. New estimates of the underinsured younger than 65 years. JAMA. 1995;274:1302–1306. doi: 10.1001/jama.1995.03530160054034. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Alexander GC, Casalino LP, Meltzer DO. Patient-physician communication about out-of-pocket costs. JAMA. 2003;290:953–958. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.7.953. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kullgren JT, Galbraith AA, Hinrichsen VL, et al. Health care use and decision making among lower-income families in high-deductible health plans. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170:1918–1925. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.428. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Himmelstein DU, Thorne D, Warren E, Woolhandler S. Medical bankruptcy in the United States, 2007: results of a national study. Am J Med. 2009;122:741–746. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2009.04.012. - DOI - PubMed
    1. The USA's crisis of the uninsured. Lancet 2009;373:782. - PubMed

Publication types