Employers as Consumers of Healthcare

Haven Health is About to Disrupt the U.S. Healthcare System

Background: Healthcare costs are increasing in the U.S. Healthcare market is fragmented and opaque. The Amazon, JP Morgan Chase, and Berkshire Hathaway partnered to form an independent healthcare company ‘Haven’, designed to support cost-containment in health care and to forge a better patient experience. Limited information is available in the public domain about Haven’s strategy to deliver cost-effective healthcare for their employees.

Objective: To describe the impact of Haven Health of modern healthcare.

Methods: We reviewed literature in Pubmed (MEDLINE database of references and abstracts on life sciences and biomedical topics from the USA National Library of Medicine at the National Institutes of Health) and the public domain.

Results: Amazon’s expertise and abilities in e-commerce such as logistics, supply, and big data management will support Haven’s quest to resolve inefficiencies in health care. Haven may attempt to directly negotiate with providers, bypassing insurance companies, to establish themselves as an independent payor. Additionally, Haven to establish themselves as a provider by building new low-cost primary care clinics, focusing on chronic disease prevention. The new healthcare system may leverage machine learning, artificial intelligence and big data analysis to support its initiatives and other ‘big data’ analytics to drive it all.

Conclusions: Heaven Health may use its expertise to disrupt everything from the pharmaceutical supply chain to primary care and telehealth. More research is needed to evaluate the impact of Haven Healthcare on disease outcomes and healthcare costs.

Workplace absenteeism amongst patients undergoing open vs. robotic radical prostatectomy, hysterectomy, and partial colectomy

BACKGROUND

There is controversy regarding the widespread uptake of robotic surgery across several surgical disciplines. While it has been shown to confer clinical benefits such as decreased blood loss and shorter hospital stays, some argue that the benefits of this technology do not outweigh its high cost. We performed a retrospective insurance-based analysis to investigate how undergoing robotic surgery, compared to open surgery, may impact the time in which an employed individual returns to work after undergoing major surgery.

METHODS

We identified a cohort of US adults with employer-sponsored insurance using claims data from the MarketScan database who underwent either open or robotic radical prostatectomy, hysterectomy/myomectomy, and partial colectomy from 2012 to 2016. We performed multiple regression models incorporating propensity scores to assess the effect of robotic vs. open surgery on the number of absent days from work, adjusting for demographic characteristics and baseline absenteeism.

RESULTS

In a cohort of 1157 individuals with employer-sponsored insurance, those undergoing open surgery, compared to robotic surgery, had 9.9 more absent workdays for radical prostatectomy (95%CI 5.0 to 14.7, p < 0.001), 25.3 for hysterectomy/myomectomy (95%CI 11.0-39.6, p < 0.001), and 29.8 for partial colectomy (95%CI 14.8-44.8, p < 0.001) CONCLUSION: For the three major procedures studied, robotic surgery was associated with fewer missed days from work compared to open surgery. This information helps payers, patients, and providers better understand some of the indirect benefits of robotic surgery relative to its cost.