Consumers’ perceptions and choices related to three value-based insurance design approaches

Abstract

The burden of rising health care costs is being shifted to consumers, and 30 percent of health care costs are attributed to wasteful spending on low- or no-value services. Value-based insurance design (VBID) is intended to encourage the use of high-value services or discourage the use of low-value services by aligning cost with quality. During the summer and fall of 2016, this mixed-methods study used focus groups and a quantitative analysis of survey data to explore consumer decision making in Northern California. When presented with three common VBID approaches, the focus groups favored value-based benefit design the most (41 percent), followed by reference pricing (28 percent) and narrow networks (21 percent). When presented with VBID scenarios, participants were skeptical of the value-based trade-offs and reported seeking information they wanted instead of relying on information that health plans provide. Engaging consumers to successfully reduce waste through VBID will require clarifying trade-offs to support consumers’ processes for arriving at high-value decisions as well as reaching out to consumers through trusted sources and networks.