Insurers favor value-based contracts, but few are available

Most health plans responding to a Avalere Health survey said they have favorable attitudes towards value-based contracts, though smaller numbers of insurers are actually pursuing or have entered into those agreements.

The survey was completed by 50 “qualified representatives” for 45 health plans. Avalere said the respondents represent 183 million of the covered lives in the United States, including those in Medicaid managed care or Medicare Advantage plans.

A large majority (70) percent reported favoring contracts based on outcomes. Only 24 percent, however, have those contracts in place, with 12 percent having five or more contracts and 8 percent having just one.

Another 30 percent reported negotiating one or more value-based contracts at the time they completed the survey, and 29 percent said they’re not planning to pursue those agreements.

“Health plans, providers, and patients demand innovative, data-based methods to improve outcomes and manage cost,” Avalere President Dan Mendelson said in a statement. “Outcomes-based contracts offer the opportunity to deploy data, analytics and interventions to deliver on these goals for pharmaceuticals—particularly to better integrate therapy into medical management.”

Among plans which have outcomes-based contracts in place, the results appear to be positive, as most indicated planned to pursue additional contracts. Of the current contracts in place, respondents reported they’re mostly centered on four therapeutic areas—endocrine (55 percent), infectious disease (45 percent), cardiovascular (42 percent) and respiratory conditions (41 percent). Health plans said they’d like to expand to new areas, particularly inflammatory diseases.

Operational challenges remain, however, which could limit uptake among reluctant health plans.

“While some plans have experienced administrative and operational challenges in implementing outcomes-based contracts, most are figuring out ways to benefit from these types of contracts in multiple therapeutic areas,” said Kathy Hughes, vice president at Avalere. “Solutions in data connectivity, contract monitoring and direct clinician intervention streamline the administrative burden and enable transparency for all parties.”

A lack of buy-in from health plans has already slowed down the transition to value-based care. A December 2016 survey from the American Medical Group Association, 64 percent of respondents fewer than 20 percent of local commercial insurers offered risk products in their market, with 18 percent saying none were available in their area.

""
John Gregory, Senior Writer

John joined TriMed in 2016, focusing on healthcare policy and regulation. After graduating from Columbia College Chicago, he worked at FM News Chicago and Rivet News Radio, and worked on the state government and politics beat for the Illinois Radio Network. Outside of work, you may find him adding to his never-ending graphic novel collection.

Around the web

Compensation for heart specialists continues to climb. What does this say about cardiology as a whole? Could private equity's rising influence bring about change? We spoke to MedAxiom CEO Jerry Blackwell, MD, MBA, a veteran cardiologist himself, to learn more.

The American College of Cardiology has shared its perspective on new CMS payment policies, highlighting revenue concerns while providing key details for cardiologists and other cardiology professionals. 

As debate simmers over how best to regulate AI, experts continue to offer guidance on where to start, how to proceed and what to emphasize. A new resource models its recommendations on what its authors call the “SETO Loop.”