“I Can’t Afford the Copays, So Guess I’ll Die?” Using Discounting Methodology to Quantify How Cost Affects Health-Care Utilization

IF 1.6 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Mark Justin Rzeszutek, Anthony DeFulio, Fawzia Fazlu Khan
{"title":"“I Can’t Afford the Copays, So Guess I’ll Die?” Using Discounting Methodology to Quantify How Cost Affects Health-Care Utilization","authors":"Mark Justin Rzeszutek, Anthony DeFulio, Fawzia Fazlu Khan","doi":"10.1007/s42822-024-00173-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The cost of health care in the United States is roughly twice as much as the average cost in comparable countries. Moreover, the United States also has the highest rate of deaths that could have been prevented by accessing health care. This is likely primarily a result of the privatized health system, which places the cost of care on the patient. Under this system, high costs create a barrier to utilization of health-care services. To better understand how health-care seeking changes as a function of cost, three experiments were conducted using crowd-sourced samples from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). These experiments were designed to assess the likelihood of seeking care based on cost, symptom, severity, and duration of symptom experienced. Effective durations of symptoms experienced when likelihood to see or contact a health-care professional was 50% (<i>EDur</i>50) was used to describe in days how cost delayed health-care seeking. A cost increase from $10 to $100 increased the <i>EDur</i>50 for a participant would see or contact a health-care professional by 1.4 to 2.5 times, whereas a cost increase from $10 to $1,000 increased <i>EDur</i>50 between 5.4 to 17.6 times. Physical health was consistently inversely related to <i>EDur</i>50 to see a health-care professional, whereas increased delay discounting of losses and decreased probability discounting of gains were related to decreased <i>EDur</i>50. This set of experiments adds to the body of evidence that substantial reforms are required in the American health-care system to ensure those who need health care can access it.</p>","PeriodicalId":44553,"journal":{"name":"Behavior and Social Issues","volume":"72 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavior and Social Issues","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s42822-024-00173-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The cost of health care in the United States is roughly twice as much as the average cost in comparable countries. Moreover, the United States also has the highest rate of deaths that could have been prevented by accessing health care. This is likely primarily a result of the privatized health system, which places the cost of care on the patient. Under this system, high costs create a barrier to utilization of health-care services. To better understand how health-care seeking changes as a function of cost, three experiments were conducted using crowd-sourced samples from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). These experiments were designed to assess the likelihood of seeking care based on cost, symptom, severity, and duration of symptom experienced. Effective durations of symptoms experienced when likelihood to see or contact a health-care professional was 50% (EDur50) was used to describe in days how cost delayed health-care seeking. A cost increase from $10 to $100 increased the EDur50 for a participant would see or contact a health-care professional by 1.4 to 2.5 times, whereas a cost increase from $10 to $1,000 increased EDur50 between 5.4 to 17.6 times. Physical health was consistently inversely related to EDur50 to see a health-care professional, whereas increased delay discounting of losses and decreased probability discounting of gains were related to decreased EDur50. This set of experiments adds to the body of evidence that substantial reforms are required in the American health-care system to ensure those who need health care can access it.

Abstract Image

"我付不起共付额,所以我猜我会死?使用贴现方法量化成本对医疗保健使用的影响
美国的医疗费用大约是同类国家平均费用的两倍。此外,美国也是本可以通过获得医疗服务而避免死亡的国家中死亡率最高的国家。这很可能主要是由于实行了私有化医疗制度,由病人承担医疗费用。在这种制度下,高昂的费用成为利用医疗服务的障碍。为了更好地了解医疗保健寻求是如何随着成本的变化而变化的,我们利用亚马逊机械土耳其(MTurk)的众包样本进行了三项实验。这些实验旨在根据费用、症状、严重程度和症状持续时间来评估就医的可能性。当就诊或联系医护人员的可能性为 50%(EDur50)时,症状的有效持续时间被用来描述费用如何延迟就医的天数。费用从 10 美元增加到 100 美元时,受试者看病或联系医护人员的 EDur50 会增加 1.4 到 2.5 倍,而费用从 10 美元增加到 1,000 美元时,EDur50 会增加 5.4 到 17.6 倍。身体健康与看医护人员的 EDur50 始终成反比,而损失的延迟贴现增加和收益的概率贴现减少与 EDur50 的降低有关。这组实验进一步证明,美国的医疗保健系统需要进行重大改革,以确保需要医疗保健的人能够获得医疗保健服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Behavior and Social Issues
Behavior and Social Issues PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
50.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The primary intellectual framework for Behavior and Social Issues is the science of behavior analysis and its sub-discipline of cultural systems analysis, but contributions from contrasting viewpoints will occasionally be considered if of specific interest to behavior analysts. We recommend that potential authors examine recent issues to determine whether their work is appropriate to the journal. Appropriate contributions include theoretical and conceptual analyses, research articles and brief reports, dialogues, and research reviews. Behavior and Social Issues is an appropriate forum for the work of senior scholars in the field, many of whom serve on the editorial board, as well as for the work of emerging scholars, including students, who have an interest in the contributions of a natural science of behavior to constructing cultures of social justice, human rights, and environmental sustainability.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信