The problem
The end of each year brings over two months of insurance
reassignment, the “open enrollment” period.
This is in addition to the regular nonstop Medicare signup as everyone
turning 65 signs on to thousands of Medicare insurance programs. Not just over-65s, but low-income (Medicaid),
plus disabled, are eligible. Four additional
months of the year (ending March 31) are hunting season for Medicare Advantage
plan-changers.
Half the time the phone rings, that’s what’s on the other
end: an invitation to enter a bewildering universe of costs and options without
any rational or obvious route to navigating that world.
This national decision-making marathon is the natural outcome
of the “customer-first” trend in medicine.
And while that sounds empowering, it actually means that healthcare
customers are increasingly responsible for decisions well beyond their
education level or even their ability to ask for and organize information in
strategic ways. This goes along with being
required to select treatments and compare risks, decisions for which patients
have no training.
Decision making
Decision-making science is an education in itself, and even
when they are aware of the basics, few people can implement this skill in any
systematic way. Rather than rational
procedures with principles and guidelines, most major decisions are 95%
right-brained, emotional responses to hoped-for results to get a
compound-complex process over with.
For most people, we understand pieces of the puzzle (but not
the entire system) and just have to hope it all comes together for our future
quality of life, health, and finances.
This is a poker game we know very little about when it comes to
high-stakes betting. What’s important is
to distinguish between critical and less-critical decisions within the
game. And a good sense of probability
calculations. As Charles Duhigg puts it
in Smarter, Faster, Better (2016), “How do we learn to make better decisions?
.....Regardless of our methods, the goals are the same: to see the future as
multiple possibilities rather than one predetermined outcome; to identify what
you do and don’t know; to ask yourself, which choice gets you the best
odds?”
The options
What do the puzzle pieces look like? Costs include premiums, deductibles, and
copays, both within and outside the Medicare system or the Supplement or
Advantage plan under review – and compared between plans. Then there are all the time frames that
define when care can be given, how often, and in conjunction with other
treatments, along with any follow-up care.
Where will services be available?
Locations, clinic type (there are several, ranging between in-patient
hospital, emergency centers, offices, urgent-care, ambulatory, observational,
etc.). Then post-procedure stays,
long-term care for chronic cases like long Covid (which will be an upcoming
major line item in the decision tree as a disability), at-home, nursing
centers, and more. Watch for important exclusions and limitations in services,
cost, and scheduling.
Solution-seeking
Basic keys
These are led by three: does the potential plan cover my
current providers? Does it cover my
medications? (Average is $1200 spent per year).
What will it cost or save—compared to what I pay now (premiums and
copays)? These are big-ticket decisions
whose consequences usually become clear only after choices are made, procedures
undergone, and the bill arrives. The
choice of insurance plan amounts to a critical partnership between the patient
and a complex system that can’t be understood in advance of billing
outcomes—when it’s discovered that your procedure wasn’t covered, or is
attached to services uncovered. Sitting in the dental chair about to be fitted
for a molar crown is no time to be told that porcelain is an extra $300.
In parallel, when Mom’s health starts to fail, millions now realize
they don’t really understand the full rulebook for her long-term care
policy. The percentage of long-term care
payers who ever use their insurance is far less than half. Plenty of anguish
and suffering results from failure to make the right choices, and that depends
on getting good decision training.
The number of decisions, based on the Evidence of Coverage,
is simply overwhelming. There is no way
that anyone can foresee what services and procedures and drugs they will need,
even for the near future. And quite
difficult to construct equations that can show parallels between plans, as each
line item can differ in coverage or scope as well as cost. Is it better to have a higher deductible
(copay) for a hospital visit, or a lower one with fewer benefits? This is one example of the difficulty of
comparing unequal line items. And then
there are dozens—hundreds—of other comparisons the customer can try to make
without fully understanding what is being compared. At the bottom line, there is a confused list
that doesn’t carry over to rank two or three or four plans. That means there is no confident bottom line
for price—or for coverage, either.
Brain basics
Prospect theory says that we are more afraid of losses (about
2.4 x) than rewarded by gains. Any
single difference changes the equation; it can take hundreds of hours to puzzle
out. This includes understanding what you don’t need to buy—expensive
extras or guarantees that increase the bottom line without adding any value. Does the monthly cost of a hospital indemnity
plan (at $30-$60 and up) actually justify the expected hospital stays? The actual number, of course, is an unknown
quantity.
You only find out how good or poor decisions were when the
medical incident strikes and you need to use it. Things will be fine—until they aren’t. Either you can’t use the plan or what you
need costs more than expected—sometimes thousands more. But hindsight is a hard
way to learn. You need to know what obstacles could be involved in advance, and
how to navigate these when they emerge.
This takes a sophisticated, experienced decision partner to review the
options. Pitfalls aren’t visible until
you are falling into them (that’s their purpose). Your new formulary may charge you $500/month
for a drug that was free under the plan you had last year. Providers change plans (your doctor could be
one of them). And the plan you have now can always announce changes for next
year—including their brand names, which leads to more confusion. Over half of
the adults in a Bloomberg survey on debt reported that healthcare costs were
the leading source (led by emergency-room visits), at over $10,000 for one in
four.
There is an essential fact worth keeping in mind here: humans
don’t like making decisions--under any circumstances. Especially for high-stakes issues with
complex rules we can’t understand or know how to apply, in a field based on
medical, high technology, and complex financial systems. Once executed, the
choice can’t always be reversed or undone in time to prevent costly further
decisions. Add this uncertainty to our ignorance of
accidents and illness in the future. Decision avoidance could keep us from
making very logical changes to coverage we now have but don’t understand at all
well until we need it—and this unfamiliarity itself encourages active avoidance. Ongoing discomfort with low Medicare
understanding can result in ignoring the Open Enrollment period, just when choosers
should be wading into the change process because their health and finances
could benefit.
Navigating the system
How do Medicare insurance plans advertise? Each year mailbox and email are choked with
flyers about supplemental benefits: health clubs, cooking classes,
transportation, delivered groceries. OTC
allowances and home nurse wellness visits are largely diversions, a form of
emotional window dressing. These are
actually the most immediately compelling and likeable features by which private
insurance advertises, because they are the most viscerally appealing, as well
as familiar (yoga, steak, gummy vitamins) the easiest to relate to. But they are not anywhere near the top row in
the decision process, a reversal that puts them top of mind while co-pays, major
surgery, home nursing care, therapies, screenings, and lab tests are far more
costly and important. Reversing the
hierarchy is an example of a clarifying technique in framing this decision.
In fact the entire Medicare process is based on emotional
appeals: opening with reassurance about medical systems’ “caring,” along with saving
money, discounts, free stuff, glamorous retiree shots, and confidence in agents
who sound smart. They sound especially
smart because they are dealing in technical domains – medical and
technological—where patients have limited experience and knowledge. So patients are going to feel undereducated,
which they can’t help. It adds to the
attraction of leaning on the expertise of the seller while undervaluing one’s
own ability to make sound decisions.
But the outcome is high-stakes and high price, and will determine whether and how much quality healthcare is going to turn out to be affordable. Not that different from buying a luxury car with hundreds of features and not knowing how they work or whether they are even needed or desirable, nor whether they could increase driving insurance rates or repairs. The emotional hook of “luxury medical goods” must be pointed out and examined more closely so they can be overridden by a more rational computation. It can almost seem that Medicare is designed to be confusing and unclear—it would be hard to think of a system of decisions that is more so. (See “Do You Know Your Medicare Number? Try Memorizing This,” the February 2021 blog on the complexity of the Medicare alpha-numeric member ID making it highly difficult to memorize.)