Health insurers use narrow and tiered networks to lower costs by contracting with, or favoring, selected providers. Little is known about the contemporary effects of narrow or tiered networks on key metrics. The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize the evidence on how narrow and tiered networks impact cost, access, quality, and patient steering. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for articles published from January 2000 to June 2020. Both narrow and tiered networks are associated with reduced overall health care costs for most cost-related measures. Evidence pertaining to access to care and quality measures were more limited to a narrow set of outcomes or were weak in internal validity, but generally concluded no systematic adverse effects on narrow or tiered networks. Narrow and tiered networks appear to reduce costs without affecting some quality measures. More research on quality outcomes is warranted.
BrennanT. A.SpettellC. M.FernandesJ.DowneyR. L.CarraraL. M. (2008). Do managed care plans’ tiered networks lead to inequities in care for minority patients?Health Affairs, 27(4), 1160–1166.
4.
BuntinM. B.GravesJ. A. (2020). How the ACA dented the cost curve. Health Affairs, 39(3), 403–412.
5.
BurnsJ. (2012). Narrow networks found to yield substantial savings. Managed Care, 21(2), 26–30.
DafnyL.HendelI.WilsonN. (2015). Narrow networks on the health insurance exchanges: What do they look like and how do they affect pricing? A case study of Texas. The American Economic Review, 105(5), 110–114.
8.
DafnyL. S.HendelI.MaroneV.OdyC. (2017). Narrow networks on the health insurance marketplaces: Prevalence, pricing, and the cost of network breadth. Health Affairs, 36(9), 1606–1614.
FeymanY.FigueroaJ. F.PolskyD. E.AdelbergM.FraktA. (2019). Primary care physician networks in Medicare advantage. Health Affairs, 38(4), 537–544.
12.
FortneyJ.ThillJ. C.ZhangM.DuanN.RostK. (2001). Provider choice and utility loss due to selective contracting in rural and urban areas. Medical Care Research and Review, 58(1), 60–75.
13.
FrankM. B.HsuJ.LandrumM. B.ChernewM. E. (2015). The impact of a tiered network on hospital choice. Health Services Research, 50(5), 1628–1648.
14.
GillenE. M.Hassmiller LichK.TranthamL. C.WeinbergerM.SilbermanP.HolmesM. (2017). The effect of narrow network plans on out-of-pocket cost. The American Journal of Managed Care, 23(9), 540–545.
15.
GravesJ. A.NshutiL.EversonJ.RichardsM.BuntinM.NikpayS.ZhouZ.PolskyD. (2020). Breadth and exclusivity of hospital and physician networks in US insurance markets. JAMA Network Open, 3(12), Article e2029419.
16.
GruberJ.McKnightR. (2016). Controlling health care costs through limited network insurance plans: Evidence from Massachusetts state employees. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 8(2), 219–250.
17.
HaederS. F.WeimerD. L.MukamelD. B. (2015). California hospital networks are narrower in Marketplace than in commercial plans, but access and quality are similar. Health Affairs, 34(5), 741–748.
18.
HaederS. F.WeimerD. L.MukamelD. B. (2016). Secret shoppers find access to providers and network accuracy lacking for those in marketplace and commercial plans. Health Affairs, 35(7), 1160–1166.
19.
HaederS. F.WeimerD. L.MukamelD. B. (2019). A consumer-centric approach to network adequacy: Access to four specialties in California’s marketplace. Health Affairs, 38(11), 1918–1926.
HoK. (2009). Insurer-provider networks in the medical care market. The American Economic Review, 99(1), 393–430.
22.
HowardD. H. (2008). Hospital quality and selective contracting: Evidence from kidney transplantation. Forum for Health Economics & Policy, 11(2), 2.
23.
HowardD. H. (2014). Adverse effects of prohibiting narrow provider networks. The New England Journal of Medicine, 371(7), 591–593.
24.
Institute of Medicine Committee to Design a Strategy for Quality Review and Assurance, & Lohr, K. N. (1990). Defining quality of care. National Academies Press.
Lo SassoA. T.LindroothR. C.LurieI. Z.LyonsJ. S. (2006). Expanded mental health benefits and outpatient depression treatment intensity. Medical Care, 44(4), 366–372.
29.
McKennaR. M.PintorJ. K.AliM. M. (2019). Insurance-based disparities in access, utilization, and financial strain for adults with psychological distress. Health Affairs, 38(5), 826–834.
30.
MelnickG. A.ZwanzigerJ.BamezaiA.PattisonR. (1992). The effects of market structure and bargaining position on hospital prices. Journal of Health Economics, 11(3), 217–233.
31.
MoherD.LiberatiA.TetzlaffJ.AltmanD. G., & PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLOS Medicine, 6(7), Article e1000097.
32.
MorriseyM. A. (2001). Competition in hospital and health insurance markets: A review and research agenda. Health Services Research, 36(1, Pt 2), 191–221.
PolskyD.CandonM. K.ChatterjeeP.ChenX. (2018). Scope of primary care physicians’ participation in the health insurance marketplaces. Health Affairs, 37(8), 1252–1256.
35.
PolskyD.CidavZ.SwansonA. (2016). Marketplace plans with narrow physician networks feature lower monthly premiums than plans with larger networks. Health Affairs, 35(10), 1842–1848.
36.
PolskyD.WeinerJ.ZhangY. (2017). Exploring the decline of narrow networks on the 2017 ACA marketplaces. LDI Issue Brief, 21(9), 1–6.
37.
PragerE. (2020). Healthcare demand under simple prices: Evidence from tiered hospital networks. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 12(4), 196–223.
38.
RosenthalM. B.LiZ.MilsteinA. (2009). Do patients continue to see physicians who are removed from a PPO network?The American Journal of Managed Care, 15(10), 713–719.
39.
ScanlonD. P.LindroothR. C.ChristiansonJ. B. (2008). Steering patients to safer hospitals? The effect of a tiered hospital network on hospital admissions. Health Services Research, 43(5Pt2), 1849–1868.
40.
SchleicherS. M.MullangiS.FeeleyT. W. (2016). Effects of narrow networks on access to high-quality cancer care. JAMA Oncology, 2(4), 427–428.
41.
SinaikoA. D. (2016). Variations in patient response to tiered physician networks. The American Journal of Managed Care, 22(6), 420–425.
42.
SinaikoA. D.LandrumM. B.ChernewM. E. (2017). Enrollment in a health plan with a tiered provider network decreased medical spending by 5 percent. Health Affairs, 36(5), 870–875.
43.
SinaikoA. D.RosenthalM. B. (2014). The impact of tiered physician networks on patient choices. Health Services Research, 49(4), 1348–1363.
44.
StataCorp LLC. (2021). State base reference manual, Release 17.
45.
TackettS.StelznerC.McGlynnE.MehrotraA. (2011). The impact of health plan physician-tiering on access to care. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26(4), 440–445.
46.
van den Broek-AltenburgE. M.AtherlyA. J. (2020). The relation between selective contracting and healthcare expenditures in private health insurance plans in the United States. Health Policy, 124(2), 174–182.
47.
WholeyD.FeldmanR.ChristiansonJ. B. (1995). The effect of market structure on HMO premiums. Journal of Health Economics, 14(1), 81–105.
48.
YasaitisL.BekelmanJ. E.PolskyD. (2017). Relation between narrow networks and providers of cancer care. Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 35(27), 3131–3135.
49.
ZwanzigerJ.MelnickG. A.BamezaiA. (2000). The effect of selective contracting on hospital costs and revenues. Health Services Research, 35(4), 849–867.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
