Medical Cost Savings for Web-Based Wellness Program Participants from Employers Engaged in Health Promotion Activities

Abstract

Purpose.

Assess whether an insurer-provided Web-based wellness program results in cost and utilization improvements.

Design.

Quasi-experimental, pre-post, treatment-comparison design. Variables of interest were participation rates; medical, professional, and pharmacy expenditures; inpatient admissions; emergency room visits; and preventive service utilization.

Setting.

Six hundred forty-three employer-based wellness programs in Pennsylvania.

Subjects.

Forty-seven employers engaged in the Web-based wellness program and 596 employers who were not engaged. The engaged employer group included 10,463 wellness participants; an equal number of matched nonparticipant employees were identified from employers who were not engaged.

Intervention.

Web-based wellness program features were added to an on-site program in 2004. The program was followed through 2007.

Measures.

Outcomes were calculated using health insurance enrollment and claims history.

Analysis.

Participating employees were compared to nonparticipants using generalized linear mixed models to study changes in costs and utilization.

Results.

During the 2003 baseline year, engaged employers had greater costs, greater chronic disease prevalence, and greater hospitalization. Costs of program participants showed a lower rate of increase in 2004, and then dropped below those of the nonparticipants for the duration of the study. Between 2003 and 2007, the increase in medical expenditures of the participant group was significantly less than that of the nonparticipant group (31% vs. 46%, p < .01). In addition, the participant group showed a lower increase in professional service expenditures (p = .02) and greater utilization of preventive services (p < .01).

Conclusions.

Web-based insurer-provided wellness programs may decrease health care costs and encourage preventive service utilization. (Am J Health Promot 2011;25[4]:272–280.)

Keywords

Health Insurance Wellness Program Health Promotion Workplace Prevention Research Health Care Costs Manuscript format: research Research purpose: intervention testing/program evaluation Study design: quasi-experimental Outcome measure: other financial/economic Setting: workplace Health focus: medical self care nutrition smoking control stress management weight control Strategy: skill building/behavior change Target population age: adults Target population circumstances: employees

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary, National Health Statistics Group, National health expenditures. Available at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/. Accessed December 4, 2009.

US Department of Health and Human Services, Healthy People 2010. With Understanding and Improving Health and Objectives for Improving Health. 2 vols. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office;2000.

Healthy People 2020 public meetings: 2009 draft objectives. Available at: http://www.healthypeople.gov/hp2020/objectives/files/Draft2009Objectives.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2010.

Ozminkowski

Goetzel

Smith

The impact of the Citibank, NA, Health Management Program on changes in employee health risks over time. J Occup Environ Med. 2000;42:502–511.

Goetzel

Ozminkowski

Bruno

The long-term impact of Johnson & Johnson's Health & Wellness Program on employee health risks. J Occup Environ Med. 2002;44:417–423.

Naydeck

Pearson

Ozminkowski

The impact of the Highmark employee wellness programs on 4-year health care costs. J Occup Environ Med. 2008;50:146–156.

Chapman

LS.

Meta-evaluation of worksite health promotion economic return studies: 2005 update. Am J Health Promot. 2005;19:1–11.

Chapman

LS.

Do we need a “virtual” program infrastructure for worksite and population health promotion efforts?

Am J Health Promot. 2006;21:1–10.

McLellan

MacKenzie

Tilton

Impact of workplace sociocultural attributes on participation in health assessments. J Occup Environ Med. 2009;51:797–803.

10.

Loeppke

Taitel

Haufle

Health and productivity as a business strategy: A multiemployer study. J Occup Environ Med. 2009;51:411–428.

11.

DxCG, Inc, DxCG RiskSmart Stand Alone V2.1.1 Overview. Boston, MA: DxCG;2006.

12.

DxCG RiskSmart Stand Alone [computer program], Version 2.1.1. Boston, MA: DxCG;2006.

13.

United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Measuring price change for medical care in the CPI. Available at: http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpifact4.htm. Accessed April 15, 2010.

14.

Bergstralh

Kosanke

JL.

Computerized matching of controls. Mayo Foundation, Section of Biostatistics; 1995. Technical Report 56. Available at http://mayoresearch.mayo.edu/mayo/research/biostat/sasmacros.cfm. Accessed November 17, 2010.

15.

Goetzel

Jacobson

Aldana

Health care costs of worksite health promotion participants and nonparticipants. J Occup Environ Med. 1998;40:341–346.

16.

Ozminkowski

Ling

Goetzel

Long-term impact of Johnson & Johnson's Health and Wellness Program on health care utilization and expenditures. J Occup Environ Med. 2002;44:21–29.

17.

Baicker

Cutler

Song

Workplace wellness programs can generate savings. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(2):1–8.

18.

Keller

Lehmann

Milligan

KJ.

Effectiveness of corporate well-being programs: A meta-analysis. J Macromark. 2009;29:279–302.