To estimate the effect of cost sharing on seeking care for serious and minor symptoms, we analyzed data for 3539 persons aged 17 to 61 from the Rand Health Insurance Experiment. Participants were randomly assigned to a free-care group or to insurance plans requiring them to pay part of the costs (cost-sharing group). Annual surveys were administered to determine if participants had serious and minor symptoms during the preceding month and whether they saw a physician. Serious symptoms were judged by a panel of physicians to warrant care in most instances; minor symptoms were judged neither to be severe nor to warrant care in most instances. The cost-sharing group was nearly one third less likely than the free-care group to see a physician when they had minor symptoms (6.3% compared with 9.0%;p < 0.04). The free-care and cost-sharing groups did not differ significantly in seeking care for serious symptoms (22.3% compared with 17.9%;p = 0.095). However, for participants with low socioeconomic status who began the study in poor health, the prevalence of serious symptoms was higher in the cost-sharing than the free-care group (29.1% compared with 23.8%,p < 0.004).

References

  • 1. NEWHOUSEMANNINGMORRIS JWC. Some interim results from a controlled trial of cost sharing in health insurance. N Engl J Med. 1981;305:1501-7. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 2. MCDONALDMCDONALDSALTERENTERLINE AJVP. Effects of Quebec Medicare on physician consultation for selected symptoms. N Engl J Med. 1974;291:649-52. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 3. BROOKWAREROGERS RJW. Does free care improve adults' health? N Engl J Med. 1983;309:1426-34. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 4. . 1980 Census of the Population: Volume 1. Characteristics of the Population. Chapter B. General Population Characteristics. Part 1. United States Summary. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office; 1983:26. Google Scholar
  • 5. BROOKWAREROGERS RJW. The Effect of Co-insurance on the Health of Adults: Results from the Rand Health Insurance Experiment. Santa Monica, California: Rand Corporation; 1984. (Rand publication no. R-3055-HHS). Google Scholar
  • 6. ADAYANDERSON LR. Development of Indices of Access to Medical Care. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Health Administration Press; 1975. Google Scholar
  • 7. ANDERSONKASPERFRANKEL RJM. Total Survey Error. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers; 1979. Google Scholar
  • 8. DAVIESWARE AJ. Measuring Health Perceptions in the Health Insurance Experiment. Santa Monica, California: The Rand Corporation; 1981. (Rand publication no. R-2711-HHS). Google Scholar
  • 9. WARE J. The general health rating index. In: WENGER NK, MATTSON ME, FARBERG CD, et al, eds. Assessment of Quality of Life in Clinical Trials. New York: Le Jacq Publishing Co. ; 1984:184-8. Google Scholar
  • 10. STEWARTWAREBROOK AJR. Advances in the measurement of functional status: construction of aggregate indexes. Med Care. 1981;19:473-88. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 11. VEITWARE CJ. The structure of psychological distress and well-being in general populations. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983;51:730-42. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 12. MANNINGNEWHOUSEWARE WJJ. The status of health in demand estimation; or beyond excellent, good, fair, poor. In: FUCHS VR, ed. Economic Aspects of Health. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1982:143-84. Google Scholar
  • 13. WARE J. Scales for measuring general health perceptions. Health Serv Res. 1976;11:396-415. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 14. NEWHOUSEWAREDONALD JJC. HOW sophisticated are consumers about the medical care delivery system? Med Care. 1981;19:316-28. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 15. HUBER P. The Behavior of Maximum Likelihood Estimates Under Nonstandard Conditions: Fifth Berkeley Symposium, 1965. Berkeley, California: University of California Press; 1967:221-33. Google Scholar

This content is PDF only. To continue reading please click on the PDF icon.