Effect of an annual benefit limit on adult dental expenditure and utilization: a cross-sectional analysis
Morrison, G. C., Hendrix, K. S., Arling, G., Hancock, E., Hus, A. M.,
Rosenman, M. B. and Swigonski, N. L. (2012), Effect of an annual benefit
limit on adult dental expenditure and utilization: a cross-sectional
analysis. Journal of Public Health Dentistry.
doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.2012.00341.x
Abstract
Objectives:
Despite widespread use of dental benefit limits in terms of the types
of services provided, an annual maximum on claims, or both, there is a
dearth of literature examining their impact on either cost to the
insurer or health outcomes. This study uses a natural experiment to
examine dental care utilization and expenditure changes following
Indiana Medicaid's introduction of a $600 individual annual limit on
adult dental expenditure in 2003.
Methods:
In a before and after comparison, we use two separate cross-sections of
paid claims for 96+ percent of the Medicaid adult population. Paid
claims were available as a per-member-per-year (PMPY) figure.
Results:
Between 2002 and 2007, the eligible population decreased 3 percent
(from 323,209 to 313,623), yet the number of people receiving any dental
services increased 60 percent and total Medicaid dental claims
increased 18 percent (from $34.1 million to $40.1 million). In both
years, those Dually (Medicare/Medicaid) Eligible had the largest
percentage of members receiving services, about 75 percent, and the
Disabled Adult group had the lowest percentage (5-8 percent), yet both
populations are likely to have high dental need due to effects of
chronic conditions and medications.
Conclusions:
The increase in the number and percentage of people receiving
Diagnostic and Restorative care suggests that the expenditure limit's
introduction did not impose a barrier to accessing basic dental
services. However, among those receiving any service, PMPY claims fell
by 37 percent and 31 percent among the Dually Eligible and Disabled
Adults categories, respectively, suggesting that the benefit limit
affected these generally high need populations most.
Comments