John A Nyman1, Nathan A Barleen, Bryan E Dowd. 1. Division of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn, USA. nyman001@umn.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the return-on-investment, if any, for the health promotion program adopted by the University of Minnesota in 2006. METHODS: Regression analysis was used to determine the cost-savings in annual health care expenditures associated with three components of the program: a risk assessment, a risk management program, and a disease management (DM) program. Differences-in-differences equations with random effects were used to deal with selection bias. RESULTS: The analysis suggests that the DM reduced spending by about $1375 per year for each participant. The risk assessment and risk management components had no effect on spending in this initial year. CONCLUSIONS: DM reduced health care spending at the University of Minnesota, but not enough to generate a positive return-on-investment. A number of factors may qualify this conclusion.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the return-on-investment, if any, for the health promotion program adopted by the University of Minnesota in 2006. METHODS: Regression analysis was used to determine the cost-savings in annual health care expenditures associated with three components of the program: a risk assessment, a risk management program, and a disease management (DM) program. Differences-in-differences equations with random effects were used to deal with selection bias. RESULTS: The analysis suggests that the DM reduced spending by about $1375 per year for each participant. The risk assessment and risk management components had no effect on spending in this initial year. CONCLUSIONS:DM reduced health care spending at the University of Minnesota, but not enough to generate a positive return-on-investment. A number of factors may qualify this conclusion.
Authors: Yun-Kyoung Song; Boyoon Choi; Jung Mi Oh; Arim Kwak; Kyungim Kim Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-01-27 Impact factor: 3.390