Abstract
Objective To investigate healthcare costs and contributors to costs for multiple chronic conditions (MCCs), common clusters of conditions and their impact on cost and utilisation.
Methods This was a cross-sectional analysis of US financial claims data representative of the US population, including Medicare, Medicaid and Commercial insurance claims in 2015. Outcome measures included healthcare costs and contributors; ranking of clusters of conditions according to frequency, strength of association and unsupervised (k-means) analysis; the impact of clustering on costs and contributors to costs.
Results Of 1,878,951 patients, 931,045(49.6%) had MCCs, 56.5% weighted to the US population. Mean age was 53.0 years(SD16.7); 393,121(42.20%) were male. Mean annual healthcare spending was $12,601, ranging from $4,385 (2 conditions) to $33,874 (11 conditions), with spending increasing by 22-fold for inpatient services, 6-fold for outpatient services, 4.5-fold for generic drugs and 4.2-fold for branded drugs.
Cluster ranking using the 3 methodologies yielded similar results: highest ranked clusters included metabolic syndrome(12.2% of US insured patients), age related diseases(7.7%), renal failure(5.6%), respiratory disorders(4.5%), cardiovascular disease(CVD)(4.3%), cancers(4.1-4.3%), mental health-related clusters(1.0-1.5%) and HIV/AIDS(0.2%).
Highest spending was in HIV/AIDS clusters ($48,293), mental health-related clusters ($38,952-$40,637), renal disease ($38,551) and CVD ($37,155); with 89.9% of spending on outpatient and inpatient care combined, and 10.1% on medication.
Conclusion and Relevance Over 57% of insured patients in the US may have MCCs. MCC Clustering is frequent and is associated with healthcare utilisation. The findings favour health system redesign towards a multiple condition approach for clusters of chronic conditions, alongside other cost-containment measures for MCCs.
What is already known about the topic?Despite one in three adults suffering from more than one chronic condition, little is known about the burden from MCCs. Some studies to date suggest markedly different disease, cost and societal burdens. Furthermore, certain conditions cluster together more frequently, however, no studies have reported on the impact that clusters have on the healthcare cost burden from MCCs in a comprehensive manner. Recent consensus statements have called for a specific focus on multiple chronic conditions.
What does the paper add to existing knowledge?This study is one of the most comprehensive studies investigating contributors to costs in terms of number of patients included, representativeness of the US population and inclusion of the full range of chronic conditions.
What insights does the paper provide for informing healthcare-related decision making?Of US insured patients, over 57% may have multiple chronic conditions.
HIV/AIDS was the costliest cluster followed by clusters of mental and behavioural disorders, renal failure and CVD. Outpatient and inpatient services account for roughly 90% of health spending and medication for 10%.
Health service utilisation varies by number and clusters of conditions, with potential overutilization of specialist services and underutilisation of primary care and psychiatric services.
Competing Interest Statement
CH and YS received funding from TEVA Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd for their time to conduct the study but did not receive funding to publish the study. AAW is an employee of TEVA Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. CH has received consulting fees from ECLAT, a spin-off of the University of Catania for tobacco harm reduction research, and was a paid member by Sustainability of the Advisory Panel for the Tobacco Transformation Index.
Funding Statement
CH and YS received funding from TEVA Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd for their time to conduct the study but did not receive funding to publish the study. AAW is an employee of TEVA Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
N/A
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The study used data from the Marketscan database, available to license through Truven Health Analytics
