• James F Burke, Sandeep Vijan, Lynette A Chekan, Ted M Makowiec, Laurita Thomas, and Lewis B Morgenstern.
• Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, University of Michigan Medical School, 6312 Medical Science Building 1, Ann Arbor, MI 48109. E-mail: jamesbur@med.umich.edu.
• Am J Manag Care. 2014 Sep 1; 20 (9): 725-33.

ObjectivesA possible remedy for health disparities is for employers to promote cardiovascular health among minority employees. We sought to quantify the financial return to employers of interventions to improve minority health, and to determine whether a race- or risk-targeted strategy was better.Study DesignRetrospective claims-based cohort analysis.MethodsUnconditional per-person costs attributable to stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) were estimated for University of Michigan employees from 2006 to 2009 using a 2-part model. The model was then used to predict the costs of cardiovascular disease to the University for 2 subgroups of employees-minorities and high-risk patients-and to calculate cost-savings thresholds: the point at which the costs of hypothetical interventions (eg, workplace fitness programs) would equal the cost savings from stroke/ MI prevention.ResultsOf the 38,314 enrollees, 10% were African American. Estimated unconditional payments for stroke/MI were almost the same in African Americans ($128 per employee per year; 95% CI, $79-$177) and whites ($128 per employee per year; 95% CI, $101- $156), including higher event rates and lower payments per event in African Americans. Targeting the highest risk decile with interventions to reduce stroke/MI would result in a substantially higher cost-savings threshold ($81) compared with targeting African Americans ($13). An unanticipated consequence of risk-based targeting is that African Americans would substantially benefit: an intervention targeted at the top risk decile would prevent 75% of the events in African Americans, just as would an intervention that exclusively targeted African Americans.ConclusionsTargeting all high-risk employees for cardiovascular risk reduction may be a win-win-win situation for employers: improving health, decreasing costs, and reducing disparities.

36 keywords...

hide…