The Obesity Battle

Weighing the Obesity Exposure

Obesity's classification as a disease raises a host of new risk management challenges.
By: and | November 1, 2013 • 8 min read

The recent action by the American Medical Association to reclassify obesity as a disease has generated a great deal of discussion about its potential impact on workers’ compensation.

Notably, in August, the California Workers Compensation Institute (CWCI) issued a report suggesting that the reclassification could spark a rise in the number of work injury claims involving obesity.

This should raise some new red flags for risk managers, who may view this as a signal to revisit their workers’ compensation and employee wellness initiatives.

Not surprisingly, CWCI found that in workers’ compensation, obesity historically has been a comorbidity — a condition coincidental to, but independent of, an injury or other illness. Thus, medical providers might include an obesity comorbidity code on their bills when they believed the condition needed to be addressed so the work-related injury could be treated and the worker could recover and return to work.

An earlier CWCI survey (conducted in 2011) found that, while 28 percent of injured workers reported that they were obese, fewer than 1 percent of job injury claims from those workers included an obesity comorbidity diagnostic code.

So, at that point, obesity infrequently was found to be a condition that had to be addressed in order to treat most work injuries and illnesses.

Now, however, according to CWCI, that may change: “… if medical providers feel a greater responsibility to counsel obese patients about their weight and to treat the condition, especially if there is a greater likelihood that they will be paid for doing so. That could prompt an influx of claims that include obesity as a comorbidity, as well as an increase in cases in which obesity is claimed as a compensable consequence of injury (e.g., when an injured worker gains weight due to lack of exercise or a medication prescribed to them during recovery).”

The Cost of Obesity

By latest estimates, about two-thirds of American adults are overweight or obese. And the difference in medical costs is more than five times higher in severely obese workers than those with a normal Body Mass Index (BMI). Citing the Duke Health and Safety Internal Medicine Archives, NCCI described how workers’ compensation claims rose in step with workers’ BMI.

Consider the following medical claims costs per 100 workers:

*Normal BMI: $7,500

*Overweight: More than $13,300

*Mildly Obese: More than $19,000

*Moderately Obese: More than $23,300

*Severely Obese: More than $51,000

Indeed, when obesity is a comorbidity in workers’ compensation, its impact on medical costs is substantial.

With respect to indemnity costs, an NCCI study in 2012 found that claims involving obesity have five times the indemnity costs of those where obesity is not a comorbidity. The multiple jumps to six when permanent partial disability claims are included.

Advertisement




The NCCI study follows a Duke University study, which pointed to substantially higher odds of injury for workers in the highest obesity category.

That study tallied workers’ compensation claims for Duke University and Duke University Health System employees over an eight-year window, and classified the employees according to six BMI categories ranging from underweight, to recommended weight, to overweight and three classes of obese.

The Duke study found that medical costs for morbidly obese employees were 6.8 times higher than for recommended-weight employees. Morbidly obese employees were also twice as likely to have a claim, and missed almost 13 times more days of work.

Beyond the studies, AMA’s classification of obesity as a disease adds a new wrinkle — and that’s whether workers might claim their disease stems from the forced sedentary lifestyle of the work environment.

Obesity and Modeling

In workers’ compensation management, the use of predictive modeling is rapidly gaining momentum. When identified early, obesity is an absolute driver in predicting the size and complexity of the loss. Obesity is one of the most effective “predictors” of serious injury.

Tracking the overall health of the workforce will allow risk managers to design proactive solutions to obesity and related conditions before a claim occurs.

However, after the claim occurs, risk managers will need to determine early on what solutions are available for changing the “predicted direction” of that claim, if the claimant is obese.

Here, the value in predictive modeling is if the claim is likely to be a large loss, then it is important to devise intervention strategies as soon as possible to change the claim’s trajectory.

The workers’ compensation industry has a wealth of data on obesity. Employer claims data with payment detail is rife with employer-specific information on comorbidities and costs.

To address the impact of obesity on the organization, it is necessary to tackle the data.

As the CWCI research found, diagnostic coding isn’t isolated around comorbidities consistently. That is a critical data element in prediction, intervention and return on investment tracking.

If it is difficult to gather program data, remediating that situation should be a top priority. Require vendors to make information readily available. Obesity is often voluntarily reported to doctors and available in diagnostic codes as claims begin creeping upward. TPA adjusters should be able to share that information with an employer’s defense attorneys. And the organization’s RMIS can be used to conduct a multivariate analysis.

Many employers have difficulty putting their fingers on their specific experience and losses. Try to fix that now. Scrub the current open claims. Extract the obesity information so it can be readily correlated with other information in reports.

With the help of the organization’s HR department, work with HR consulting firms — independent consultants or those associated with brokers — to seek out integrated claim and human resource analysis.

Advertisement




In addition, the CDC’s Obesity Cost Calculator, available through the CDC website, can help employers estimate obesity-related costs to the organization, as well as compare the costs and benefits of obesity prevention programs.

For example, risk managers can develop the following estimates for their organizations:

*Total costs attributable to high BMI;

*Total annual medical costs attributable to high BMI;

*Total annual work loss costs attributable to high BMI;

*Number of employees with high BMI;

*Average attributable cost per high-BMI employee;

*Expected costs of interventions to reduce obesity;

*Potential reductions in medical costs and work loss resulting from interventions; and

*The number of years before a break-even period is reached.

Once there is a baseline, risk managers can see how obesity is driving the organization’s experience.

And when the actual costs associated with obesity (not assumptions or broad industry numbers) are known, employers can begin evaluating intervention options.

In workers’ compensation, the longer a claim is open, the more issues arise — and the higher the costs.

Teaming With Human Resources

Given the increasing costs and potential exposures associated with obesity, the time is right for risk managers to collaborate with their HR counterparts and educate senior management about obesity, workers’ comp and related issues.

With the AMA classification, employees might claim their new disease is a compensable consequence of injury, acquired through free meals or poor snack choices available in meetings and break rooms, and long work hours that reduce time available for exercise.

As risk managers initiate internal dialogues on obesity, the time is ripe for employers to revisit or establish policies that reduce exposure and strengthen wellness. They can improve available food options or eliminate them altogether.

Consider workplace interventions on obesity, including wellness programs. The Wellness Council of America estimates the annual cost per employee of $100 to $150 for a wellness program generates a return of $300 to $450. And several studies show wellness programs generally pay for themselves. Harvard health economist Katherine Baicker led a 2010 study considered the “gold standard” in measuring return on investment: It found that “medical costs fall about $3.27 for every dollar spent on wellness programs, and absentee day costs fall by about $2.73 for every dollar spent.”

In January 2014, wellness measures under the Affordable Care Act take effect. Some may help expand corporate wellness programs and improve their effectiveness in reducing obesity, including:

*Larger employer incentives. Starting in 2014, employers will be able to boost incentives for employee participation in health promotion and wellness programs by 20 percent to 30 percent.

*More robust wellness benchmarking. Federal workforce wellness programs will be evaluated and reported to Congress by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Under the law’s Section 4402, the evaluations will include employee absenteeism, productivity, workplace injury rates, and “medical costs incurred by employees, and health conditions, including workplace fitness, healthy food and beverages and incentives.”

Advertisement




*Long-term measurement. Surveys will be conducted nationwide on worksite health policies and programs, and assessed by HHS. Subsequently, surveys will be conducted periodically to measure the effectiveness of the programs. The surveys are outlined in Section 399 MM-1 of the bill.

*Funding assistance. Small business tax credits and grant money will be available for implementing wellness programs.

Incentives Don’t Guarantee Success

In addressing obesity, wellness programs to date haven’t been a panacea. Nearly three in four (74 percent) U.S. employers already offer some sort of incentive or wellness program, but many have had modest effects due to low employee participation.

Be aware that incentives alone don’t guarantee success. Experts at WELCOA (Wellness Councils of America) point to seven benchmarks of successful, results-oriented employer wellness programs:

*Capture CEO support.

*Create cohesive wellness teams.

*Collect data to drive health efforts.

*Craft an operating plan.

*Choose appropriate interventions.

*Create a supportive environment.

*Carefully evaluate outcomes.

So if the organization’s wellness program has limited participation, it may warrant revisiting it.

As cost issues associated with obesity gain more attention, risk managers recognize they cannot solve these challenges exclusively with traditional approaches. Consider intervention options. Understand the costs. And do the necessary analysis to be able to justify the investment in necessary risk management resources to stakeholders.

Misty Price is director of analytics for Adelson, Testan, Brundo, Novell & Jimenez. Mariah Baesel is director of wellness for Adelson, Testan, Brundo, Novell & Jimenez. They can be reached at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Insurtech

Kiss Your Annual Renewal Goodbye; On-Demand Insurance Challenges the Traditional Policy

Gig workers' unique insurance needs drive delivery of on-demand coverage.
By: | September 14, 2018 • 6 min read

The gig economy is growing. Nearly six million Americans, or 3.8 percent of the U.S. workforce, now have “contingent” work arrangements, with a further 10.6 million in categories such as independent contractors, on-call workers or temporary help agency staff and for-contract firms, often with well-known names such as Uber, Lyft and Airbnb.

Scott Walchek, founding chairman and CEO, Trōv

The number of Americans owning a drone is also increasing — one recent survey suggested as much as one in 12 of the population — sparking vigorous debate on how regulation should apply to where and when the devices operate.

Add to this other 21st century societal changes, such as consumers’ appetite for other electronic gadgets and the advent of autonomous vehicles. It’s clear that the cover offered by the annually renewable traditional insurance policy is often not fit for purpose. Helped by the sophistication of insurance technology, the response has been an expanding range of ‘on-demand’ covers.

The term ‘on-demand’ is open to various interpretations. For Scott Walchek, founding chairman and CEO of pioneering on-demand insurance platform Trōv, it’s about “giving people agency over the items they own and enabling them to turn on insurance cover whenever they want for whatever they want — often for just a single item.”

Advertisement




“On-demand represents a whole new behavior and attitude towards insurance, which for years has very much been a case of ‘get it and forget it,’ ” said Walchek.

Trōv’s mobile app enables users to insure just a single item, such as a laptop, whenever they wish and to also select the period of cover required. When ready to buy insurance, they then snap a picture of the sales receipt or product code of the item they want covered.

Welcoming Trōv: A New On-Demand Arrival

While Walchek, who set up Trōv in 2012, stressed it’s a technology company and not an insurance company, it has attracted industry giants such as AXA and Munich Re as partners. Trōv began the U.S. roll-out of its on-demand personal property products this summer by launching in Arizona, having already established itself in Australia and the United Kingdom.

“Australia and the UK were great testing grounds, thanks to their single regulatory authorities,” said Walchek. “Trōv is already approved in 45 states, and we expect to complete the process in all by November.

“On-demand products have a particular appeal to millennials who love the idea of having control via their smart devices and have embraced the concept of an unbundling of experiences: 75 percent of our users are in the 18 to 35 age group.” – Scott Walchek, founding chairman and CEO, Trōv

“On-demand products have a particular appeal to millennials who love the idea of having control via their smart devices and have embraced the concept of an unbundling of experiences: 75 percent of our users are in the 18 to 35 age group,” he added.

“But a mass of tectonic societal shifts is also impacting older generations — on-demand cover fits the new ways in which they work, particularly the ‘untethered’ who aren’t always in the same workplace or using the same device. So we see on-demand going into societal lifestyle changes.”

Wooing Baby Boomers

In addition to its backing for Trōv, across the Atlantic, AXA has partnered with Insurtech start-up By Miles, launching a pay-as-you-go car insurance policy in the UK. The product is promoted as low-cost car insurance for drivers who travel no more than 140 miles per week, or 7,000 miles annually.

“Due to the growing need for these products, companies such as Marmalade — cover for learner drivers — and Cuvva — cover for part-time drivers — have also increased in popularity, and we expect to see more enter the market in the near future,” said AXA UK’s head of telematics, Katy Simpson.

Simpson confirmed that the new products’ initial appeal is to younger motorists, who are more regular users of new technology, while older drivers are warier about sharing too much personal information. However, she expects this to change as on-demand products become more prevalent.

“Looking at mileage-based insurance, such as By Miles specifically, it’s actually older generations who are most likely to save money, as the use of their vehicles tends to decline. Our job is therefore to not only create more customer-centric products but also highlight their benefits to everyone.”

Another Insurtech ready to partner with long-established names is New York-based Slice Labs, which in the UK is working with Legal & General to enter the homeshare insurance market, recently announcing that XL Catlin will use its insurance cloud services platform to create the world’s first on-demand cyber insurance solution.

“For our cyber product, we were looking for a partner on the fintech side, which dovetailed perfectly with what Slice was trying to do,” said John Coletti, head of XL Catlin’s cyber insurance team.

“The premise of selling cyber insurance to small businesses needs a platform such as that provided by Slice — we can get to customers in a discrete, seamless manner, and the partnership offers potential to open up other products.”

Slice Labs’ CEO Tim Attia added: “You can roll up on-demand cover in many different areas, ranging from contract workers to vacation rentals.

“The next leap forward will be provided by the new economy, which will create a range of new risks for on-demand insurance to respond to. McKinsey forecasts that by 2025, ecosystems will account for 30 percent of global premium revenue.

Advertisement




“When you’re a start-up, you can innovate and question long-held assumptions, but you don’t have the scale that an insurer can provide,” said Attia. “Our platform works well in getting new products out to the market and is scalable.”

Slice Labs is now reviewing the emerging markets, which aren’t hampered by “old, outdated infrastructures,” and plans to test the water via a hackathon in southeast Asia.

Collaboration Vs Competition

Insurtech-insurer collaborations suggest that the industry noted the banking sector’s experience, which names the tech disruptors before deciding partnerships, made greater sense commercially.

“It’s an interesting correlation,” said Slice’s managing director for marketing, Emily Kosick.

“I believe the trend worth calling out is that the window for insurers to innovate is much shorter, thanks to the banking sector’s efforts to offer omni-channel banking, incorporating mobile devices and, more recently, intelligent assistants like Alexa for personal banking.

“Banks have bought into the value of these technology partnerships but had the benefit of consumer expectations changing slowly with them. This compares to insurers who are in an ever-increasing on-demand world where the risk is high for laggards to be left behind.”

As with fintechs in banking, Insurtechs initially focused on the retail segment, with 75 percent of business in personal lines and the remainder in the commercial segment.

“Banks have bought into the value of these technology partnerships but had the benefit of consumer expectations changing slowly with them. This compares to insurers who are in an ever-increasing on-demand world where the risk is high for laggards to be left behind.” — Emily Kosick, managing director, marketing, Slice

Those proportions may be set to change, with innovations such as digital commercial insurance brokerage Embroker’s recent launch of the first digital D&O liability insurance policy, designed for venture capital-backed tech start-ups and reinsured by Munich Re.

Embroker said coverage that formerly took weeks to obtain is now available instantly.

“We focus on three main issues in developing new digital business — what is the customer’s pain point, what is the expense ratio and does it lend itself to algorithmic underwriting?” said CEO Matt Miller. “Workers’ compensation is another obvious class of insurance that can benefit from this approach.”

Jason Griswold, co-founder and chief operating officer of Insurtech REIN, highlighted further opportunities: “I’d add a third category to personal and business lines and that’s business-to-business-to-consumer. It’s there we see the biggest opportunities for partnering with major ecosystems generating large numbers of insureds and also big volumes of data.”

For now, insurers are accommodating Insurtech disruption. Will that change?

Advertisement




“Insurtechs have focused on products that regulators can understand easily and for which there is clear existing legislation, with consumer protection and insurer solvency the two issues of paramount importance,” noted Shawn Hanson, litigation partner at law firm Akin Gump.

“In time, we could see the disruptors partner with reinsurers rather than primary carriers. Another possibility is the likes of Amazon, Alphabet, Facebook and Apple, with their massive balance sheets, deciding to link up with a reinsurer,” he said.

“You can imagine one of them finding a good Insurtech and buying it, much as Amazon’s purchase of Whole Foods gave it entry into the retail sector.” &

Graham Buck is a UK-based writer and has contributed to Risk & Insurance® since 1998. He can be reached at riskletters.com.