Cyril F. Chang, PhD
Methodist LeBonheur Center for Healthcare Economics, Fogelman College of Business and Economics, University of Memphis
PDF version: 

TennCare is one of the most controversial Medicaid experiments in the recent history of state-level health care reform. Launched in 1994, this bold and ambitious health insurance initiative was designed to apply a managed care model to Tennessee's traditional Medicaid program (Mirvis, 1995, Cooper, 1996). TennCare was also to achieve two additional worthy goals: to expand insurance coverage to the uninsured and to those who were uninsurable because of pre-existing conditions and to avert a pending health care budget crisis by keeping the Medicaid budget under control (Mirvis, 1996).

In the last 13 years, the total budget of TennCare grew from the initial $2.64 billion per year to over $8.5 billion in fiscal year 2005 while the total enrollment remained relatively stable, hovering around 1.3 million people or 1 in every 4 Tennessee residents. In 2005, the state's inability to overcome numerous financial and legal difficulties finally led to painful cutbacks in both enrollment and medical services.

The program has undergone many structural and implementation changes, some initiated by the state and some forced on the state by litigation and court rulings (Chang, 2005).

This article traces the history of TennCare and describes the program's design. It then summarizes the root causes of the various problems that have plagued the program and discusses Gov. Phil Bredesen's current reform effort to save TennCare. The article ends with a discussion of the new state program called "Cover Tennessee" as part of a larger concerted effort initiated in May 2006 to provide insurance coverage to small businesses and uninsured workers and to mitigate the adverse effects brought on by the recent cutbacks in TennCare.

Managed Care’s Top Ten Articles of 2016

There’s a lot more going on in health care than mergers (Aetna-Humana, Anthem-Cigna) creating huge players. Hundreds of insurers operate in 50 different states. Self-insured employers, ACA public exchanges, Medicare Advantage, and Medicaid managed care plans crowd an increasingly complex market.

Major health care players are determined to make health information exchanges (HIEs) work. The push toward value-based payment alone almost guarantees that HIEs will be tweaked, poked, prodded, and overhauled until they deliver on their promise. The goal: straight talk from and among tech systems.

They bring a different mindset. They’re willing to work in teams and focus on the sort of evidence-based medicine that can guide health care’s transformation into a system based on value. One question: How well will this new generation of data-driven MDs deal with patients?

The surge of new MS treatments have been for the relapsing-remitting form of the disease. There’s hope for sufferers of a different form of MS. By homing in on CD20-positive B cells, ocrelizumab is able to knock them out and other aberrant B cells circulating in the bloodstream.

A flood of tests have insurers ramping up prior authorization and utilization review. Information overload is a problem. As doctors struggle to keep up, health plans need to get ahead of the development of the technology in order to successfully manage genetic testing appropriately.

Having the data is one thing. Knowing how to use it is another. Applying its computational power to the data, a company called RowdMap puts providers into high-, medium-, and low-value buckets compared with peers in their markets, using specific benchmarks to show why outliers differ from the norm.
Competition among manufacturers, industry consolidation, and capitalization on me-too drugs are cranking up generic and branded drug prices. This increase has compelled PBMs, health plan sponsors, and retail pharmacies to find novel ways to turn a profit, often at the expense of the consumer.
The development of recombinant DNA and other technologies has added a new dimension to care. These medications have revolutionized the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and many of the other 80 or so autoimmune diseases. But they can be budget busters and have a tricky side effect profile.

Shelley Slade
Vogel, Slade & Goldstein

Hub programs have emerged as a profitable new line of business in the sales and distribution side of the pharmaceutical industry that has got more than its fair share of wheeling and dealing. But they spell trouble if they spark collusion, threaten patients, or waste federal dollars.

More companies are self-insuring—and it’s not just large employers that are striking out on their own. The percentage of employers who fully self-insure increased by 44% in 1999 to 63% in 2015. Self-insurance may give employers more control over benefit packages, and stop-loss protects them against uncapped liability.