Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 13, 2025
Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Impacts of chronic disease prevention programs implemented by private health insurers: a systematic review
Sithara Wanni Arachchige Dona1,2, Mary Rose Angeles1,2, Natasha Hall1,2
1Institute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, 3220, Australia.
Background:
Chronic diseases contribute to a significant proportion (71%) of all deaths each year worldwide. Governments and other stakeholders worldwide have taken various actions to tackle the key risk factors contributing to the prevalence and impact of chronic diseases. Private health insurers (PHI) are one key stakeholders, particularly in Australian health system, and their engagement in chronic disease prevention is growing. Therefore, we investigated the impacts of chronic disease prevention interventions implemented by PHI both in Australia and internationally.
Method:
We searched multiple databases (Business Source Complete, CINAHL, Global Health, Health Business Elite, Medline, PsycINFO, and Scopus) and grey literature for studies/reports published in English until September 2020 using search terms on the impacts of chronic disease prevention interventions delivered by PHIs. Two reviewers assessed the risk of bias using a quality assessment tool developed by Effective Public Healthcare Panacea Project. After data extraction, the literature was synthesised thematically based on the types of the interventions reported across studies. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42020145644.
Results:
Of 7789 records, 29 studies were eligible for inclusion. There were predominantly four types of interventions implemented by PHIs: Financial incentives, health coaching, wellness programs, and group medical appointments. Outcome measures across studies were varied, making it challenging to compare the difference between the effectiveness of different intervention types. Most studies reported that the impacts of interventions, such as increase in healthy eating, physical activity, and lower hospital admissions, last for a shorter term if the length of the intervention is shorter.
Interpretation:
Although it is challenging to conclude which intervention type was the most effective, it appeared that, regardless of the intervention types, PHI interventions of longer duration (at least 2 years) were more beneficial and outcomes were more sustained than those PHI interventions that lasted for a shorter period.
Funding:
Primary source of funding was Geelong Medical and Hospital Benefits Association (GMHBA), an Australian private health insurer.
Related Concept Videos
01:26Levels of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention
In primary prevention, actions taken before disease onset prevent the disease from...
01:30Preventive Healthcare Services
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:22Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...
01:18Models of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention II
The agent-host-environment model states that disease results...
01:30Health Information Technology and Healthcare Information System
Health Information Technology, commonly called HIT, integrates advanced information systems and technology in healthcare settings. Its primary functions include: