ICON STUDY
The Use of Meridian Stress Assessment
ICON Health & Fitness, Inc.
Healthcare Study: The Use of Meridian Stress
Assessment
June 1998 through February 2000
March 22, 2000
OVERVIEW
ICON Health and Fitness is headquartered in
Logan, Utah, and is the world's largest manufacturer of home
exercise equipment, with annual sales of $710 million and a staff of
4,239. The company operates a self-funded medical plan, which
is overseen by its Human Resources Director, Douglas Younker.
ICON contracts with Benefit Management Services, Inc. of Salt Lake
City, Utah for medical plan consulting services.
The company has aggressively pursued an employee
fitness and wellness program for the past several years. One
of its most recent projects was an outcome study using meridian
stress assessment. The project began on June 1, 1998 and ended
May 31, 1999. The final project assessment was conducted in
February 2000. The Benefit/Cost Ratio was 10.40/1 and
participant satisfaction was very high.
Narrative by Douglas Younker, ICON's Human
Resources Director
In January 1998, Dr. Brent Peterson of the
Peterson Chiropractic Clinic tested me with the BEST (BioEnergetic
Stress Test) System, a meridian stress assessment (MSA) device
developed by BioMeridian Corporation. I was impressed by the
health improvements I experienced. As the Director of Human
Resources for a large company with a self-funded medical plan, I
immediately recognized the potential this technology had to
eliminate medical symptoms and reduce costs. I had to learn
more. A few days later, I met with Mr. Reggie Hughes of BioMeridian.
We decided that a study would help me determine the cost
effectiveness of the BEST System.
I was not concerned about running a double blind,
randomized test. In fact, I do not consider it appropriate for
our company to ask its employees to participate in clinical trials,
nor would it be an appropriate use of corporate funds. All I
wanted to know could be summed up with two questions: First, would
BEST System services improve the overall health of our employees?
Second, would the services reduce medical plan expenses? With
these questions in mind, I had healthcare professionals help me
develop a process to track symptom reduction and dollar savings.
Later, as I started to see significant success with the program, I
began to measure other important factors: reduced sick days,
increased productivity and improved quality of life.
The "bottom line" results of the study were very
favorable. Participants evaluated in the final audit had
experienced a 75% (93% for children) reduction in symptoms weighted
for severity. For every dollar spent, savings were $10.40 (80%
to ICON and 20% to the participants). Hence, the Benefit/Cost
Ration was 10.40/1 over the one-year study period. The average
total study cost per participant was $373 (approximately 80% paid by
ICON and the balance by participants). Annual gross and net
savings per participant were $3,878 and $3,505 respectively.
The average participant finished the course of treatment in about 8
weeks. Healthcare cost savings paid for the $373 average cost
per participant in 6 weeks (called the "Payback Period").
Participants reported improvement in the quality of their life
ranging from 0% to 100% and averaging 45%. Most participants have
continued to enjoy better health and lower healthcare costs beyond
the one-year study period.
I waited 9 months after the completion of the
study before making my final contact with 25 of the participants.
The selection of participants was not done randomly, which will be
discussed later in this report.
Of the 70 study participants entering the study,
9 did not complete the course of treatment, as described later in
this report. Of the remaining 61, approximately 4 showed no
improvement, and 4 improved, but retrogressed. (It is very
possible that their improved state could be restored through further
MSA services.) Hence approximately 53 (87%) of the 61 persons
completing the study experienced significant and lasting
improvement. However, the final report is based primarily upon
the results experienced by the 25 participants who were included in
the final, more thorough evaluation.
Dr. Peterson and his staff encouraged
participants to continue using dietary supplements started during
their participation in the study. The clinic's staff also
taught the participants to occasionally use their homeopathic
medicines if old health problems seemed to be returning.
Several participants reported that following this advice has worked
well for them.
I classified savings into two categories: hard
dollar savings and soft dollar savings. Hard dollar savings
are objective and concrete, while soft dollar savings are more
subjective and open to debate. Gross hard dollar savings in
reduced medical and prescription expenses came to $1,393 per
participant. Increased productivity and reduced sick-leave
make up the soft dollar savings which amounted to $2,485 per
participant. For the 25 participants carefully tracked and
included in the final audit, aggregate net savings were $87,630.
For the 70 participants, total savings were approximately $200,000.
The cost of this study obviously paid for itself, but the real
satisfaction has come from the gratitude expressed by employee
participants and their family members. Some of their stories
are provided in Appendix A of this report.
We did not try to calculate savings resulting
from the avoidance of hospitalization. However, several of the
participants said they avoided the need to be hospitalized because
of the favorable results they experienced in the study. Total
hospitalization savings might have been in the range of $10,000 to
$20,000.
Twenty-one months have passed since we started
the study. At this point, my observations are as follows:
·
I really feel that Meridian Stress
Assessment is most remarkable. Dr. Peterson says that the
value of MSA is its apparent ability to delineate from countless
remedies the few products that match an individual patient's needs.
Dr. Peterson and his staff credit MSA for the high degree of success
reported in this study.
·
Overall, employees were very open with me
about their health conditions and study results. I believe
that their written and verbal reports have been honest and accurate.
However, a few may have been reticent to admit that their
performance prior to the study was less than it is now. For
example, a co-worker of a female employee participant called me to
ask if he too could participate. He had seen a significant
improvement in his co-worker's energy level and productivity.
She had also told me how much better she felt. But at a later
date, when I asked if she had experienced any improvement in
productivity as a result of the study, she said that there had been
no change. My first thought about this seemingly contradictory
statement was that she did not want the Human Resources Director to
think that she had been less productive before the study.
·
Two methods were used to select the study
participants. First, I selected employees who spent a
significant amount on prescriptions. Second, I placed an
article in our company newsletter inviting employees to contact me
if they or a family member had unresolved medical issues and wanted
to consider participating in an alternative medicine study.
Participation was voluntary. The two methods produced about 70
participants. A small number of employees volunteered to
participate, not because they had major medical problems, but
because I wanted them to be familiar with the new service.
·
Since the completion of the study, we have
continued to cover MSA services. Participants' co-payments for
an MSA office visit are the same as they pay for a doctor's office
visit. Their co-payment for dietary supplements is the same as
they pay when purchasing prescription drugs
·
We are now writing a formal policy for the
inclusion of MSA as a covered service of our self-funded medical
plan. Included will be an MSA gatekeeper program with
incentives for its use when plan participants are faced with certain
challenging and potentially costly health problems. MSA will
also be a covered service for our employees at our other
manufacturing locations, where we will contract with local MSA
providers for the service.
INFORMATION PERTINENT TO THE
STUDY
Plan Year:
April 1 through March 31.
Plan Benefits:
Compared to other corporate self-funded medical plans, benefits
and co-payments are about average. ICON covers
approximately 80% of the costs and employees cover the balance.
Cost/Employee:
The annual cost per participating employee in 99/00 was $2,455,
which is 43% below the 1999 large employer national average of
$4,320 (William M. Mercer, Business Insurance, December 13,
1999). This cost includes plan administration and
reinsurance. ICON's annual cost per participating employee
excluding administration and reinsurance was $2,220 ($185/month)
in 99/00, which was down from the 98/99 cost of $2,352
($196/month), as illustrated by the chart in Appendix B.
Covered Lives:
ICON's average number of covered lives per enrolled employee is
approximately 3.6. The national average is in the range of
2.8 to 3.1.
STUDY PROCESS INFORMATION
Study Name:
ICON Meridian Stress Assessment Pilot Project
Type of Study:
Outcome study without a control group. Voluntary
participation.
Purpose:
To evaluate the degree to which sustainable health improvements and
cost savings might be achieved when healthcare professionals use MSA
technology as an assessment tool in the treatment of persons with
long-standing, and/or unresolved illnesses.
Study Period:
June 1, 1998 to May 31, 1999
Location:
Peterson Chiropractic Clinic, Logan, Utah
Sponsor:
ICON Health & Fitness' self-funded medical plan. Authorization
required for participation.
Planned by:
Douglas Younker, Human Resources Director, ICON Health & Fitness
Brent Peterson, DC, Peterson Chiropractic Clinic, Logan, Utah Elmo
Gruwell, MD, Chair, Dept. of Emergency Medicine, Utah Valley
Regional Medical Center, Provo, Utah. Richard Droubay, VP, Benefit
Management Services, Salt Lake City, Utah Reginald Hughes, VP,
BioMeridian Corporation of Draper, Utah
Participants:
Covered lives with long-standing, and/or unresolved health problems
having resulted in significant, ongoing healthcare costs.
Methods:
Two technicians performed the MSA under the direction of a
chiropractor experienced in complementary medicine. Both
technicians were trained and experienced in the use of MSA.
One was a Medical Assistant and the other a Registered Nurse.
Dietary supplements and homeopathic medicines were used. Diet
changes were sometimes recommended.
Each participant agreed to
report results by completing a Symptom Checklist and by answering
study-related questions in telephone and/or personal interviews with
the HR Director.
Participants co-paid for MSA office visits and
remedies (dietary supplements and homeopathic medicines) at the same
rates paid for routine doctor office visits and prescriptions.
The clinic discounted all services and products sold to ICON's
participants.
Participants reported on changes in their symptoms at the
beginning of each office visit. Participants also gave updates
to the HR Director, usually by telephone. They rated each of
their symptoms on a scale from zero (0) to five (5). A rating
of 5 was assigned to extremely severe symptoms, a 1 was assigned to
the least severe symptoms, and a zero was used to indicate that a
symptom had disappeared. Participants also completed a medical
history at the time of their first visit for MSA services.
Participants were advised to remain under the
care of their primary care physician, and to cease using any
MSA-related remedies if adverse side effects were experienced.
Participants were advised by the clinic not to alter their use of
any prescription medications without first consulting with their
Medical Doctor.
ICON's Human Resources Director, who also serves
as the director of the company's self-funded medical plan,
personally tracked the progress of all participants through frequent
phone calls.
STUDY RESULTS
ICON, assisted by Peterson Chiropractic Clinic,
conducted several evaluation meetings at the clinic throughout the
course of the study. BioMeridian did not participate in any of
these meetings. The first audit was conducted on October 26,
1998. Records were reviewed and phone calls were made to 20 of
the first 48 participants. Results reported were:
·
Average age of participants: 33
·
Reduction in symptoms to date, weighted
for severity: 64%
·
Percentage of participants reporting
health improvement: 94%
·
Estimated net annual cost savings per
participant – office visits and prescriptions only (80% of savings
to the company and 20% to the participants): $1,271
Participants who joined the
study after the first audit experienced results similar to those
presented above. When the one-year study period ended, 70
persons had participated. Nine months after completion of the study,
the HR Director personally contacted 25 of the participants to
gather information for the final report. As indicated earlier
in this report, the 25 were not randomly selected. They were
selected because they were:
·
still employed by ICON at its Logan,
Utah facilities,
·
easily accessible,
·
willing to be included in the final
evaluation, and
·
likely to have followed the MSA
provider's suggestions.
A few participants did not wish to be included in
the final evaluation, but reported favorable results. Others
were not available during the evaluation, but have since reported
outcomes similar to the 25 participants included in the final
evaluation. At the time the 25 participants reported on their
current health status, as presented below, more than one year had
passed since some of them had completed their course of treatment.
Generally, the 25 reported that their improvements remained
unaltered. Results were:
·
Average age of participants: 30
·
Reduction in symptoms weighted for
severity: 70%
·
Percent of participants reporting health
improvements: 100%
(Case #15 reported very minor improvement. Case #31 was not
treated, but conformed to the dietary changes given to her parent,
who was treated, resulting in significant health improvements for
the child.)
·
Average cost per participant (ICON and
participant payments) $373
·
Estimated net annual savings per
participant, office visits and prescriptions only, excluding any
hospital cost savings ($1,393 - $373) $1,020
·
Gross annual savings per participant, hard
and soft costs $3,878
·
Net annual savings per participant, hard
and soft costs ($3,878 - $373) $3,505
·
Benefit/Cost Ratio ($3,878/$373): 10.40/1
·
Average payback period per participant: 6
weeks
NOTE: The average Benefit/Cost Ratio of 8 pilot
studies reported by Steven Aldana in The Art of Health Promotion was
3.35/1
A spreadsheet presentation of final report
results is attached as Appendix C. Although the data is
useful, it does not conform to the data collection standards of a
clinical trial. However, the data has been considered adequate
to help determine whether ICON and the participants benefited from
the study.
Participants were also asked to rate any
improvement they might have experienced in the quality of their life
as a result of their participation in the study. Ratings
ranged from zero to 100% and averaged 45%.
There was no attempt to measure the effect a
spouse or a child's health improvement might have had on an ICON
employee. However, it is possible that employees were able to
perform better at work once a family member's health had
significantly improved.
Of the 70 participants, the following withdrew
from the study prior to completing the course of treatment:
·
Participant #20, a 55-year old female
diabetic who participated in the first audit, reported an 80%
reduction in leg and knee pain, and an 80% decrease in pain and
numbness in her feet. However, her blood sugar level became
more erratic during the pilot project. She withdrew at the
recommendation of her MD. This was the only adverse reaction
reported.
·
Approximately 4 people withdrew from the
program without completing it due to lack of satisfaction.
·
Approximately 4 others moved from the area
prior to completing the program.
As noted earlier, no attempt was made to measure cost savings due
to the avoidance of hospitalization. However, several
participants commented that had the MSA services not been
successful, they were anticipating receiving inpatient care.
Participants took natural and homeopathic remedies associated
with the MSA service, but in most cases did not continue to take
them routinely for more than 4 to 8 weeks. Thereafter,
participants kept the homeopathic medicines and used them
occasionally if their health problems began to resurface. Some
participants were asked to consider using dietary supplements
regularly and to consider making permanent changes in their.
Participants who have followed these suggestions report positive
results.
Conclusions and Actions:
Because of the savings, health improvements and
employee satisfaction resulting from the study, ICON is in the
process of adding MSA to its medical plan as a standard benefit.
The company will also issue a gatekeeper policy pertaining to the
use of MSA. Further, ICON will contract with additional
physicians for MSA services for its employees living in other
locations.
Information about MSA
BioMeridian
Corporation of Draper, Utah manufactures and sells a meridian
stress assessment device called the MSA-21, which is an upgrade of
its BEST System. The MSA-21 is a FDA-registered, computerized
galvanic skin response testing device used for meridian stress
assessment. It is based upon the traditional acupuncture
meridian system. Acupuncture works on the principle that there
is a network of energy channels, called meridians, suffusing the
body. In 1950, Reinhold Voll, M.D, of Germany, developed a
means of electronically measuring electrical resistance in
meridians. Computerized versions of the technology originated in the
United States around 1980. The MSA-21 is one such device.
It is not used to diagnose or treat disease, as defined by Western
Medicine. Nor is it used to define disease based on clinically
manifested symptoms. It is used to assess the body's energy
balance, which may help a physician (Medical Doctor, Doctor of
Chiropractic, Doctor of Osteopathy, Naturopathic Doctor or other
licensed practitioner) in identifying energy imbalances and in
selecting a course of action to restore balance. Because the
technology is employed only as a topical evaluation, it is
non-invasive and completely safe. MSA procedures and equipment
are complements to – not replacements of - a conventional doctor's
diagnostic and therapeutic procedures and equipment. Remedies
used in conjunction with the MSA services are typically dietary
supplements and homeopathic medicines.
