Insurance Multiple Sclerosis

At MultipleSclerosisLifeInsurance.com, our clients all have multiple sclerosis and we work with your risk every day. We know which life insurance companies are giving the best approvals and will use our experience and expertise to find the best rates for your unique multiple sclerosis risk.

insurance multiple sclerosis

Download Zip: https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Furluso.com%2F2ugpTQ&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AOvVaw3gkKwjPdmmrdjQzcjZypbX

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, inflammatory autoimmune disease that attacks the central nervous system (CNS). The CNS is comprised mostly of the brain and spinal cord, and also includes the optic nerve and retina.

Healthy nerves in the CNS are protected by a fatty insulating layer called myelin. The demyelination process occurs in individuals with MS when the myelin sheath around the nerves is damaged. These damaged nerves build up plaque, or scar tissue, also known as sclerosis; which is how the disease earned its name.

The demyelination of the nerves impedes the process by which the brain sends and receives signals. It is the impediment of this process that causes the range and severity of multiple sclerosis symptoms.

The affects and severity of the disease vary from person to person, depending on the amount and severity of their demylenation. Early multiple sclerosis symptoms may include any of the following: hazy, blurred and double vision; eye pain; decreased coordination; and muscle weakness, tingling, and numbness.

Diagnosing multiple sclerosis early is important, however it is extremely difficult and there is presently no single test to diagnose MS. Since MS affects the central nervous system, a neurologist who specializes in MS is the best doctor to make the diagnosis.

Researchers believe that there are several genes that can increase the likelihood of a person being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. The current theory is that the genes a person is born with predisposes them to react adversely to an environmental agent, thereby causing an autoimmune response upon exposure.

An individual has a one in 750 chance of being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in their lifetime. Those odds increase to one in 40 in individuals who have a close relative with MS. If a twin is diagnosed, the odds increase to one in four.

It is unusual to be diagnosed with multiple sclerosis before adolescence, as the typical diagnosis usually occurs between the ages of 20 and 50. The risk of being diagnosed with MS generally declines after age 50. Women are at least two to three times more likely to be diagnosed with MS than their male counterparts. There is also a higher occurrence of MS in whites than in any other racial group in the United States.

While there is currently no known cure for multiple sclerosis, there are many medications that can help reduce the frequency and severity of episodes. Some drugs may also slow the progression of some types of multiple sclerosis.

Some of the insurance companies we work with who view MS most favorably include American General, Banner Life, MetLife, Mutual of Omaha, Transamerica, Protective, and Prudential. These are companies who will not only offer life insurance for MS patients, but will offer very competitive rates for life insurance for MS sufferers.

The questionnaire will also help us and the life insurance company determine how far along you are with your disease. If you have Relapsing Remitting MS (RRMS), you will more than likely be offered better rates than someone whose MS has progressed. If you have a progressive type of MS, your two best options for life insurance with multiple sclerosis are guaranteed issue policies and graded death benefit policies.

Guaranteed issue life insurance policies are best suited for those who have progressive MS because the policy is guaranteed to be issued regardless of health status. This policy is no medical exam, no questions asked (including not pulling a medical report from the Medical Information Board). The only requirement is that the applicant is a US citizen. The downside to guaranteed issue life insurance is that these types of policies are more expensive.

The second type of life insurance for progressive MS is graded death benefit life insurance policies. These policies are less expensive than guaranteed issue policies because they are slightly harder to qualify for. Approximately eight to 15 health questions are asked and the life insurance companies will pull a health history report from the Medical Information Board. These policies are also no medical exam life insurance policies and also have a two- to three-year waiting period.

This site provides life insurance information and quotes. Each rate shown is a quote based on information provided by the carrier. No portion of multiplesclerosislifeinsurance.com may be copied, published or distributed in any manner for any purpose without prior written authorization of the owner.

Each semiannual survey reassesses level of disability; captures whether any DMTs were used in the last 6 months (yes/no) and the names of the DMT used; and updates sociodemographic information including marital status, employment status, and health insurance coverage (yes/no) including type (private, public, supplemental, and other).

Survey question (In the last 12 months, has your insurance or financial situation influenced your treatment decisions [disease-modifying therapies only], including not taking any treatment for your MS?) and response frequency (%) in the fall 2014 update survey

(A) Cohort disposition. (B) Distribution of respondents who took DMTs through insurance coverage by experienced insurance challenges. Total of the respondents (%) in (B) is greater than 100% due to overlap in the different types of challenges.

Within the not taking DMT category, we divided respondents into 2 groups by their reasons for not taking DMTs: (1) those who did not take DMTs by personal choice or physician recommendation (options 1 and 4) and (2) those citing insurance or financial reasons (options 2, 3, and 17). It was possible that some respondents decided not to take DMTs for multiple reasons, thus we allowed respondents to fall into both groups.

Within the taking DMT category, we divided respondents into 3 groups according to the financial resources used to pay for DMTs: (1) self-pay only (no insurance); (2) free or discounted drug programs; and (3) insurance. It was reasonable that some respondents obtained DMTs using multiple resources concurrently, thus overlap between groups 1 and 2 or groups 2 and 3 was allowed. However, overlap between groups 1 and 3 was not allowed; those who fell into both groups 1 and 3 were assigned into group 3 only. Due to the small number of respondents in group 1 (n = 34), only respondents in groups 2 and 3 were used for statistical inference.

We characterized the study cohort using descriptive statistics and used Pearson χ2 to compare the proportions of categorical variables, analysis of variance to test normally distributed continuous variables, and nonparametric Wilcoxon or Kruskal to test non-normally distributed continuous variables or ordinal variables. We dichotomized respondents' insurance change compared with 12 months ago as negative insurance change (somewhat worse) and stable insurance (remained unchanged, somewhat better, and much better). The association between negative insurance change and (1) type of insurance, (2) DMT use, (3) use of free or discounted drug programs, or (4) insurance challenges was investigated using multivariable logistic regression analyses14 adjusting for potential confounders including age at the time of survey, PDDS, disease duration, annual income, marital status, disability status, and employment status in the last 6 months and for type of insurance (for outcomes 2, 3, and 4). We initially conducted analyses for all respondents and then repeated our analyses limited to RRMS respondents since the clinical trials leading to DMT approval only enrolled persons with RRMS.15

Of the 6,662 respondents, 2,681 (42.3%) reported having only private insurance, 1,410 (22.3%) only public, 1,293 (20.4%) public and private, and 946 (14.9%) public+. Among respondents who obtained DMTs through insurance coverage, those with only private insurance tended to be younger, employed, and less disabled, with higher income, shorter disease duration, RRMS, and lower PDSS than those in the other groups (table 2).

We employed a similar question to another study, and our estimate of the proportion of respondents who reported that their insurance coverage was worse is about 4% higher than reported previously.4 The slight difference may reflect differences in study cohorts or time periods. Our study had nearly 3 times as many respondents and our respondents had longer disease duration and lower annual income. The study by Pozniak et al.4 was conducted 5 years earlier than ours, which was conducted over 6 months after the ACA took effect.10

Respondents with private insurance were more likely to report negative insurance change. Financial burden and lack of insurance coverage of DMT use directly affected access to any DMT for a large number of respondents and posed challenges for respondents and their physicians with respect to the choice of DMT. As expected, negative insurance change affected persons with RRMS more than those without RRMS since the available DMTs mainly target RRMS. These negative effects likely reflect the dramatically increased cost of DMTs and the response to those high costs by insurance carriers.2 However, the cross-sectional study design prevents us from confirming the conjecture that initial denial of coverage for DMTs occurred more frequently now than previously for new and established patients.2 One encouraging observation in our study is that respondents who encountered initial insurance denials of DMTs also reported that their doctors usually were able to obtain coverage by the insurance carriers for the desired treatment. This highlights the important role physicians play in maintaining patient access to DMTs.2

It is uncertain whether the extensive use of free or discounted drug programs reflects that a preferred DMT was not covered by insurance or whether copays were too high, but suggests an important gap between health insurance needs and current coverage. While negative insurance changes may explain the gap for some individuals, the recognized rise in the cost of DMTs is likely to be another substantial contributing factor.2 If the costs of DMTs continue to rise as they have over the last 5 years, we can expect that they will become unattainable for many individuals with MS. Further, economic studies that fail to incorporate information on subsidized drugs may come to inaccurate conclusions when doing cost-effectiveness analyses. 041b061a72