McKinsey & Company LogoMcKinsey on Healthcare
Sign in
Stock hero image. Not critical for content.
Payer insights

Understanding the impact of unmet social needs on consumer health and healthcare

Filed under: Consumer engagement, Digital transformation, Healthcare analytics, Integrated care

Healthcare industry stakeholders increasingly recognize that in order to deliver improved health outcomes, it is necessary to address the social factors that influence consumer health. Findings from McKinsey’s 2019 Consumer Health Insights and Consumer Social Determinants of Health surveys demonstrate that social needs are a salient issue for all types of consumers, and that they are also linked with consumer preferences and perceptions of the care they receive. This paper sheds light on differences in preferences, perceptions, health, and utilization across consumers with varying degrees of unmet social need. By better understanding consumers’ perspectives regarding their own health and social needs, healthcare stakeholders may improve programs that optimize utilization, improve outcomes, and enhance consumer experience.

Insight 1:
Unmet social needs exist across all types of consumers

Income, employment, education, food security, housing, transportation, safety, and social support are all factors that affect health and well-being. Additionally, trauma or adverse childhood experiences may have long-term effects on health and well-being.

We surveyed consumers with employer-sponsored group insurance, individual market coverage, Medicare coverage, Medicaid coverage, and those who were uninsured. We focused on understanding six social needs: food security, adequate housing, reliable transportation, social support, community safety, and personal safety.1 Although a larger proportion of Medicaid respondents reported having unmet social needs than respondents with other types of insurance coverage (likely due to the linkage with socioeconomic status), more than 35 percent of respondents in each line of business reported experiencing at least one unmet social need, and nearly a quarter of all respondents experienced two or more (Exhibit 1). This finding suggests that there are subsets of consumers in each line of business who could benefit from support to address their unmet social needs.

Furthermore, healthcare stakeholders could consider social needs not only by line of business but also by health condition. For instance, within Medicaid, respondents who reported poor mental health were more likely to report multiple unmet social needs as compared to those who reported good mental health.2 Understanding where unmet social needs may exist across types of insurance coverage and health conditions may help to focus efforts to address unmet social needs for different types of consumers.

Exhibit 1

Insight 2:
Consumers with higher utilization are more likely to report unmet social needs

The survey results identify a link between healthcare services utilization and social needs. For example, respondents with higher inpatient or emergency room (ER) utilization are more likely to report unmet social needs (Exhibit 2).3

Exhibit 2

Importantly, the relationship between social needs and healthcare utilization varies by population. For example, an unmet transportation need may have a different impact on the utilization of a healthy Medicaid consumer versus a Medicare consumer with poor health. Advanced analytics can help to demonstrate the relative impact of each unmet social need in different populations. For instance, we built analytical models to determine which social needs were most predictive of health status4 and utilization in different populations, indicating that they may play a larger role in driving overall health and healthcare utilization (Exhibit 3, see technical appendix for additional detail on methodology):

  • Among Medicare respondents, housing and transportation were relatively more important than other social needs in predicting health status.
  • Among Medicare respondents with poor health status, community safety was relatively more important in predicting inpatient or ER utilization.
  • Among Medicaid respondents and those who are likely to cycle in and out of the Medicaid program (referred to here as the “Medicaid churn population”),5 food and personal safety were relatively more important in predicting health status.
  • Among Medicaid and Medicaid churn respondents with poor health status, community safety was relatively more important in predicting inpatient utilization but not ER utilization.

These findings provide empirical support for what may seem intuitive—unmet social needs and factors associated with them may impact health and utilization differently across populations. Thus, in developing interventions, clearly defining objectives and tailoring an approach to specific populations of interest are critical to achieving the desired outcomes. Put simply, a program that targets Medicare consumers with poor health status may need to address different social factors than one that addresses the broader Medicare population. Similarly, an initiative that aims to optimize ER utilization may need to address different social factors for Medicare consumers than for Medicaid consumers. Considering the degree to which different social needs may impact different types of utilization can help stakeholders prioritize which unmet social needs to address in each target population and ensure that local social service providers have enough capacity to address these needs.

Exhibit 3

Insight 3:
Consumers with significant social risk often have decreased access to care and lower satisfaction with care when received

We analyzed access and satisfaction among respondents with Medicare coverage, Medicaid coverage, the Medicaid churn population, and those with dual Medicare and Medicaid coverage. We created a social risk score for each respondent in this group by weighting the relative importance of each social need in predicting health status, and segmented the population into those with limited, moderate, and significant social risk.6

Thirty-seven percent of respondents with significant social risk reported not getting all the healthcare they needed. Among respondents who reported at least one healthcare encounter in the previous twelve months, only 52 percent of respondents with significant social risk were satisfied with their overall healthcare experience, compared to 81 percent of respondents with limited social risk (Exhibit 4). Though respondents with significant social risk were more likely to report not getting all needed healthcare, eight of the 10 most common reasons for not getting all needed care were not related to specific social factors. Instead, they were related to affordability, healthcare access, health literacy, and low expectations of the healthcare system. This suggests that addressing unmet social needs may be necessary but not sufficient to remove barriers to receiving healthcare for consumers with significant social risk. Instead, healthcare stakeholders could consider addressing specific unmet social needs, such as transportation, in conjunction with other levers to expand access, improve satisfaction, and encourage appropriate use of healthcare services.

Exhibit 4

This is especially relevant for Medicaid and Medicaid churn populations, for whom the gap between those with limited social risk and those with significant social risk is smaller. Twenty-four percent of respondents with limited social risk also reported they did not get all the care they need, and only 64 percent of those who reported at least one healthcare encounter were satisfied with their overall healthcare experience. While social risk is important to assess, the similarity between those with limited and significant social risk in this population indicates that there are likely additional barriers not directly related to food, transportation, housing, social support, or safety for this population (such as economic status, healthcare access, and health literacy).

Insight 4:
Consumers with significant social risk may prefer alternative sites of care and support

Differences in care preferences reveal opportunities to improve care delivery for populations with significant social risk. Focusing again on the Medicare, Medicaid, and Medicaid churn populations, respondents with significant social risk are more likely to prefer the ER and alternative sites of care for routine and ongoing care (e.g., urgent care, telemedicine, pharmacy) (Exhibit 5). Eighty-one percent of respondents with significant social risk want support in managing their health and may seek support from a variety of sources—for example, 58 percent want support from a primary care provider, 27 percent from family or friends, and 21 percent from a therapist. In comparison, similar percentages of those with limited social risk said they would want the support of a primary care provider (PCP) or family or friends, though only 2 percent said they would want the support of a therapist.

There is also an opportunity to engage respondents with significant social risk digitally—86 percent have access to a smartphone and 83 percent were open to digital health solutions. However, even when interested respondents had access to programs such as extended hours at drop-in care clinics and digital health tools, 30 percent did not use these services. Respondents with significant social risk were less likely to find digital tools such as medication reminders useful after trying them, despite their original interest.

Exhibit 5

However, even when interested respondents had access to programs such as extended hours at drop-in care clinics and digital health tools, 30 percent did not use these services. Respondents with significant social risk were less likely to find digital tools such as medication reminders useful after trying them, despite their original interest.

Together, these findings suggest a need to engage individuals, communities, and caregivers in creating solutions that reflect individual needs and local preferences. Equipping alternative sites of care to address social needs as well as physical health could help to improve overall outcomes. The disconnect between program interest, uptake, and continued use suggests misalignment between what users desire and what each solution ultimately delivers. Ensuring that programs and digital solutions are designed and tested with individuals with unmet social needs may help to meet these consumers’ needs and expectations, and ultimately create opportunities to further scale support for these populations. Importantly, because local context often influences social needs, successful solutions may also require flexibility to respond differently to communities across geographies.

* * *

Recognizing that individuals with unmet social needs exist across all types of health insurance coverage, a nuanced understanding of consumers’ social needs and preferences can enable organizations to move away from broad social interventions to targeted, effective solutions.

Healthcare organizations could consider investing in quantitative and qualitative methods to understand the impact of unmet social needs on the health and healthcare preferences of their consumers and gain insight into which unmet social needs most influence their healthcare utilization and outcomes. For example, providers could tailor a patient’s care plan and follow-up to the patient’s social context, partnering with local community organizations to provide social services where needed. Payers could incorporate data about social needs into existing analytics and systems to better equip care managers and customer care teams in supporting members, and to make informed investments in expanding the capacity of local social service providers. Creating targeted solutions and interventions with input from consumers with varied unmet social needs may yield higher engagement, improved effectiveness, and better consumer outcomes.

The authors would like to thank Glen Graves, Eric Bochtler, Abigail Charles, Violet Dang, Shriram Bhutada, and Himani Kohli for their contributions to this paper.

  1. Because analyses were conducted across and within different types of healthcare coverage which themselves control for income and employment to some degree, analyses related to income and employment were excluded from this research. The majority of respondents attained at least a high school education; therefore, analyses related to education were excluded from this research. This research focused on understanding current social context; past unmet social needs, e.g., during childhood, were not assessed.
  2. Erica Coe and Jenny Cordina, “Insights on mental health from a 2019 McKinsey Consumer survey,” McKinsey & Company, February 2020, McKinsey.com.
  3. Analysis uses correlations and trends to identify possible relationships between unmet social needs and health; therefore, results cannot be interpreted to determine causality between unmet social needs and health.
  4. Calculated as a composite score for each respondent, incorporating the number of ongoing chronic conditions a respondent has and their past healthcare utilization in inpatient, emergency room, and primary care settings. See technical appendix for additional detail on methodology.
  5. We defined the Medicaid churn population as individuals with household incomes below 250 percent of the federal poverty level who were uninsured or who received health insurance through the individual market.
  6. See technical appendix for additional detail on methodology.

Download full article
Also of Interest