EHR Retro Studies Series: Cost-benefit study confirms EHR value across life insurance underwriting use cases
properties.trackTitle
properties.trackSubtitle
Munich Re Life US underwriters, in partnership with Clareto, a Munich Re company, have been working extensively with electronic health records (EHRs) for several years. Our ability to leverage EHRs for risk assessment has grown significantly with this experience. This led us to think anew about the efficacy of EHRs across multiple underwriting use cases: Does the original and widely held industry belief that EHRs’ primary and best use would be to replace the attending physician statements (APS) stand up to scrutiny? Is the focus on APS replacement even the best use case for EHR adoption?
Study overview
Over the course of our work with Clareto, the Munich Re Life US team has reviewed thousands of EHRs. For this series, we focused on a subset of over 800 lives using underwriting files provided by multiple carriers representing a cross-section of markets.1 The goal was to determine the impact of incorporating EHRs in multiple use cases:
- Non-fluid underwriting/accelerated underwriting: This is the first in a series of papers covering findings from the studies around the protective and operational value of EHRs in underwriting workflows.
- Fluid underwriting: coming in January 2025
- APS underwriting: coming in March 2025
Top-level results by use case
The results provided us with a data set that allowed us to see the impact of EHRs on the cost of underwriting evidence, the time savings of ordering underwriting evidence, and the overall mortality savings provided by EHRs. As seen in the chart below, this enabled us to review the impact across all these factors in each use case and to form an overall conclusion as to how advantageous the use of EHRs can be.
Here are the top-level findings for each use case: