RESUMEN
This Viewpoint discusses helping dual-eligible beneficiaries navigate Medicare and Medicaid coverage options.
RESUMEN
Medicare Advantage (MA) supplemental benefits offered at no or low premiums are a key value proposition for low-income beneficiaries. Despite nearly $20 billion in rebate payments to MA plans for funding supplemental benefits, their quality or enrollee access is not monitored. Using 2018-19 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey data linked to MA plan data, we found that regardless of plan benefit generosity, low-income beneficiaries were more likely to report dental, vision, and hearing unmet needs because of cost. Enrollment in plans with higher corresponding-year (that is, the same year as unmet need measurement) star ratings was associated with lower dental unmet need. Income-related disparities in dental unmet needs were lower in the highest-rated plans. However, prior-year star ratings that determined plan payments were not associated with unmet needs or disparities in those needs. Policy makers should consider monitoring supplemental benefits for equity and access, and they should assess the value added by quality bonus payments to high-rated plans for beneficiaries' access.
Asunto(s)
Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Medicare Part C , Pobreza , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Medicare Part C/economía , Anciano , Femenino , Masculino , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/economía , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Trastornos de la Visión/economía , Trastornos de la Visión/terapiaRESUMEN
Importance: In 2021, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services designated a new category of dual-eligible special needs plans (D-SNPs) with exclusively aligned enrollment (receive Medicare and Medicaid benefits through the same plan or affiliated plans within the same organization). Objective: To assess the availability of and enrollment in D-SNPs with exclusively aligned enrollment and to compare the characteristics of beneficiaries enrolled in D-SNPs with exclusively aligned enrollment available vs beneficiaries without such enrollment available. Design, Setting, and Participants: Full-benefit beneficiaries enrolled in D-SNPs for 6 months or longer in 2021 or 2022. Availability of and beneficiary enrollment in D-SNPs were assessed by year and county for D-SNPs with exclusively aligned enrollment available vs D-SNPs without exclusively aligned enrollment available. The D-SNP enrollees residing in counties with aligned plans available were compared based on demographic, social, health, and area characteristics vs D-SNP enrollees in counties without such plans available. Comparisons were also made based on beneficiaries who enrolled in the aligned D-SNPs vs those who did not enroll (were enrolled in unaligned D-SNPs). The data analyses were conducted from October 1, 2023, to August 2, 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Availability of aligned D-SNPs and beneficiary residence by county; enrollment in exclusively aligned D-SNPs vs unaligned D-SNPs; and beneficiary demographic, social, health, and area characteristics. Results: Of 2â¯197â¯732 beneficiaries enrolled in D-SNPs in 2021, 881â¯736 (40.1%) were living in counties with aligned enrollment available and 251â¯305 (11.4%) enrolled. Of 2â¯689â¯045 beneficiaries enrolled in D-SNPs in 2022, 1â¯047â¯223 (38.9%) were living in counties with aligned enrollment available and 318â¯906 (11.9%) enrolled. Beneficiaries enrolled in D-SNPs residing in counties without aligned enrollment available were more likely to live in rural or micropolitan areas (21.9%) vs beneficiaries in counties with aligned enrollment available (8.1%) (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.38 [95% CI, 0.38-0.38]), be entitled to disability (44.4% vs 27.3%, respectively; SMD, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.36-0.36]), or be Black individuals (27.4% vs 21.4%; SMD, 0.14 [95% CI, 0.14-0.14]); were less likely to be Hispanic individuals (15.4% vs 33.7%; SMD, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.45-0.45]) or Asian or Pacific Islander individuals (6.1% vs 12.2%; SMD, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.22-0.22]); and lived in zip codes with a higher area deprivation index (mean, 66.8 [SD, 26.4] vs mean, 43.2 [SD, 29.0]; SMD, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.86-0.86]). Beneficiaries enrolled in aligned D-SNPs were more likely to be receiving long-term institutionalized care vs beneficiaries in nonaligned D-SNPs (4.3% vs 1.0%, respectively; SMD, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.24-0.25]) or have dementia or Alzheimer disease (9.2% vs 5.9%; SMD, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.13-0.13]). Conclusions: This study found that availability of and enrollment in D-SNPs with exclusively aligned enrollment are increasing, but the overall proportion enrolled remains low. Further reforms are needed to promote aligned enrollment.
Asunto(s)
Medicaid , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Medicaid/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Determinación de la Elegibilidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Doble Elegibilidad para MEDICAID y MEDICARE , Anciano de 80 o más AñosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite the known benefits for individuals with heart failure (HF), incomplete data suggest a low use of palliative care (PC) for HF in the United States. We aimed to investigate the national PC use for adults with HF by determining when they received their first PC consultation (PCC) and the associations with clinical factors following diagnosis of HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a national all-payer electronic health record database to identify adults (aged ≥18 years) with newly diagnosed HF between 2011 and 2018. The proportion of those who received PCC within 5 years following a diagnosis of HF, and associations of time to first PCC with patient characteristics and HF-specific clinical markers were determined. We followed 127 712 patients for a median of 792 days, of whom 18.3% received PCC in 5 years. Shorter time to receive PCC was associated with diagnoses of HF in 2016 to 2018 (compared with 2010-2015: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.421 [95% CI, 1.370-1.475]), advanced HF (aHR, 2.065 [95% CI, 1.940-2.198]), cardiogenic shock (aHR, 2.587 [95% CI, 2.414-2.773]), implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (aHR, 5.718 [95% CI, 5.327-6.138]), and visits at academic medical centers (aHR, 1.439 [95% CI, 1.381-1.500]). CONCLUSIONS: Despite an expanded definition of PC and recommendations by professional societies, PC for HF remains low in the United States. Racial and geographic variations in access and use of PC exist for patients with HF. Future studies should interrogate the mechanisms of PC underusage, especially before advanced stages, and address barriers to PC services across the health care system.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Cuidados Paliativos , Humanos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/epidemiología , Cuidados Paliativos/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Femenino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Adulto , Factores de Tiempo , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Bases de Datos Factuales , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Importance: Most dual-eligible Medicare-Medicaid beneficiaries are enrolled in bifurcated insurance programs that pay for different components of care. Therefore, policymakers are prioritizing expansion of integrated care plans (ICPs) that manage both Medicare and Medicaid benefits and spending. Objective: To review evidence of the association between ICPs and health care spending, quality, utilization, and patient outcomes among dual-eligible beneficiaries. Evidence Review: A search was conducted of PubMed/MEDLINE (January 1, 2010, through November 1, 2023) and Google Scholar (January 1, 2010, through October 1, 2023) and augmented with reports from US federal and state government websites. Three categories of ICPs were evaluated: Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE), Medicare-Medicaid Plans (MMPs), and Fully Integrated Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans (FIDE-SNPs) and related models aligning Medicare and Medicaid coverage. The review included studies that evaluated beneficiaries dually eligible for and enrolled in full Medicaid; compared an ICP to a nonintegrated arrangement; and evaluated utilization, spending, care coordination, patient experience, or health for 100 or more beneficiaries. Findings: In all, 26 ICP evaluations met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis: 5 of PACE, 13 of MMPs, and 8 of FIDE-SNPs and other aligned models. Evidence generally showed associated reductions in long-term nursing home stays in PACE (3 of 4 studies) and FIDE-SNPs and related aligned models (3 of 5 studies) but was mixed in evaluations of MMPs. Four of 9 studies of MMPs and 2 of 3 studies of FIDE-SNPs found higher outpatient use, although other studies showed no difference. Evidence on Medicaid spending was limited, whereas 8 of 10 studies of MMPs showed an association between these plans and higher Medicare spending. Evidence was mixed or inconclusive regarding care coordination and hospitalizations, and it was insufficient to evaluate patient satisfaction, health, and outcomes in beneficiary subgroups (eg, those with serious mental illness). Furthermore, studies had limited ability to control for bias from unmeasured differences between enrollees of ICPs compared with nonintegrated models. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review found variability and gaps in evidence regarding ICPs and spending, quality, utilization, and outcomes. Studies found some ICPs were associated with reductions in long-term nursing home admissions, and several identified increases in outpatient care. However, MMPs were primarily associated with higher Medicare spending. Evidence for other outcomes was limited or inconclusive. Research addressing these evidence gaps is needed to guide ongoing efforts to integrate coverage and care for dual-eligible beneficiaries.
Asunto(s)
Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud , Gastos en Salud , Medicaid , Medicare , Estados Unidos , Humanos , Medicare/economía , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicaid/economía , Medicaid/estadística & datos numéricos , Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud/economía , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/economíaRESUMEN
This cohort study examines rural and urban trends in 30-day all-cause and same-cause mental health readmissions in the US.
Asunto(s)
Trastornos Mentales , Readmisión del Paciente , Humanos , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Readmisión del Paciente/tendencias , Trastornos Mentales/terapia , Trastornos Mentales/epidemiología , Población Urbana/estadística & datos numéricos , Población Urbana/tendencias , Estados Unidos , Población Rural/estadística & datos numéricos , Población Rural/tendencias , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
Importance: Medicaid coverage loss can substantially compromise access to and affordability of health care for dual-eligible beneficiaries. The extent to which this population lost Medicaid coverage before and during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) and the characteristics of beneficiaries more at risk for coverage loss are currently not well known. Objective: To assess the loss of Medicaid coverage among dual-eligible beneficiaries before and during the first year of the PHE, and to examine beneficiary-level and plan-level factors associated with heightened likelihood of losing Medicaid. Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated cross-sectional study used national Medicare data to estimate annual rates of Medicaid loss among dual-eligible beneficiaries before (2015 to 2019) and during the PHE (2020). Individuals who were dual eligible for Medicare and Medicaid at the beginning of a given year and who continuously received low-income subsidies for Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage were included in the sample. Multivariable regression models were used to examine beneficiary-level and plan-level factors associated with Medicaid loss. Data analyses were conducted between March 2023 and October 2023. Exposure: Onset of PHE. Main Outcomes and Measures: Loss of Medicaid for at least 1 month within a year. Results: Sample included 56â¯172â¯736 dual-eligible beneficiary-years between 2015 and 2020. In 2020, most dual-eligible beneficiaries were aged over 65 years (5â¯984â¯420 [61.1%]), female (5â¯868â¯866 [59.9%]), non-Hispanic White (4â¯928â¯035 [50.3%]), full-benefit eligible (6â¯837â¯815 [69.8%]), and enrolled in traditional Medicare (5â¯343â¯537 [54.6%]). The adjusted proportion of dual-eligible beneficiaries losing Medicaid for at least 1 month increased from 6.6% in 2015 to 7.3% in 2019 and then dropped to 2.3% in 2020. Between 2015 and 2019, dual-eligible beneficiaries who were older (ages 55-64 years: -1.4%; 95% CI, -1.8% to -1.0%; ages 65-74 years: -2.0%; 95% CI, -2.5% to -1.5%; ages 75 and older: -4.5%; 95% CI, -5.0% to -4.0%), disabled (-0.8%; 95% CI, -1.1% to -0.6%), and in integrated care programs were less likely to lose Medicaid. In 2020, the disparities within each of these demographic groups narrowed significantly. Notably, while Black (0.6%; 95% CI, 0.2% to 0.9%) and Hispanic (0.7%; 95% CI, 0.3% to 1.2%) dual-eligible beneficiaries were more likely to lose Medicaid than their non-Hispanic White counterparts between 2015 and 2019, such gap was eliminated for Black beneficiaries and narrowed for Hispanic beneficiaries in 2020. Conclusions and Relevance: During the PHE, Medicaid coverage loss declined significantly among dual-eligible beneficiaries, and disparities were mitigated across subgroups. As the PHE unwinds, it is crucial for policymakers to implement strategies to minimize Medicaid coverage disruptions and racial and ethnic disparities, especially given that loss of Medicaid was slightly increasing over time before the PHE.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Medicare Part D , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Humanos , Anciano , Femenino , Medicaid , Estudios Transversales , Salud Pública , COVID-19/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
This Viewpoint describes existing public health and social service systems for persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities as they transition to adult care, barriers and opportunities faced in service access, and potential actions to narrow these gaps and enhance equity.
Asunto(s)
Discapacidades del Desarrollo , Discapacidad Intelectual , Niño , Humanos , Discapacidades del Desarrollo/terapia , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Discapacidad Intelectual/terapiaRESUMEN
Accountable care organizations (ACOs) have become Medicare's dominant care model because policy makers believe that ACOs will improve the quality and efficiency of care for chronic conditions. Depression and anxiety disorders are the most prevalent and undertreated chronic mental health conditions in Medicare. Yet it is unknown whether ACOs influence treatment and outcomes for these conditions. To explore these questions, this longitudinal study used data from the 2016-19 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, linked to validated depression and anxiety symptom instruments, among diagnosed and undiagnosed fee-for-service Medicare patients with these conditions. Among patients not enrolled in ACOs at baseline, those who newly enrolled in ACOs in the following year were 24 percent less likely to have their depression or anxiety treated during the year than patients who remained unenrolled in ACOs, and they saw no relative improvements at twelve months in their depression and anxiety symptoms. Better-designed incentives are needed to motivate Medicare ACOs to improve mental health treatment.
Asunto(s)
Organizaciones Responsables por la Atención , Medicare , Humanos , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Estudios Longitudinales , Depresión , Salud Mental , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Trastornos de AnsiedadRESUMEN
Importance: Social determinants of health contribute to disparities in cancer outcomes. State public assistance spending, including Medicaid and cash assistance programs for socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals, may improve access to care; address barriers, such as food and housing insecurity; and lead to improved cancer outcomes for marginalized populations. Objective: To determine whether state-level public assistance spending is associated with overall survival (OS) among individuals with cancer, overall and by race and ethnicity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included US adults aged at least 18 years with a new cancer diagnosis from 2007 to 2013, with follow-up through 2019. Data were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Data were analyzed from November 18, 2021, to July 6, 2023. Exposure: Differential state-level public assistance spending. Main Outcome and Measure: The main outcome was 6-year OS. Analyses were adjusted for age, race, ethnicity, sex, metropolitan residence, county-level income, state fixed effects, state-level percentages of residents living in poverty and aged 65 years or older, cancer type, and cancer stage. Results: A total 2â¯035â¯977 individuals with cancer were identified and included in analysis, with 1â¯005â¯702 individuals (49.4%) aged 65 years or older and 1â¯026â¯309 (50.4%) male. By tertile of public assistance spending, 6-year OS was 55.9% for the lowest tertile, 55.9% for the middle tertile, and 56.6% for the highest tertile. In adjusted analyses, public assistance spending at the state-level was significantly associated with higher 6-year OS (0.09% [95% CI, 0.04%-0.13%] per $100 per capita; P < .001), particularly for non-Hispanic Black individuals (0.29% [95% CI, 0.07%-0.52%] per $100 per capita; P = .01) and non-Hispanic White individuals (0.12% [95% CI, 0.08%-0.16%] per $100 per capita; P < .001). In sensitivity analyses examining the roles of Medicaid spending and Medicaid expansion including additional years of data, non-Medicaid spending was associated with higher 3-year OS among non-Hispanic Black individuals (0.49% [95% CI, 0.26%-0.72%] per $100 per capita when accounting for Medicaid spending; 0.17% [95% CI, 0.02%-0.31%] per $100 per capita Medicaid expansion effects). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that state public assistance expenditures, including cash assistance programs and Medicaid, were associated with improved survival for individuals with cancer. State investment in public assistance programs may represent an important avenue to improve cancer outcomes through addressing social determinants of health and should be a topic of further investigation.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Asistencia Pública , Tasa de Supervivencia , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios de Cohortes , Etnicidad , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Neoplasias/mortalidad , Estados Unidos , Negro o AfroamericanoRESUMEN
This Viewpoint highlights costly inefficiencies in delivery of care to patients who qualify to receive both Medicare and Medicaid and proposes more effective care models.
Asunto(s)
Medicaid , Medicare , Determinación de la Elegibilidad , Estados Unidos , Cobertura del Seguro , Reforma de la Atención de SaludRESUMEN
Policy makers are increasingly investing in efforts to better integrate Medicare and Medicaid services for people who are eligible for both programs, including expanding Dual-Eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs). In recent years, however, a potential threat to integration has emerged in the form of D-SNP "look-alike" plans, which are conventional Medicare Advantage plans that are marketed toward and primarily enroll dual eligibles but are not subject to federal regulations requiring integrated Medicaid services. To date, limited evidence exists documenting national enrollment trends in look-alike plans or the characteristics of dual eligibles in these plans. We found that look-alike plans experienced rapid enrollment growth among dual eligibles during the period 2013-20, increasing from 20,900 dual eligibles across four states to 220,860 dual eligibles across seventeen states, for an elevenfold increase. Nearly one-third of dual eligibles in look-alike plans were previously in integrated care programs. Compared with D-SNPs, look-alike plans were more likely to enroll dual eligibles who were older, Hispanic, and from disadvantaged communities. Our findings suggest that look-alike plans have the potential to compromise national efforts to integrate care delivery for dual eligibles, including vulnerable subgroups who may benefit the most from integrated coverage.
Asunto(s)
Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud , Medicare Part C , Humanos , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Determinación de la Elegibilidad , Medicaid , Poblaciones VulnerablesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with dementia are a growing and vulnerable population within Medicare. Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are becoming Medicare's dominant care model, but ACO enrollment and care patterns for patients with dementia are unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare differences in ACO enrollment for patients with versus without dementia, and in risk profiles and ambulatory care among patients with dementia by ACO enrollment status. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cohort study assessing the relationships between patient dementia, following-year ACO enrollment, and ambulatory care patterns. SUBJECTS: A total of 13,362 (weighted: 45, 499,049) person-years for patients [2761 (weighted: 6,312,304) for dementia patients] ages 65 years and above in the 2015-2019 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. MEASURES: We assessed differences in ACO enrollment rates for patients with versus without dementia, and in dementia-relevant ambulatory care visit rates and validated care fragmentation indices among patients with dementia by ACO enrollment status. RESULTS: Patients with versus without dementia were less likely to be enrolled in (38.3% vs. 44.6%, P<0.001), and more likely to exit (21.1% vs. 13.7%, P<0.01) ACOs. Among patients with dementia, those enrolled versus not enrolled in ACOs had a more favorable social and health risk profile on 6 of 16 measures (P<0.05). There were no differences in rates of dementia-relevant, primary, or specialty care visits. ACO enrollment was associated with 45.7% higher wellness visit rates (P<0.001), and 13.4% more fragmented primary care (P<0.01) spread across 8.7% more distinct physicians (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Medicare ACOs are less likely to enroll and retain patients with dementia than other patients and provide more fragmented primary care without providing additional dementia-relevant ambulatory care visits.
Asunto(s)
Organizaciones Responsables por la Atención , Demencia , Humanos , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Estudios de Cohortes , Medicare , Poblaciones Vulnerables , Demencia/terapiaRESUMEN
Importance: Medicare Advantage (MA) plans are expanding rapidly, now serving 50% of all Medicare enrollees. Little is known about how inclusion rates of physicians in MA plan networks vary by the social and clinical risks of their patients. Objective: To examine the association of physicians caring for patients with higher levels of social and clinical risk in traditional Medicare (TM) with the likelihood of inclusion in MA plan networks. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study evaluated the number of patients of physicians participating in TM Part B in 2019. The data analysis was conducted between June 2022 and March 2023. Exposures: Quintiles of the proportion of patients who were dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid and average beneficiary hierarchical condition category (HCC) score (a measure of a patient's chronic disease burden that is used in risk adjustment and MA plan payment, where higher scores indicate higher risk) in the Part B TM program. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the proportion of MA plans and enrollees for which physicians were in network. Results: The analysis sample included 259â¯932 physicians billing Medicare Part B in 2019. After adjusting for physician, patient, and county characteristics, physicians with the highest quintile of patients with dual eligibility were associated with a lower likelihood of being included in MA plans and being in network with MA enrollees than the lowest quintile physicians (MA inclusion rate, -3.0% [95% CI, -3.2% to -2.8%]; P < .001; in-network enrollee proportion, -6.5% [95% CI, -7.0% to -6.0%]; P < .001). Similarly, physicians with the highest quintile HCC score were associated with a lower likelihood of being included in MA plans and being in network with MA enrollees than the lowest quintile physicians (MA inclusion rate, -7.5% [95% CI, -7.9% to -7.2%]; P < .001; in-network enrollee proportion, -18.7% [95% CI, -19.5% to -18.1%]; P < .001). Physicians in medical specialties in the highest clinical risk group (highest quintile HCC score) were associated with a significantly lower likelihood of being in network with MA enrollees than those in the lowest clinical risk group (in-network enrollee proportion, -20.4% [95% CI, -21.1% to -19.8%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study of physicians participating in TM Part B in 2019 found that physicians with higher numbers of patients with social and medical risks in TM were significantly less likely to be associated with MA plans.
Asunto(s)
Medicare Part C , Médicos , Anciano , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Estudios Transversales , Medicaid , Ajuste de RiesgoAsunto(s)
COVID-19 , Personas con Discapacidad , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Humanos , Inequidades en SaludRESUMEN
This Viewpoint discusses 3 types of systemic health inequity experienced by individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilitiesstigma, exclusion, and devaluation of worth; underrepresentation in population epidemiology and research; and inadequate access to care and social servicesand suggests potential approaches to ameliorating inequities in each of these areas.
Asunto(s)
Discapacidades del Desarrollo , Personas con Discapacidad , Equidad en Salud , Discapacidad Intelectual , Niño , Humanos , Discapacidades del Desarrollo/terapia , Equidad en Salud/normas , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Discapacidad Intelectual/terapiaRESUMEN
Importance: Medicare beneficiaries with disabilities aged 18 to 64 years face barriers accessing ambulatory care. Past studies comparing Medicare Advantage (MA) with traditional Medicare (TM) have not assessed how well these programs meet the needs of beneficiaries with disabilities. Objective: To compare differences in enrollment rates, ambulatory care access, and ambulatory care quality for beneficiaries with disabilities in MA vs TM. Design Setting and Participants: This cohort study included a nationally representative, weighted sample of 7201 person-years for beneficiaries aged 18 to 64 years with disability entitlement in the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey from 2015 through 2018. Differences in program enrollment and in measures of access and quality by program enrollment were compared after adjusting for demographic, insurance, social, health, and area characteristics and after reweighting the sample by propensity to enroll in MA as estimated by observed confounders. Data analyses were conducted between November 1, 2020, and November 11, 2021. Exposures: Medicare Advantage vs TM program enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Six patient-reported measures of ambulatory care access (usual source of care, primary care usual source of care, specialist visit) and quality (cholesterol screening, influenza vaccination, colon cancer screening). Results: The mean (SD) age of the overall study population was 52.1 (11.0) years; 49.5% were female and 50.5% were male; 1.6% were Asian/Pacific Islander; 17.4%, Black; 10.2% Hispanic; 1.4%, Native American; 65.1%, White, and 4.2%, multiracial. Among all beneficiaries living in the community, individuals with disability entitlement were less likely to enroll in MA than other beneficiaries (34.8% vs 41.2%). The final sample of beneficiaries with disabilities included 2444 person-years in MA and 4757 person-years in TM. Beneficiaries with disabilities in MA vs TM were more likely to be of a minority race or ethnicity (35.7% vs 27.6%) and less likely to be enrolled in private insurance (11.9% vs 25.0%). Comparing MA with TM among beneficiaries with disabilities, those in MA had significantly better rates of access to a usual source of care (90.2% vs 84.9%; adjusted propensity-weighted marginal difference [APWMD], 2.9%; 95% CI, 0.2%-5.7%), access to specialist visits (53.2% vs 44.8%; APWMD, 5.5%; 95% CI, 0.6%-10.5%), cholesterol screenings (91.1% vs 86.4%; APWMD, 3.8%; 95% CI, 0.9%-6.7%), influenza vaccinations (61.4% vs 51.5%; APWMD, 10.4%; 95% CI, 5.3%-15.5%), and colon cancer screenings (68.4% vs 54.6%; APWMD, 10.3%; 95% CI, 4.8%-15.8%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, Medicare beneficiaries with disabilities were enrolled in MA at significantly lower rates than those without disabilities. However, MA was associated with significantly better ambulatory care access and quality for these beneficiaries on 5 of 6 measures compared with TM.
Asunto(s)
Personas con Discapacidad , Gripe Humana , Medicare Part C , Anciano , Atención Ambulatoria , Colesterol , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Importance: Medicare's Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is a new, mandatory, outpatient value-based payment program that ties reimbursement to performance on cost and quality measures for many US clinicians. However, it is currently unknown how the program measures the performance of psychiatrists, who often treat a different patient case mix with different clinical considerations than do other outpatient clinicians. Objective: To compare performance scores and value-based reimbursement for psychiatrists vs other outpatient physicians in the 2020 MIPS. Design Setting and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Provider Data Catalog was used to identify outpatient Medicare physicians listed in the National Downloadable File between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020, who participated in the 2020 MIPS and received a publicly reported final performance score. Data from the 593 863 clinicians participating in the 2020 MIPS were used to compare differences in the 2020 MIPS performance scores and value-based reimbursement (based on performance in 2018) for psychiatrists vs other physicians, adjusting for physician, patient, and practice area characteristics. Exposures: Participation in MIPS. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were final MIPS performance score and negative (penalty), positive, and exceptional performance bonus payment adjustments. Secondary outcomes were scores in the MIPS performance domains: quality, promoting interoperability, improvement activities, and cost. Results: This study included 9356 psychiatrists (3407 [36.4%] female and 5 949 [63.6%] male) and 196 306 other outpatient physicians (69 221 [35.3%] female and 127 085 [64.7%] male) (data on age and race are not available). Compared with other physicians, psychiatrists were less likely to be affiliated with a safety-net hospital (2119 [22.6%] vs 64 997 [33.1%]) or a major teaching hospital (2148 [23.0%] vs 53 321 [27.2%]) and had lower annual Medicare patient volume (181 vs 437 patients) and mean patient risk scores (1.65 vs 1.78) (P < .001 for all). The mean final MIPS performance score for psychiatrists was 84.0 vs 89.7 for other physicians (absolute difference, -5.7; 95% CI, -6.2 to -5.2). A total of 573 psychiatrists (6.1%) received a penalty vs 5739 (2.9%) of other physicians (absolute difference, 3.2%; 95% CI, 2.8%-3.6%); 8664 psychiatrists (92.6%) vs 189 037 other physicians (96.3%) received a positive payment adjustment (absolute difference, -3.7%; 95% CI, -3.3% to -4.1%), and 7672 psychiatrists (82.0%) vs 174 040 other physicians (88.7%) received a bonus payment adjustment (absolute difference, -6.7%; 95% CI, -6.0% to -7.3%). These differences remained significant after adjustment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study that compared US psychiatrists with other outpatient physicians, psychiatrists had significantly lower 2020 MIPS performance scores, were penalized more frequently, and received fewer bonuses. Policy makers should evaluate whether current MIPS performance measures appropriately assess the performance of psychiatrists.
Asunto(s)
Médicos , Psiquiatría , Anciano , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare , Motivación , Pacientes Ambulatorios , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Paid sick leave provides workers with job-protected paid time off to address short-term illnesses or seek preventive care for themselves and their family members. We studied the impact of mandatory paid sick leave at the state level on emergency department (ED) visit rates, using all-payer, longitudinal ED data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project for the period 2011-19. We found that state implementation of paid sick leave mandates was associated with a 5.6 percent reduction in the total ED visit rate relative to the baseline, equivalent to 23 fewer visits per 1,000 population per year. The reduction was concentrated in Medicaid patients. Some of the largest reductions were ED visits related to adult dental conditions, adult mental health or substance use disorders, and pediatric asthma. Mandatory paid sick leave may be an effective policy lever to reduce excess ED use and costs.