Quality, Spending, Utilization, and Outcomes Among Dual-Eligible Medicare-Medicaid Beneficiaries in Integrated Care Programs: A Systematic Review.

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.

Antiretroviral Therapy Use and Disparities Among Medicare Beneficiaries with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is recommended for all people with HIV. Understanding ART use among Medicare beneficiaries with HIV is therefore critically important for improving quality and equity of care among the growing population of older adults with HIV. However, a comprehensive national evaluation of filled ART prescriptions among Medicare beneficiaries is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To examine trends in ART use among Medicare beneficiaries with HIV from 2013 to 2019 and to evaluate whether racial and ethnic disparities in ART use are narrowing over time. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SUBJECTS: Traditional Medicare beneficiaries with Part D living with HIV in 2013-2019. MAIN MEASURES: Months of filled ART prescriptions each year. KEY RESULTS: Compared with beneficiaries not on ART, beneficiaries on ART were younger, less likely to be Black (41.6% vs. 47.0%), and more likely to be Hispanic (13.1% vs. 9.7%). While the share of beneficiaries who filled ART prescriptions for 10 + months/year improved (+ 0.48 percentage points/year [p.p.y.], 95% CI 0.34-0.63, p < 0.001), 25.8% of beneficiaries did not fill ART for 10 + months in 2019. Between 2013 and 2019, the proportion of beneficiaries who filled ART for 10 + months improved for Black beneficiaries (65.8 to 70.3%, + 0.66 p.p.y., 95% CI 0.43-0.89, p < 0.001) and White beneficiaries (74.8 to 77.4%, + 0.38 p.p.y.; 95% CI 0.19-0.58, p < 0.001), while remaining stable for Hispanic beneficiaries (74.5 to 75.0%, + 0.12 p.p.y., 95% CI - 0.24-0.49, p = 0.51). Although Black-White disparities in ART use narrowed over time, the share of beneficiaries who filled ART prescriptions for 10 + months/year was significantly lower among Black beneficiaries relative to White beneficiaries each year. CONCLUSIONS: ART use improved from 2013 to 2019 among Medicare beneficiaries with HIV. However, about 25% of beneficiaries did not consistently fill ART prescriptions within a given year. Despite declining differences between Black and White beneficiaries, concerning disparities in ART use persist.

Trends in observation stays for Medicare beneficiaries with and without Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.

BACKGROUND: There has been a marked rise in the use of observation care for Medicare beneficiaries visiting the emergency department (ED) in recent years. Whether trends in observation use differ for people with Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's disease-related dementias (AD/ADRD) is unknown. METHODS: Using a national 20% sample of Medicare beneficiaries ages 68+ from 2012 to 2018, we compared trends in ED visits and observation stays by AD/ADRD status for beneficiaries visiting the ED. We then examined the degree to which trends differed by nursing home (NH) residency status, assigning beneficiaries to four groups: AD/ADRD residing in NH (AD/ADRD+ NH+), AD/ADRD not residing in NH (AD/ADRD+ NH-), no AD/ADRD residing in NH (AD/ADRD- NH+), and no AD/ADRD not residing in NH (AD/ADRD- NH-). RESULTS: Of 7,489,780 unique beneficiaries, 18.6% had an AD/ADRD diagnosis. Beneficiaries with AD/ADRD had more than double the number of ED visits per 1000 in all years compared to those without AD/ADRD and saw a faster adjusted increase over time (+26.7 vs. +8.2 visits/year; p < 0.001 for interaction). The annual increase in the adjusted proportion of ED visits ending in observation was also greater among people with AD/ADRD (+0.78%/year, 95% CI 0.77-0.80%) compared to those without AD/ADRD (+0.63%/year, 95% CI 0.59-0.66%; p < 0.001 for interaction). Observation utilization was greatest for the AD/ADRD+ NH+ population and lowest for the AD/ADRD- NH- population, but the AD/ADRD+ NH- group saw the greatest increase in observation stays over time (+15.4 stays per 1000 people per year, 95% CI 15.0-15.7). CONCLUSIONS: Medicare beneficiaries with AD/ADRD have seen a disproportionate increase in observation utilization in recent years, driven by both an increase in ED visits and an increase in the proportion of ED visits ending in observation.

Trends in healthy days at home for Medicare beneficiaries using the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Older adults, particularly those with Alzheimer's Disease and Alzheimer's Disease Related Dementias (AD/ADRD), have high rates of emergency department (ED) visits and are at risk for poor outcomes. How best to measure quality of care for this population has been debated. Healthy Days at Home (HDAH) is a broad outcome measure reflecting mortality and time spent in facility-based healthcare settings versus home. We examined trends in 30-day HDAH for Medicare beneficiaries after visiting the ED and compared trends by AD/ADRD status. METHODS: We identified all ED visits among a national 20% sample of Medicare beneficiaries ages 68 and older from 2012 to 2018. For each visit, we calculated 30-day HDAH by subtracting mortality days and days spent in facility-based healthcare settings within 30 days of an ED visit. We calculated adjusted rates of HDAH using linear regression, accounting for hospital random effects, visit diagnosis, and patient characteristics. We compared rates of HDAH among beneficiaries with and without AD/ADRD, including accounting for nursing home (NH) residency status. RESULTS: We found fewer adjusted 30-day HDAH after ED visits among patients with AD/ADRD compared to those without AD/ADRD (21.6 vs. 23.0). This difference was driven by a greater number of mortality days, SNF days, and, to a lesser degree, hospital observation days, ED visits, and long-term hospital days. From 2012 to 2018, individuals living with AD/ADRD had fewer HDAH each year but a greater mean annual increase over time (p < 0.001 for the interaction between year and AD/ADRD status). Being a NH resident was associated with fewer adjusted 30-day HDAH for beneficiaries with and without AD/ADRD. CONCLUSIONS: Beneficiaries with AD/ADRD had fewer HDAH following an ED visit but saw moderately greater increases in HDAH over time compared to those without AD/ADRD. This trend was visit driven by declining mortality and utilization of inpatient and post-acute care.

Evaluation of Potentially Avoidable Acute Care Utilization Among Patients Insured by Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare.

Importance: Medicare Advantage plans have strong incentives to reduce potentially wasteful health care, including costly acute care visits for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs). However, it remains unknown whether Medicare Advantage plans lower acute care use compared with traditional Medicare, or if it shifts patients from hospitalization to observation stays and emergency department (ED) direct discharges. Objective: To determine whether Medicare Advantage is associated with differential utilization of hospitalizations, observations, and ED direct discharges for ACSCs compared with traditional Medicare. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional study of US Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare beneficiaries from January 1 to December 31, 2018. Poisson regression models were used to compare risk-adjusted rates of Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare, controlling for patient demographic characteristics and clinical risk and including county fixed-effects. Data were analyzed between April 2021 and November 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospitalizations, observation stays, and ED direct discharges for ACSCs. Results: The study sample comprised 2 665 340 Medicare Advantage patients (mean [SD] age, 72.7 [9.8] years; 1 504 519 [56.4%] women; 1 859 067 [69.7%] White individuals) and 7 981 547 traditional Medicare patients (mean [SD] age, 71.2 [11.8] years; 4 232 201 [53.0%] women; 6 176 239 [77.4%] White individuals). Medicare Advantage patients had lower risk of hospitalization for ACSCs compared with traditional Medicare patients (relative risk [RR], 0.94; 95% CI, 0.93-0.95), primarily owing to fewer hospitalizations for acute conditions (eg, pneumonia). Medicare Advantage patients had a higher risk of ED direct discharges (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.43-1.45) and observation stays (RR, 2.38; 95% CI, 2.34-2.41) for ACSCs vs traditional Medicare patients. Overall, Medicare Advantage patients were at higher risk of needing care for an ACSC (hospitalization, ED direct discharge, or observation stay) than traditional Medicare patients (RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.30-1.31). Within the Medicare Advantage population, patients in health maintenance organizations (HMOs) were at lower risk of ACSC-related hospitalization compared with patients in its preferred provider organizations (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98); however, those in the HMOs had a higher risk of ED direct discharge (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.07-1.09) and observation stay (overall RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.12). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study of Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare patients with ACSCs indicate that apparent gains in lowering rates of potentially avoidable acute care have been associated with shifting inpatient care to settings such as ED direct discharges and observation stays.

Association of Academic Medical Center Presence With Clinical Outcomes at Neighboring Community Hospitals Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

Importance: Studies suggest that academic medical centers (AMCs) have better outcomes than nonteaching hospitals. However, whether AMCs have spillover benefits for patients treated at neighboring community hospitals is unknown. Objective: To examine whether market-level AMC presence is associated with outcomes for patients treated at nonteaching hospitals within the same markets. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, population-based cohort study assessed traditional Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older discharged from US acute care hospitals between 2015 and 2017 (100% sample). Data were analyzed from August 2021 to December 2022. Exposures: The primary exposure was market-level AMC presence. Health care markets (ie, hospital referral regions) were categorized by AMC presence (percentage of hospitalizations at AMCs) as follows: no presence (0%), low presence (>0% to 20%), moderate presence (>20% to 35%), and high presence (>35%). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were 30-day and 90-day mortality and healthy days at home (HDAH), a composite outcome reflecting mortality and time spent in facility-based health care settings. Results: There were 22 509 824 total hospitalizations, with 18 865 229 (83.8%) at non-AMCs. The median (IQR) age of patients was 78 (71-85) years, and 12 568 230 hospitalizations (55.8%) were among women. Of 306 hospital referral regions, 191 (62.4%) had no AMCs, 61 (19.9%) had 1 AMC, and 55 (17.6%) had 2 or more AMCs. Markets characteristics differed significantly by category of AMC presence, including mean population, median income, proportion of White residents, and physicians per population. Compared with markets with no AMC presence, receiving care at a non-AMC in a market with greater AMC presence was associated with lower 30-day mortality (9.5% vs 10.1%; absolute difference, -0.7%; 95% CI, -1.0% to -0.4%; P < .001) and 90-day mortality (16.1% vs 16.9%; absolute difference, -0.8%; 95% CI, -1.2% to -0.4%; P < .001) and more HDAH at 30 days (16.49 vs 16.12 HDAH; absolute difference, 0.38 HDAH; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.64 HDAH; P = .005) and 90 days (61.08 vs 59.83 HDAH; absolute difference, 1.25 HDAH; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.92 HDAH; P < .001), after adjustment. There was no association between market-level AMC presence and mortality for patients treated at AMCs themselves. Conclusions and Relevance: AMCs may have spillover effects on outcomes for patients treated at non-AMCs, suggesting that they have a broader impact than is traditionally recognized. These associations are greatest in markets with the highest AMC presence and persist to 90 days.

Assessment of Strategies Used in US Hospitals to Address Social Needs During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This survey study uses 2020 American Hospital Association data to assess strategies of US hospitals serving vulnerable populations in addressing social needs during the COVID-19 pandemic.