Out-of-Pocket Prescription Drug Savings for Medicare Beneficiaries with Asthma and COPD Under the Inflation Reduction Act.

BACKGROUND: High and rising prescription drug costs for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) contribute to medication nonadherence and poor clinical outcomes. The recently enacted Inflation Reduction Act includes provisions that will cap out-of-pocket prescription drug spending at $2,000 per year and expand low-income subsidies. However, little is known about how these provisions will impact out-of-pocket drug spending for Medicare beneficiaries with asthma and COPD. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact of the Inflation Reduction Act's out-of-pocket spending cap and expansion of low-income subsidies on Medicare beneficiaries with obstructive lung disease. DESIGN: We calculated the number of Medicare beneficiaries ≥ 65 years with asthma and/or COPD and out-of-pocket prescription drug spending > $2,000/year, and then estimated their median annual out-of-pocket savings under the Inflation Reduction Act's spending cap. We then estimated the number of beneficiaries with incomes > 135% and ≤ 150% of the federal poverty level who would become newly eligible for low-income subsidies under this policy. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents to the 2016-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). MAIN MEASURES: Annual out-of-pocket prescription drug spending. KEY RESULTS: An annual estimated 5.2 million Medicare beneficiaries had asthma and/or COPD. Among them, 360,160 (SE ± 38,021) experienced out-of-pocket drug spending > $2,000/year, with median out-of-pocket costs of $3,003/year (IQR $2,360-$3,941). Therefore, median savings under the Inflation Reduction Act's spending cap would be $1,003/year (IQR $360-$1,941), including $738/year and $1,137/year for beneficiaries with asthma and COPD, respectively. Total annual estimated savings would be $504 million (SE ± $42 M). In addition, 232,155 (SE ± 4,624) beneficiaries would newly qualify for low-income subsidies, which will further reduce prescription drug costs. CONCLUSIONS: The Inflation Reduction Act will have major implications on out-of-pocket prescription drug spending for Medicare beneficiaries with obstructive lung disease resulting in half-a-billion dollars in total out-of-pocket savings per year, which could ultimately have implications on medication adherence and clinical outcomes.

Readmissions Among Patients With Surgically Managed Drug Use Associated-Infective Endocarditis Before and After the Implementation of an Addiction Consult Team: A Retrospective, Observational Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients who undergo cardiac surgery for drug use-associated infective endocarditis (DUA-IE) have high rates of readmissions for recurrent endocarditis, substance use disorder (SUD), and septicemia. Our primary objective was to assess whether exposure to an addiction consult team (ACT) was associated with reduced readmissions in this population. METHODS: This single-center retrospective analysis identified patients who underwent cardiac surgery for DUA-IE between 1/2012-9/2022 using the Society for Thoracic Surgeons database, and compared the cumulative incidence of readmissions at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months among those cared for before and after the implementation of an ACT in 9/2017, accounting for competing risk of mortality and adjusted for measured confounders using inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: The 58 patients (35 pre-ACT and 23 post-ACT) were young (36.4 +/- 7.7 years) and predominantly White (53.4%) and male (70.7%). The post-ACT cohort had a significantly lower risk of readmission at 1 month (adjusted risk difference [RD] -23.8% [95% CI -94.4%, -8.3%], P = 0.005) and 3 months (RD -34.1% [-55.1%, -13.1%], P = 0.005), but not at 6 or 12 months. In a sensitivity analysis, the post-ACT cohort also had significantly lower risk of readmissions for SUD complications at 3 months. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: ACT exposure was associated with a lower risk of short-term readmission among patients with surgically managed DUA-IE, possibly due to a reduction in SUD-related complications. Additional studies are needed to replicate these findings and to identify ways to sustain the potential benefits of ACTs over the longer term.

Community Benefit and Tax-Exemption Levels at Non-Profit Hospitals Across U.S. States.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between state policies and sociodemographic characteristics and state mean fair share spending at non-profit hospitals. Fair share spending is a hospital's charity care and community investment less the estimated value of their tax-exempt status. BACKGROUND: Hospitals with non-profit status in the United States are exempt from paying taxes. In return, they are expected to provide community benefits by subsidizing medical care for those who cannot pay and investing in the health and social needs of their community. METHODS: We used a multivariable linear regression model to determine the association of state-level sociodemographics and policies with state-level mean fair share spending in 2019. Fair share spending data was obtained from the Lown Institute. RESULTS: We found no association between the percentage of people living in poverty, in rural areas, or U.S. region and fair share spending. Similarly, there was no association found for state minimum community benefit and reporting requirements. The state percentage of racial/ethnic minorities was associated with higher mean fair share spending [+$1.48 million for every 10% increase (95% CI: 0.01 to 2.96 million)]. Medicaid expansion status was associated with a 6.9-million-dollar decrease (95% CI: -10.4 to -3.3 million). CONCLUSIONS: State-level community benefit policies have been ineffective at raising community benefit spending to levels comparable to the value of non-profit hospital tax-exempt status.

From Policy to Practice: Assessing the State Innovation Models Initiative's Early Success in Incorporating Social Determinants of Health in ASCVD Hospitalizations in the United States.

The study examines effects of the CMS State Innovation Models(SIM) on capturing social risk factors in adults hospitalized with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD). Using a difference-in-differences(DID) approach with propensity score weights, the study compared documentation of secondary diagnosis of SDOH/social factors using ICD-9 V codes ("SDOH codes") in adults hospitalized with ASCVD as a primary diagnosis (N= 1,485,354). Data were gathered from January 1, 2010, to September 30, 2015, covering the period before and after the SIM implementation in October 2013. From January 2010 to September 2015, SDOH codes were infrequently utilized among adults with ASCVD(0.55%, 95% CI: 0.43%-0.67%). SDOH codes with ASCVD increased from pre- to post-period in SIM states(0.56% to 0.93%) and comparison states (0.46% to 0.56%). SIM implementation was associated with greater improvement in SDOH codes utilization (adjusted OR 1.30, 95%CI: 1.18-1.43) during ASCVD hospitalizations. The odds of SDOH codes utilization were 86% higher in ED admissions(AOR 1.86, 95%CI: 1.76-1.97) than in routine admissions with ASCVD. Findings were similar when limiting population to older adults(>=65 years) enrolled in Medicare(AOR 1.50, 95%CI 1.31-1.71), whereas not significant for Medicaid beneficiaries. The study points to challenges for healthcare providers in documenting SDOH in adults with ASCVD.

Factors Underlying Reduced Hospitalizations for Myocardial Infarction During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The incidence of hospital encounters for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) decreased sharply early in the COVID-19 pandemic and has not returned to prepandemic levels. There has been an ongoing debate about what mechanism may underlie this decline, including patients avoiding the hospital for treatment, excess mortality from COVID-19 among patients who would otherwise have had an AMI, a reduction in the incidence or severity of AMIs due to pandemic-related changes in behavior, or a preexisting temporal trend of lower AMI incidence. Objective: To describe drivers of changing incidence in AMI hospital encounters during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used traditional Medicare claims from all patients enrolled in traditional Medicare from January 2016 to June 2023 (total of 2.85 billion patient-months) to calculate the rate of AMI hospital encounters (emergency department visits, observation stays, or inpatient admissions) per capita at all short-term acute care and critical access hospitals in the United States overall and by patient characteristics. Observed rates were compared with expected rates that accounted for shifts in population characteristics and the prepandemic temporal trend (as estimated over 2016-2019). Data were analyzed in November 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospital encounters for AMI. Results: On average, the study sample included 31 623 928 patients each month from January 2016 through June 2023, for a total of 2 846 153 487 patient-months during the 90-month study period. In June 2023, there were 0.044 AMI hospital encounters per 100 patients, which was 20% lower than in June 2019 (0.055 encounters per 100 patients). Early in the pandemic, AMI rates moved inversely with COVID-19 death rates and tracked patterns seen for other painful acute conditions, such as nephrolithiasis, suggesting these changes were associated with care avoidance. Changes in patient characteristics driven by excess deaths during the pandemic explained little of the decline. Later in the pandemic, the decline may be explained by the long-standing downward trend in AMI incidence; by April 2022, the observed rate of encounters matched the expected rate that accounted for this trend. During the full pandemic period, from March 2020 to June 2023, there were an estimated 5% (95% prediction interval, 1%-9%) fewer AMI hospital encounters than expected. Conclusions and Relevance: The early reduction in AMI encounters was likely driven by care avoidance, while ongoing reductions through June 2023 likely reflect long-standing temporal trends. During the pandemic, there were 5% fewer AMI encounters than expected.

Use Of High- And Low-Value Health Care Among US Adults, By Income, 2010-19.

Health care payment reforms in the US have aimed to encourage the use of high-value care while discouraging the use of low-value care. However, little is known about whether the use of high- and low-value care differs by income level. Using data from the 2010-19 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we examined the use of specified types of high- and low-value care by income level. We found that high-income adults were significantly more likely than low-income adults to use nearly all types of high-value care. Findings were consistent across age categories, although differences by income level in the use of high-value care were smaller among the elderly. Our analysis of differences in the use of low-value care had mixed results. Among nonelderly adults, significant differences between those with high and low incomes were found for five of nine low-value services, and among elderly adults, significant differences by income level were found for three of twelve low-value services. Understanding the mechanisms underlying these disparities is crucial to developing effective policies and interventions to ensure equitable access to high-value care and discourage low-value services for all patients, regardless of income.

Projected Changes in Statin and Antihypertensive Therapy Eligibility With the AHA PREVENT Cardiovascular Risk Equations.

Importance: Since 2013, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and American Heart Association (AHA) have recommended the pooled cohort equations (PCEs) for estimating the 10-year risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). An AHA scientific advisory group recently developed the Predicting Risk of cardiovascular disease EVENTs (PREVENT) equations, which incorporated kidney measures, removed race as an input, and improved calibration in contemporary populations. PREVENT is known to produce ASCVD risk predictions that are lower than those produced by the PCEs, but the potential clinical implications have not been quantified. Objective: To estimate the number of US adults who would experience changes in risk categorization, treatment eligibility, or clinical outcomes when applying PREVENT equations to existing ACC and AHA guidelines. Design, Setting, and Participants: Nationally representative cross-sectional sample of 7765 US adults aged 30 to 79 years who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys of 2011 to March 2020, which had response rates ranging from 47% to 70%. Main Outcomes and Measures: Differences in predicted 10-year ASCVD risk, ACC and AHA risk categorization, eligibility for statin or antihypertensive therapy, and projected occurrences of myocardial infarction or stroke. Results: In a nationally representative sample of 7765 US adults aged 30 to 79 years (median age, 53 years; 51.3% women), it was estimated that using PREVENT equations would reclassify approximately half of US adults to lower ACC and AHA risk categories (53.0% [95% CI, 51.2%-54.8%]) and very few US adults to higher risk categories (0.41% [95% CI, 0.25%-0.62%]). The number of US adults receiving or recommended for preventive treatment would decrease by an estimated 14.3 million (95% CI, 12.6 million-15.9 million) for statin therapy and 2.62 million (95% CI, 2.02 million-3.21 million) for antihypertensive therapy. The study estimated that, over 10 years, these decreases in treatment eligibility could result in 107 000 additional occurrences of myocardial infarction or stroke. Eligibility changes would affect twice as many men as women and a greater proportion of Black adults than White adults. Conclusion and Relevance: By assigning lower ASCVD risk predictions, application of the PREVENT equations to existing treatment thresholds could reduce eligibility for statin and antihypertensive therapy among 15.8 million US adults.

Changes in Health Care and Prescription Medication Affordability in the US During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: In the US, the COVID-19 pandemic led to a significant rise in unemployment and economic loss that disproportionately impacted low-income individuals. It is unknown how health care and prescription medication affordability changed among low-income adults during the COVID-19 pandemic overall and compared with their higher-income counterparts. Objective: To evaluate changes in health care affordability and prescription medication affordability during the COVID-19 pandemic (2021 and 2022) compared with pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels (2019) and whether income-based inequities changed. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional study included adults 18 years and older participating in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) in 2019, 2021, and 2022. Low-income adults were defined as having a household income of 200% or less of the federal poverty level (FPL); middle-income adults, 201% to 400% of the FPL; and high-income adults, more than 400% of the FPL. Data were analyzed from June to November 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Measures of health care affordability and prescription medication affordability. Results: The study population included 89 130 US adults. Among the weighted population, 51.6% (95% CI, 51.2-52.0) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 48.0 (0.12) years. Compared with prepandemic levels, during the COVID-19 pandemic, low-income adults were less likely to delay medical care (2022: 11.2%; 95% CI, 10.3-12.1; 2019: 15.4%; 95% CI, 14.3-16.4; adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66-0.81) or avoid care (2022: 10.7%; 95% CI, 9.7-11.6; 2019: 14.9%; 95% CI, 13.8-15.9; aRR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.64-0.80) due to cost, while high-income adults experienced no change, resulting in a significant improvement in income-based disparities. Low-income and high-income adults were less likely to experience problems paying medical bills but experienced no change in worrying about medical bills during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with prepandemic levels. Across measures of prescription medication affordability, low-income adults were less likely to delay medications (2022: 9.4%; 95% CI, 8.4-10.4; 2019: 12.7%; 95% CI, 11.6-13.9; aRR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65-0.84), not fill medications (2022: 8.9%; 95% CI, 8.1-9.8; 2019: 12.0%; 95% CI, 11.1-12.9; aRR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.66-0.83), skip medications (2022: 6.7%; 95% CI, 5.9-7.6; 2019: 10.1%; 95% CI, 9.1-11.1; aRR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77), or take less medications (2022: 7.3%; 95% CI, 6.4-8.1; 2019: 11.2%; 95% CI, 10.%-12.2; aRR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56-0.74) due to costs, and these patterns were largely similar among high-income adults. Improvements in measures of health care and prescription medication affordability persisted even after accounting for changes in health insurance coverage and health care use. These patterns were similar when comparing measures of affordability in 2021 with 2019. Conclusions and Relevance: Health care affordability improved for low-income adults during the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in a narrowing of income-based disparities, while prescription medication affordability improved for all income groups. These findings suggest that the recent unwinding of COVID-19 pandemic-related safety-net policies may worsen health care affordability and widen existing income-based inequities.

Home Health Care Use and Outcomes After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Home health care (HHC) has been increasingly used to improve care transitions and avoid poor outcomes, but there is limited data on its use and efficacy following coronary artery bypass grafting. The purpose of this study was to describe HHC use and its association with outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 100% of Medicare fee-for-service files identified 77 331 beneficiaries undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting and discharged to home between July 2016 and December 2018. The primary exposure of HHC use was defined as the presence of paid HHC claims within 30 days of discharge. Hierarchical logistic regression identified predictors of HHC use and the percentage of variation in HHC use attributed to the hospital. Propensity-matched logistic regression compared mortality, readmissions, emergency department visits, and cardiac rehabilitation enrollment at 30 and 90 days after discharge between HHC users and nonusers. RESULTS: A total of 26 751 (34.6%) of beneficiaries used HHC within 30 days of discharge, which was more common among beneficiaries who were older (72.9 versus 72.5 years), male (79.4% versus 77.4%), White (90.2% versus 89.2%), and not Medicare-Medicaid dual eligible (6.7% versus 8.8%). The median hospital-level rate of HHC use was 31.0% (interquartile range, 13.7%-54.5%) and ranged from 0% to 94.2%. Nearly 30% of the interhospital variation in HHC use was attributed to the discharging hospital (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.296 [95% CI, 0.275-0.318]). Compared with non-HHC users, those using HHC were less likely to have a readmission or emergency department visit, were more likely to enroll in cardiac rehabilitation, and had modestly higher mortality within 30 or 90 days of discharge. CONCLUSIONS: A third of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting used HHC within 30 days of discharge, with wide interhospital variation in use and mixed associations with clinical outcomes and health care utilization.

Financial Burden of Health Care in the Privately Insured US Population.

This cross-sectional study examines how changes in privately insured families' contributions to insurance premiums and out-of-pocket spending have affected the financial burden of health care in recent decades.

Outcomes of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Among Older Adults in the United States: A Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is increasingly recommended as first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation. Recent data suggest growing PVI volumes but rising complication rates, although comprehensive real-world outcomes including both inpatient and outpatient encounters remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient characteristics, population rates, and 30-day outcomes of PVI in a nationwide sample of U.S. adults aged >65 years. METHODS: First-time PVIs were identified among U.S. Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries using Current Procedural Terminology procedural codes. Comorbidities were ascertained using International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision diagnosis codes associated with each procedural claim. Outcomes included periprocedural complications, all-cause hospitalizations, and mortality at 30 days. RESULTS: From January 2017 through December 2021, a total of 227,133 patients underwent PVI (mean age 72.5 years, 42% women, 92.7% White) with an increasing comorbidity burden over time. PVI volume increased from 83.8 (2017) to 111.6 per 100,000 patient-years (2021), which was driven by outpatient procedures (87.8% of all PVIs). Concurrently, there was a significant decrease in complication rates (3.9% in 2017 vs 3.1% in 2021; P < 0.001) and hospitalizations (8.8% vs 7.0%; P < 0.001), with no significant change in mortality (0.4%; P = 0.08). The most common periprocedural complications were bleeding (1.8%), pericardial effusion (1.4%), and vascular access damage (0.8%). CONCLUSIONS: The use of PVI has steadily increased among older patients in contemporary U.S. clinical practice; yet, cumulative complication and hospitalization rates at 30 days have decreased over time, with stably low rates of short-term mortality despite rising comorbidity burden among treated patients. These data may reassure patients and providers on the safety of PVI as an increasingly common first-line procedure for atrial fibrillation.

Indirect impact of the war in Ukraine on primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in Poland.

INTRODUCTION: The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 resulted in displacement of approximately 12.5 million refugees to adjacent countries, including Poland, which may have strained health care service delivery. OBJECTIVES: Using the ST­segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) data, we aimed to evaluate whether the Russian invasion of Ukraine has indirectly impacted delivery of acute cardiovascular care in Poland. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed all adult patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) for STEMI across Poland between February 25, 2017 and May 24, 2022. The investigated health care centers were allocated to regions below and over 100 km from the Polish-Ukrainian border. Mixed­effect generalized linear regression models with random effects per hospital were used to explore the associations between the war in Ukraine and several parameters, and whether these associations differed across the regions below and over 100 km from the border. RESULTS: A total of 90 115 procedures were included in the analysis. The average number of procedures per month was similar to the predicted volume for centers over 100 km from the border, while it was higher than expected (by an estimated median of 15 [interquartile range, 11-19]) for the region below 100 km from the border. There was no difference in adjusted fatality rate or quality of care outcomes for pre- and during­war time in both regions, with no evidence of a difference­in­difference across the regions. CONCLUSIONS: Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there was only a modest and temporary increase in the number of primary PCIs, predominantly in the centers situated within 100 km of the Polish-Ukrainian border, although no significant impact on in­hospital fatality rate was found.

Community Socioeconomic Status, Acute Cardiovascular Hospitalizations, and Mortality in Medicare, 2003 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomically disadvantaged communities in the United States disproportionately experience poor cardiovascular outcomes. Little is known about how hospitalizations and mortality for acute cardiovascular conditions have changed among Medicare beneficiaries in socioeconomically disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged communities over the past 2 decades. METHODS: Medicare files were linked with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's social vulnerability index to examine age-sex standardized hospitalizations for myocardial infarction, heart failure, ischemic stroke, and pulmonary embolism among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries ≥65 years of age residing in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities (highest social vulnerability index quintile nationally) and nondisadvantaged communities (all other quintiles) from 2003 to 2019, as well as risk-adjusted 30-day mortality among hospitalized beneficiaries. RESULTS: A total of 10 942 483 Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years of age were hospitalized for myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, or pulmonary embolism (mean age, 79.2 [SD, 8.7] years; 53.9% female). Although age-sex standardized myocardial infarction hospitalizations declined in socioeconomically disadvantaged (990-650 per 100 000) and nondisadvantaged communities (950-570 per 100 000) from 2003 to 2019, the gap in hospitalizations between these groups significantly widened (adjusted odds ratio 2003, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.02-1.04]; adjusted odds ratio 2019, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.13-1.16]). There was a similar decline in hospitalizations for heart failure in socioeconomically disadvantaged (2063-1559 per 100 000) and nondisadvantaged communities (1767-1385 per 100 000), as well as for ischemic stroke, but the relative gap did not change for both conditions. In contrast, pulmonary embolism hospitalizations increased in both disadvantaged (146-184 per 100 000) and nondisadvantaged communities (153-184 per 100 000). By 2019, risk-adjusted 30-day mortality was similar between hospitalized beneficiaries from socioeconomically disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged communities for myocardial infarction, heart failure, and ischemic stroke but was higher for pulmonary embolism (odds ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 1.01-1.20]). CONCLUSIONS: Over the past 2 decades, hospitalizations for most acute cardiovascular conditions decreased in both socioeconomically disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged communities, although significant disparities remain, while 30-day mortality is now similar across most conditions.

Health Equity Adjustment and Hospital Performance in the Medicare Value-Based Purchasing Program.

Importance: Medicare's Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) program will provide a health equity adjustment (HEA) to hospitals that have greater proportions of patients dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid and that offer high-quality care beginning in fiscal year 2026. However, which hospitals will benefit most from this policy change and to what extent are unknown. Objective: To estimate potential changes in hospital performance after HEA and examine hospital patient mix, structural, and geographic characteristics associated with receipt of increased payments. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed all 2676 hospitals participating in the HVBP program in fiscal year 2021. Publicly available data on program performance and hospital characteristics were linked to Medicare claims data on all inpatient stays for dual-eligible beneficiaries at each hospital to calculate HEA points and HVBP payment adjustments. Exposures: Hospital Value-Based Purchasing program HEA. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reclassification of HVBP bonus or penalty status and changes in payment adjustments across hospital characteristics. Results: Of 2676 hospitals participating in the HVBP program in fiscal year 2021, 1470 (54.9%) received bonuses and 1206 (45.1%) received penalties. After HEA, 102 hospitals (6.9%) were reclassified from bonus to penalty status, whereas 119 (9.9%) were reclassified from penalty to bonus status. At the hospital level, mean (SD) HVBP payment adjustments decreased by $4534 ($90 033) after HEA, ranging from a maximum reduction of $1 014 276 to a maximum increase of $1 523 765. At the aggregate level, net-positive changes in payment adjustments were largest among safety net hospitals ($28 971 708) and those caring for a higher proportion of Black patients ($15 468 445). The likelihood of experiencing increases in payment adjustments was significantly higher among safety net compared with non-safety net hospitals (574 of 683 [84.0%] vs 709 of 1993 [35.6%]; adjusted rate ratio [ARR], 2.04 [95% CI, 1.89-2.20]) and high-proportion Black hospitals compared with non-high-proportion Black hospitals (396 of 523 [75.7%] vs 887 of 2153 [41.2%]; ARR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.29-1.51]). Rural hospitals (374 of 612 [61.1%] vs 909 of 2064 [44.0%]; ARR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.30-1.58]), as well as those located in the South (598 of 1040 [57.5%] vs 192 of 439 [43.7%]; ARR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.10-1.42]) and in Medicaid expansion states (801 of 1651 [48.5%] vs 482 of 1025 [47.0%]; ARR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.06-1.28]), were also more likely to experience increased payment adjustments after HEA compared with their urban, Northeastern, and Medicaid nonexpansion state counterparts, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Medicare's implementation of HEA in the HVBP program will significantly reclassify hospital performance and redistribute program payments, with safety net and high-proportion Black hospitals benefiting most from this policy change. These findings suggest that HEA is an important strategy to ensure that value-based payment programs are more equitable.