Rx -to- OTC switch increased access and lowered cost of topical adapalene.

Topical adapalene gel is an effective and well tolerated acne treatment that transitioned from prescription to over-the-counter (OTC) availability in 2016. Historically, prescription to OTC transitions have lowered costs to patients and payers and increased access to medications. This study used sales and prescriber data to assess access to topical retinoid therapies and their costs in the pre- and post- Rx-to-OTC transition. We demonstrate that the prescription to OTC transition of adapalene gel increased access to this medication, while lowering costs to patients and payers, including Medicare patients. These results provide a necessary call to action for future OTC shifts with other high safety profile, well-tolerated medications in ultimate efforts and hopes of cost savings for patients, insurers, and Medicare within our healthcare industry.

Physician Group Practices Accrued Large Bonuses Under Medicare's Bundled Payment Model, 2018-20.

The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced Model (BPCI-A), a voluntary Alternative Payment Model for Medicare, incentivizes hospitals and physician group practices to reduce spending for patient care episodes below preset target prices. The experience of physician groups in BPCI-A is not well understood. We found that physician groups earned $421 million in incentive payments during BPCI-A's first four performance periods (2018-20). Target prices were positively associated with bonuses, with a mean reconciliation payment of $139 per episode in the lowest decile of target prices and $2,775 in the highest decile. In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, mean bonuses increased from $815 per episode to $2,736 per episode. These findings suggest that further policy changes, such as improving target price accuracy and refining participation rules, will be important as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services continues to expand BPCI-A and develop other bundled payment models.

Is Electronic Information Exchange Associated With Lower 30-Day Readmission Charges Among Medicare Beneficiaries?

OBJECTIVE: Fragmented readmissions, when admission and readmission occur at different hospitals, are associated with increased charges compared with nonfragmented readmissions. We assessed if hospital participation in health information exchange (HIE) was associated with differences in total charges in fragmented readmissions. DATA SOURCE: Medicare Fee-for-Service Data, 2018. STUDY DESIGN: We used generalized linear models with hospital referral region and readmission month fixed effects to assess relationships between information sharing (same HIE, different HIEs, and no HIE available) and total charges of 30-day readmissions among fragmented readmissions; analyses were adjusted for patient-level clinical/demographic characteristics and hospital-level characteristics. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: We included beneficiaries with a hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, syncope, urinary tract infection, dehydration, or behavioral issues with a 30-day readmission for any reason. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In all, 279,729 admission-readmission pairs were included, 27% of which were fragmented (n=75,438); average charges of fragmented readmissions were $64,897-$71,606. Compared with fragmented readmissions where no HIE was available, the average marginal effects of same-HIE and different-HIE admission-readmission pairs were -$2329.55 (95% CI: -7333.73, 2674.62) and -$3905.20 (95% CI: -7592.85, -307.54), respectively. While the average marginal effects of different-HIE pairs were lower than those for no-HIE fragmented readmissions, the average marginal effects of same-HIE and different-HIE pairs were not significantly different from each other. CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistical differences in charges between fragmented readmissions to hospitals that share an HIE or that do not share an HIE compared with hospitals with no HIE available.

Medicare Coverage and Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs for Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic Medications.

This cross-sectional study evaluates the association between Medicare coverage and patient out-of-pocket costs for cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic medications.

Retrospective study investigating naloxone prescribing and cost in US Medicaid and Medicare patients.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdoses in the USA have increased to unprecedented levels. Administration of the opioid antagonist naloxone can prevent overdoses. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to reveal the pharmacoepidemiologic patterns in naloxone prescribing to Medicaid patients from 2018 to 2021 as well as Medicare in 2019. DESIGN: Observational pharmacoepidemiologic study SETTING: US Medicare and Medicaid naloxone claims INTERVENTION: The Medicaid State Drug Utilisation Data File was utilised to extract information on the number of prescriptions and the amount prescribed of naloxone at a national and state level. The Medicare Provider Utilisation and Payment was also utilised to analyse prescription data from 2019. OUTCOME MEASURES: States with naloxone prescription rates that were outliers of quartile analysis were noted. RESULTS: The number of generic naloxone prescriptions per 100 000 Medicaid enrollees decreased by 5.3%, whereas brand naloxone prescriptions increased by 245.1% from 2018 to 2021. There was a 33.1-fold difference in prescriptions between the highest (New Mexico=1809.5) and lowest (South Dakota=54.6) states in 2019. Medicare saw a 30.4-fold difference in prescriptions between the highest (New Mexico) and lowest states (also South Dakota) after correcting per 100 000 enrollees. CONCLUSIONS: This pronounced increase in the number of naloxone prescriptions to Medicaid patients from 2018 to 2021 indicates a national response to this widespread public health emergency. Further research into the origins of the pronounced state-level disparities is warranted.

Projections of Single-level and Multilevel Spinal Instrumentation Procedure Volume and Associated Costs for Medicare Patients to 2050.

BACKGROUND: Instrumented spinal fusions can be used in the treatment of vertebral fractures, spinal instability, and scoliosis or kyphosis. Construct-level selection has notable implications on postoperative recovery, alignment, and mobility. This study sought to project future trends in the implementation rates and associated costs of single-level versus multilevel instrumentation procedures in US Medicare patients aged older than 65 years in the United States. METHODS: Data were acquired from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2019. Procedure costs and counts were abstracted using Current Procedural Terminology codes to identify spinal level involvement. The Prophet machine learning algorithm was used, using a Bayesian Inference framework, to generate point forecasts for 2020 to 2050 and 95% forecast intervals (FIs). Sensitivity analyses were done by comparing projections from linear, log-linear, Poisson and negative-binomial, and autoregressive integrated moving average models. Costs were adjusted for inflation using the 2019 US Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Price Index. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2019, the annual spinal instrumentation volume increased by 776% (from 7,342 to 64,350 cases) for single level, by 329% (from 20,319 to 87,253 cases) for two-four levels, by 1049% (from 1,218 to 14,000 cases) for five-seven levels, and by 739% (from 193 to 1,620 cases) for eight-twelve levels (P < 0.0001). The inflation-adjusted reimbursement for single-level instrumentation procedures decreased 45.6% from $1,148.15 to $788.62 between 2000 and 2019, which is markedly lower than for other prevalent orthopaedic procedures: total shoulder arthroplasty (-23.1%), total hip arthroplasty (-39.2%), and total knee arthroplasty (-42.4%). By 2050, the number of single-level spinal instrumentation procedures performed yearly is projected to be 124,061 (95% FI, 87,027 to 142,907), with associated costs of $93,900,672 (95% FI, $80,281,788 to $108,220,932). CONCLUSIONS: The number of single-level instrumentation procedures is projected to double by 2050, while the number of two-four level procedures will double by 2040. These projections offer a measurable basis for resource allocation and procedural distribution.

Trends of Medicare Reimbursement Rates for Gender-Affirming Surgery Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Awareness of Medicare reimbursement is important for gender-affirming surgeons who treat transgender patients with Medicare. In 2014, Medicare began to provide coverage for medically necessary transition-related surgery. The purpose of this study was to analyze trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for gender-affirming surgery procedures from 2014 to 2022. METHODS: The Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool provided by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was used, and the Current Procedural Terminology codes for 43 gender-affirming surgery services were obtained. Monetary units, conversion factors, relative value units (RVUs) for work, facility, and malpractice costs for 30 transmasculine and 13 transfeminine procedures were analyzed. Descriptive statistics were performed to account for inflation and to determine the relative differences between 2014 and 2022. RESULTS: For all gender-affirming surgery procedures covered by Medicare, the average relative difference of monetary units decreased by 2.99% between 2014 and 2022. On average, there was a 3.97% decrease of work-based RVU charges for transmasculine procedures and a 1.73% decrease of work-based RVU charges for transfeminine procedures. After adjusting for inflation, the average relative difference of monetary units for all gender-affirming surgery procedures decreased by 23.42% between 2014 and 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Reimbursement rates for gender-affirming surgery procedures covered under Medicare have decreased over the observed period, and trends in reimbursement rates have not kept up with consumer price index inflation. Gender-affirming surgeons should be conscious of these changes in reimbursement rates and advocate for fairer compensation to promote medical care among an underserved population.

Unveiling the Hidden Discrepancies Between Medicare Physician Reimbursement Rates and Inflation Across Different Surgical Specialties.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the trends of Medicare physician reimbursement from 2011 to 2021 and compare the rates across different surgical specialties. BACKGROUND: Knowledge of Medicare is essential because of its significant contribution in physician reimbursements. Previous studies across surgical specialties have demonstrated that Medicare, despite keeping up with inflation in some areas, has remained flat when accounting for physician reimbursement. STUDY DESIGN: The Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary data for the calendar year 2021 were queried to extract the top 50% of Current Procedural Terminology codes based on case volume. The Physician Fee Schedule look-up tool was accessed, and the physician reimbursement fee was abstracted. Weighted mean reimbursement was adjusted for inflation. Growth rate and compound annual growth rate were calculated. Projection of future inflation and reimbursement rates were also calculated using the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. RESULTS: After adjusting for inflation, the weighted mean reimbursement across surgical specialties decreased by -22.5%. The largest reimbursement decrease was within the field of general surgery (-33.3%), followed by otolaryngology (-31.5%), vascular surgery (-23.3%), and plastic surgery (-22.8%). There was a significant decrease in median case volume across all specialties between 2011 and 2021 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that, when adjusted for inflation, over the study period, there has been a consistent decrease in reimbursement for all specialties analyzed. Awareness of the current downward trends in Medicare physician reimbursement should be a priority for all surgeons, as means of advocating for compensation and to maintain surgical care feasible and accessible to all patients.

Plan to alter access to health data draws ire.

Universities could no longer store Medicare and Medicaid data, and costs would rise.

Costs and health care resource utilization among Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common type of leukemia. However, published studies of CLL have either only focused on costs among individuals diagnosed with CLL without a non-CLL comparator group or focused on costs associated with specific CLL treatments. An examination of utilization and costs across different care settings provides a holistic view of utilization associated with CLL. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the health care costs and resource utilization types attributable to CLL among Medicare beneficiaries and identify predictors associated with each of the economic outcomes among beneficiaries diagnosed with CLL. METHODS: This retrospective study used a random 20% sample of the Medicare Chronic Conditions Data Warehouse (CCW) database covering the 2017-2019 period. The study population consisted of individuals with and without CLL. The CLL cohort and non-CLL cohort were matched using a 1:5 hard match based on baseline categorical variables. We characterized economic outcomes over 360 days across cost categories and places of services. We estimated average marginal effects using multivariable generalized linear regression models of total costs and across type of services. Total cost was compared between CLL and non-CLL cohorts using the matched sample. We used generalized linear models appropriate for the count or binary outcome to identify factors associated with various categories of health care resource utilization, such as inpatient admissions, emergency department (ED) visits, and oncologist/hematologist visits. RESULTS: A total of 2,736 beneficiaries in the CLL cohort and 13,571 beneficiaries in the non-CLL matched cohort were identified. Compared with the non-CLL cohort, the annual cost for the CLL cohort was higher (CLL vs non-CLL, mean [SD]: $22,781 [$37,592] vs $13,901 [$24,725]), mainly driven by health care provider costs ($6,535 vs $3,915) and Part D prescription drug costs ($5,916 vs $2,556). The main categories of health care resource utilization were physician evaluation/management visits, oncologist/hematologist visits, and laboratory services. Compared with beneficiaries aged 65-74 years, beneficiaries aged 85 years or older had lower use and cost in maintenance services (ie, oncologist visits, hospital outpatient costs, and prescription drug cost) but higher use and cost in acute services (ie, ED). Compared with residency in a metropolitan area, living in a nonmetropolitan area was associated with fewer physician visits but higher ED visits and hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: The cooccurrence of lower utilization of routine care services, along with higher utilization of acute care services among some individuals, has implications for patient burden and warrants further study.

Cost-effectiveness of medication therapy management among Medicare population and across racial/ethnic groups.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate medication utilization among older adults is a pressing concern in the United States, owing to its high prevalence and the consequential detrimental impact it engenders. The adverse effects stemming from the inappropriate use of medication may be unequally borne by racial/ethnic minority populations, calling for greater efforts towards promoting equity in healthcare. The study objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of Medication Therapy Management (MTM) services among Medicare beneficiaries and across racial/ethnic groups. METHODS: Medicare administrative data from 2016 to 2017 linked to Area Health Resources Files were used to analyze Medicare fee-for-service patients aged 65 or above with continuous Parts A/B/D coverage. The intervention group included new MTM enrollees in 2017; the control group referred to patients who met the general MTM eligible criteria but did not enroll in 2016 or 2017. The 2 groups were matched using a propensity score method. Effectiveness was evaluated as the proportion of appropriate medication utilization based on performance measures developed by the Pharmacy Quality Alliance. Costs were computed as total healthcare costs from Medicare perspective. A multivariable net benefit regressions with a classic linear model and Bayesian analysis were utilized. Net benefit was calculated based on willingness-to-pay thresholds at various multiples of the gross domestic product in 2017. Three-way interaction terms among dummy variables for MTM enrollment, 2017, and racial/ethnic minority groups were incorporated in a difference-in-differences study design. RESULTS: After adjusting for patient characteristics, the findings indicate that MTM receipt was associated with incremental net benefit among each race and ethnicity. For instance, the net benefit of MTM among the non-Hispanic White patients was $2498 (95% confidence interval = $1609, $3386) at a willingness-to-pay value of $59,908. The study found no significant difference in net benefits for MTM services between minority and White patients. CONCLUSION: The study provides evidence that MTM is a cost-effective tool for managing medication utilization among the Medicare population. However, MTM may not be cost-effective in reducing racial/ethnic disparities in medication utilization in the short term. Further research is needed to understand the long-term cost-effectiveness of MTM on racial/ethnic disparities.

Traditional Medicare supplemental insurance and the rise of Medicare Advantage.

OBJECTIVES: Most Medicare beneficiaries obtain supplemental insurance or enroll in Medicare Advantage (MA) to protect against potentially high cost sharing in traditional Medicare (TM). We examined changes in Medicare supplemental insurance coverage in the context of MA growth. STUDY DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional analysis of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey from 2005 to 2019. METHODS: We determined whether Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older were enrolled in MA (without Medicaid), TM without supplemental coverage, TM with employer-sponsored supplemental coverage, TM with Medigap, or Medicaid (in TM or MA). RESULTS: From 2005 to 2019, beneficiaries with TM and supplemental insurance provided by their former (or current) employer declined by approximately half (31.8% to 15.5%) while the share in MA (without Medicaid) more than doubled (13.4% to 35.1%). The decline in supplemental employer-sponsored insurance use was greater for White and for higher-income beneficiaries. Over the same period, beneficiaries in TM without supplemental coverage declined by more than a quarter (13.9% to 10.1%). This decline was largest for Black, Hispanic, and lower-income beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid rise in MA enrollment from 2005 to 2019 was accompanied by substantial changes in supplemental insurance with TM. Our results emphasize the interconnectedness of different insurance choices made by Medicare beneficiaries.

Accountable care organization initiatives to improve the cost and outcomes of specialty care.

OBJECTIVES: To assess initiatives to manage the cost and outcomes of specialty care in organizations that participate in Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs). STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of 2023 ACO survey data. METHODS: Analysis of responses to a 12-question web-based survey from 101 respondents representing 174 ACOs participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program or the Realizing Equity, Access, and Community Health ACO model in 2023. RESULTS: Improving specialist alignment was a high priority for 62% of the 101 respondents and a medium priority for 34%. Only 11% reported that employed specialists were highly aligned and 7% reported that contracted specialists were highly aligned. A subset of ACOs reported major efforts to engage specialists in quality improvement projects (38%) and to convene specialists to develop evidence-based care pathways (30%). They also reported supporting primary care physicians through providing specialist directories (44%), specialist e-consults (23%), and sharing specialist cost data (20%). The most common challenges reported were the influence of fee-for-service payment on specialist behavior (58%), lack of data to evaluate specialist performance (53%), and insufficient bandwidth or ACO resources to address specialist alignment (49%). CONCLUSIONS: Engaging specialists in accountable care is an emerging area for ACOs but one with numerous challenges. Making better data on specialist costs and outcomes available to Medicare ACOs is essential for accelerating progress.

Exploring kidney dialysis costs in the United States: a scoping review.

AIMS: The increasing prevalence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in the United States (US) represents a considerable economic burden due to the high cost of dialysis treatment. This review examines data from real-world studies to identify cost drivers and explore areas where dialysis costs could be reduced. METHODS: We identified and synthesized evidence published from 2016-2023 reporting direct dialysis costs in adult US patients from a comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and grey literature sources (e.g. US Renal Data System reports). RESULTS: Most identified data related to Medicare expenditures. Overall Medicare spending in 2020 was $29B for hemodialysis and $2.8B for peritoneal dialysis (PD). Dialysis costs accounted for almost 80% of total Medicare expenditures on ESRD beneficiaries. Private insurance payers consistently pay more for dialysis; for example, per person per month spending by private insurers on outpatient dialysis was estimated at $10,149 compared with Medicare spending of $3,364. Dialysis costs were higher in specific high-risk patient groups (e.g. type 2 diabetes, hepatitis C). Spending on hemodialysis was higher than on PD, but the gap in spending between PD and hemodialysis is closing. Vascular access costs accounted for a substantial proportion of dialysis costs. LIMITATIONS: Insufficient detail in the identified studies, especially related to outpatient costs, limits opportunities to identify key drivers. Differences between the studies in methods of measuring dialysis costs make generalization of these results difficult. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that prevention of or delay in progression to ESRD could have considerable cost savings for Medicare and private payers, particularly in patients with high-risk conditions such as type 2 diabetes. More efficient use of resources is needed, including low-cost medication, to improve clinical outcomes and lower overall costs, especially in high-risk groups. Widening access to PD where it is safe and appropriate may help to reduce dialysis costs.

Previous papers have studied the cost of treating patients who need dialysis for kidney failure. We reviewed these costs and looked for patterns. Dialysis was the most expensive part of treatment for people with kidney disease who have Medicare. Dialysis with private insurance was much more expensive than with Medicare. People with diabetes experienced higher costs of dialysis than those without diabetes. Dialysis in a hospital costs more than dialysis at home. There are opportunities to reduce the cost of dialysis that should be explored further, such as more use of low-cost medication that can prevent the worsening of kidney disease and reduce the need for dialysis.

Medicare in the 21 st Century: Understanding the Program to Promote Improvements.

Medicare is the largest single purchaser of health care in the United States and currently helps to pay medical expenses for approximately one-fifth of the US population. The impetus for Medicare to move away from fee-for-service and toward value-based care payments reflects the need to incentivize and improve healthcare quality while containing increasing costs. This primer provides a detailed overview of several interrelated topics for an improved understanding of the Medicare program for orthopaedic surgeons, other clinicians, healthcare administrators, policymakers, and business leaders. An improved understanding may stimulate additional ideas for successful program advancements.

Clinical and Economic Implications of Interventions in Pancreatic Fluid Collections: An Assessment From a National Claims Database.

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical and economic implications of percutaneous and endoscopic treatment approaches in patients with pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective claims analysis of Medicare beneficiaries who underwent inpatient endoscopic or percutaneous PFC drainage procedures (2016-2020). We performed longitudinal analysis of claims for all-cause mortality and rehospitalization during 180-day follow-up. Main outcome was mortality. Other outcomes were rehospitalization and direct costs. RESULTS: A total of 1311 patients underwent endoscopic (n = 727) or percutaneous (n = 584) drainage. Percutaneous as compared with endoscopic approach was associated with higher mortality (23.08% vs 16.7%, P = 0.004), rehospitalization (58.9% vs 53.3%, P = 0.04), and mean direct hospital costs ($37,107 [SD = $67,833] vs $27,800 [SD = $43,854], P = 0.004). On multivariable analysis, percutaneous drainage (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.86; P = 0.039), older age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P < 0.001), intensive care unit stay (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P < 0.001), and multiple comorbidities (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05-1.09; P < 0.001) were significantly associated with mortality. Percutaneous drainage (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.30; 95% CI, 1.04-1.63; P = 0.027) and older age (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99; P < 0.001) were significantly associated with rehospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: As percutaneous drainage may be associated with higher mortality, rehospitalization, and costs, when requisite expertise is available, endoscopy should be preferred for treatment of PFC amenable to such an approach. Randomized trials are required to validate these findings.

Hospital Capital Assets, Community Health, and the Utilization and Cost of Inpatient Care: A Population-Based Study of US Counties.

BACKGROUND: The provision of high-quality hospital care requires adequate space, buildings, and equipment, although redundant infrastructure could also drive service overprovision. OBJECTIVE: To explore the distribution of physical hospital resources-that is, capital assets-in the United States; its correlation with indicators of community health and nonhealth factors; and the association between hospital capital density and regional hospital utilization and costs. RESEARCH DESIGN: We created a dataset of n=1733 US counties by analyzing the 2019 Medicare Cost Reports; 2019 State Inpatient Database Community Inpatient Statistics; 2020-2021 Area Health Resource File; 2016-2020 American Community Survey; 2022 PLACES; and 2019 CDC WONDER. We first calculated aggregate hospital capital assets and investment at the county level. Next, we examined the correlation between community's medical need (eg, chronic disease prevalence), ability to pay (eg, insurance), and supply factors with 4 metrics of capital availability. Finally, we examined the association between capital assets and hospital utilization/costs, adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: Counties with older and sicker populations generally had less aggregate hospital capital per capita, per hospital day, and per hospital discharge, while counties with higher income or insurance coverage had more hospital capital. In linear regressions controlling for medical need and ability to pay, capital assets were associated with greater hospital utilization and costs, for example, an additional $1000 in capital assets per capita was associated with 73 additional discharges per 100,000 population (95% CI: 45-102) and $19 in spending per bed day (95% CI: 12-26). CONCLUSIONS: The level of investment in hospitals is linked to community wealth but not population health needs, and may drive use and costs.

The Impact Of Telemedicine On Medicare Utilization, Spending, And Quality, 2019-22.

Telemedicine use remains substantially higher than it was before the COVID-19 pandemic, although it has fallen from pandemic highs. To inform the ongoing debate about whether to continue payment for telemedicine visits, we estimated the association of greater telemedicine use across health systems with utilization, spending, and quality. In 2020, Medicare patients receiving care at health systems in the highest quartile of telemedicine use had 2.5 telemedicine visits per person (26.8 percent of visits) compared with 0.7 telemedicine visits per person (9.5 percent of visits) in the lowest quartile of telemedicine use. In 2021-22, relative to those in the lowest quartile, Medicare patients of health systems in the highest quartile had an increase of 0.21 total outpatient visits (telemedicine and in-person) per patient per year (2.2 percent relative increase), a decrease of 14.4 annual non-COVID-19 emergency department visits per 1,000 patients per year (2.7 percent relative decrease), a $248 increase in per patient per year spending (1.6 percent relative increase), and increased adherence for metformin and statins. There were no clear differential changes in hospitalizations or receipt of preventive care.