Use and Cost of Low-Value Services Among Veterans Dually Enrolled in VA and Medicare.

BACKGROUND: Over half of veterans enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) are also enrolled in Medicare, potentially increasing their opportunity to receive low-value health services within and outside VA. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the use and cost of low-value services delivered to dually enrolled veterans from VA and Medicare. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional. PARTICIPANTS: Veterans enrolled in VA and fee-for-service Medicare (FY 2017-2018). MAIN MEASURES: We used VA and Medicare administrative data to identify 29 low-value services across 6 established domains: cancer screening, diagnostic/preventive testing, preoperative testing, imaging, cardiovascular testing, and surgery. We determined the count of low-value services per 100 veterans delivered in VA and Medicare in FY 2018 overall, by domain, and by individual service. We applied standardized estimates to determine each service's cost. KEY RESULTS: Among 1.6 million dually enrolled veterans, the mean age was 73, 97% were men, and 77% were non-Hispanic White. Overall, 63.2 low-value services per 100 veterans were delivered, affecting 32% of veterans; 22.9 services per 100 veterans were delivered in VA and 40.3 services per 100 veterans were delivered in Medicare. The total cost was $226.3 million (M), of which $62.6 M was spent in VA and $163.7 M in Medicare. The most common low-value service was prostate-specific antigen testing at 17.3 per 100 veterans (VA 55.9%, Medicare 44.1%). The costliest low-value service was percutaneous coronary intervention (VA $10.1 M, Medicare $32.8 M). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 1 in 3 dually enrolled veterans received a low-value service in FY18, with twice as many low-value services delivered in Medicare vs VA. Interventions to reduce low-value services for veterans should consider their substantial use of such services in Medicare.

Variation in Low-Value Service Use Across Veterans Affairs Facilities.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether extensive variation in the use of low-value services exists even within a national integrated delivery system like the Veterans Health Administration (VA). OBJECTIVE: To quantify variation in the use of low-value services across VA facilities and examine associations between facility characteristics and low-value service use. DESIGN: In this retrospective cross-sectional study of VA administrative data, we constructed facility-level rates of low-value service use as the mean count of 29 low-value services per 100 Veterans per year. Adjusted rates were calculated via ordinary least squares regression including covariates for Veteran sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. We quantified the association between adjusted facility-level rates and facility geographic/operational characteristics. PARTICIPANTS: 5,242,301 patients across 139 VA facilities. MAIN MEASURES: Use of 29 low-value services within six domains: cancer screening, diagnostic/preventive testing, preoperative testing, imaging, cardiovascular testing and procedures, and surgery. KEY RESULTS: The mean rate of low-value service use was 20.0 services per 100 patients per year (S.D. 6.1). Rates ranged from 13.9 at the 10th percentile to 27.6 at the 90th percentile (90th/10th percentile ratio 2.0, 95% CI 1.8‒2.3). With adjustment for patient covariates, variation across facilities narrowed (S.D. 5.2, 90th/10th percentile ratio 1.8, 95% CI 1.6‒1.9). Only one facility characteristic was positively associated with low-value service use percent of patients seeing non-VA clinicians via VA Community Care, p < 0.05); none was associated with total low-value service use after adjustment for other facility characteristics. There was extensive variation in low-value service use within categories of facility operational characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Despite extensive variation in the use of low-value services across VA facilities, we observed substantial use of these services across facility operational characteristics and at facilities with lower rates of low-value service use. Thus, system-wide interventions to address low-value services may be more effective than interventions targeted to specific facilities or facility types.

Prevalence and Cost of Care Cascades Following Low-Value Preoperative Electrocardiogram and Chest Radiograph Within the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Low-value care cascades, defined as the receipt of downstream health services potentially related to a low-value service, can result in harm to patients and wasteful healthcare spending, yet have not been characterized within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). OBJECTIVE: To examine if the receipt of low-value preoperative testing is associated with greater utilization and costs of potentially related downstream health services in Veterans undergoing low or intermediate-risk surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using VHA administrative data from fiscal years 2017-2018 comparing Veterans who underwent low-value preoperative electrocardiogram (EKG) or chest radiograph (CXR) with those who did not. PARTICIPANTS: National cohort of Veterans at low risk of cardiopulmonary disease undergoing low- or intermediate-risk surgery. MAIN MEASURES: Difference in rate of receipt and attributed cost of potential cascade services in Veterans who underwent low-value preoperative testing compared to those who did not KEY RESULTS: Among 635,824 Veterans undergoing low-risk procedures, 7.8% underwent preoperative EKG. Veterans who underwent a preoperative EKG experienced an additional 52.4 (95% CI 47.7-57.2) cascade services per 100 Veterans, resulting in $138.28 (95% CI 126.19-150.37) per Veteran in excess costs. Among 739,005 Veterans undergoing low- or intermediate-risk surgery, 3.9% underwent preoperative CXR. These Veterans experienced an additional 61.9 (95% CI 57.8-66.1) cascade services per 100 Veterans, resulting in $152.08 (95% CI $146.66-157.51) per Veteran in excess costs. For both cohorts, care cascades consisted largely of repeat tests, follow-up imaging, and follow-up visits, with low rates invasive services. CONCLUSIONS: Among a national cohort of Veterans undergoing low- or intermediate-risk surgeries, low-value care cascades following two routine low-value preoperative tests are common, resulting in greater unnecessary care and costs beyond the initial low-value service. These findings may guide de-implementation policies within VHA and other integrated healthcare systems that target those services whose downstream effects are most prevalent and costly.

Early Performance of Accountable Care Organizations in Medicare.

BACKGROUND: In the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP), accountable care organizations (ACOs) have financial incentives to lower spending and improve quality. We used quasi-experimental methods to assess the early performance of MSSP ACOs. METHODS: Using Medicare claims from 2009 through 2013 and a difference-in-differences design, we compared changes in spending and in performance on quality measures from before the start of ACO contracts to after the start of the contracts between beneficiaries served by the 220 ACOs entering the MSSP in mid-2012 (2012 ACO cohort) or January 2013 (2013 ACO cohort) and those served by non-ACO providers (control group), with adjustment for geographic area and beneficiary characteristics. We analyzed the 2012 and 2013 ACO cohorts separately because entry time could reflect the capacity of an ACO to achieve savings. We compared ACO savings according to organizational structure, baseline spending, and concurrent ACO contracting with commercial insurers. RESULTS: Adjusted Medicare spending and spending trends were similar in the ACO cohorts and the control group during the precontract period. In 2013, the differential change (i.e., the between-group difference in the change from the precontract period) in total adjusted annual spending was -$144 per beneficiary in the 2012 ACO cohort as compared with the control group (P=0.02), consistent with a 1.4% savings, but only -$3 per beneficiary in the 2013 ACO cohort as compared with the control group (P=0.96). Estimated savings were consistently greater in independent primary care groups than in hospital-integrated groups among 2012 and 2013 MSSP entrants (P=0.005 for interaction). MSSP contracts were associated with improved performance on some quality measures and unchanged performance on others. CONCLUSIONS: The first full year of MSSP contracts was associated with early reductions in Medicare spending among 2012 entrants but not among 2013 entrants. Savings were greater in independent primary care groups than in hospital-integrated groups.

Spending by the Veterans Health Administration for Medicare Advantage Dual Enrollees, 2011-2020.

This study assesses veterans' dual enrollment in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and Medicare Advantage and VHA spending from 2011 through 2020.

Performance differences in year 1 of pioneer accountable care organizations.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, a total of 32 organizations entered the Pioneer accountable care organization (ACO) program, in which providers can share savings with Medicare if spending falls below a financial benchmark. Performance differences associated with characteristics of Pioneer ACOs have not been well described. METHODS: In a difference-in-differences analysis of Medicare fee-for-service claims, we compared Medicare spending for beneficiaries attributed to Pioneer ACOs (ACO group) with other beneficiaries (control group) before (2009 through 2011) and after (2012) the start of Pioneer ACO contracts, with adjustment for geographic area and beneficiaries' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. We estimated differential changes in spending for several subgroups of ACOs: those with and those without clear financial integration between hospitals and physician groups, those with higher and those with lower baseline spending, and the 13 ACOs that withdrew from the Pioneer program after 2012 and the 19 that did not. RESULTS: Adjusted Medicare spending and spending trends were similar in the ACO group and the control group during the precontract period. In 2012, the total adjusted per-beneficiary spending differentially changed in the ACO group as compared with the control group (-$29.2 per quarter, P=0.007), consistent with a 1.2% savings. Savings were significantly greater for ACOs with baseline spending above the local average, as compared with those with baseline spending below the local average (P=0.05 for interaction), and for those serving high-spending areas, as compared with those serving low-spending areas (P=0.04). Savings were similar in ACOs with financial integration between hospitals and physician groups and those without, as well as in ACOs that withdrew from the program and those that did not. CONCLUSIONS: Year 1 of the Pioneer ACO program was associated with modest reductions in Medicare spending. Savings were greater for ACOs with higher baseline spending than for those with lower baseline spending and were unrelated to withdrawal from the program. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and others.).

Comparison of prior authorization across insurers: cross sectional evidence from Medicare Advantage.

OBJECTIVE: To measure and compare the scope of US insurers' policies for prior authorization (PA), a process by which insurers assess the necessity of planned medical care, and to quantify differences in PA across insurers, physician specialties, and clinical service categories. DESIGN: Cross sectional analysis. SETTING: PA policies for five insurers serving most of the beneficiaries covered by privately administered Medicare Advantage in the US, 2021, as applied to utilization patterns observed in Medicare Part B. PARTICIPANTS: 30 540 086 beneficiaries in traditional Medicare Part B. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportions of government administered traditional Medicare Part B spending and utilization that would have required PA according to Medicare Advantage insurer rules. RESULTS: The insurers required PA for 944 to 2971 of the 14 130 clinical services (median 1899; weighted mean 1429) constituting 17% to 33% of Part B spending (median 28%; weighted mean 23%) and 9% to 41% of Part B utilization (median 22%; weighted mean 18%). 40% of spending ($57bn; £45bn; €53bn) and 48% of service utilization would have required PA by at least one insurer; 12% of spending and 6% of utilization would have required PA by all insurers. 93% of Part B medication spending, or 74% of medication use, would have required PA by at least one Medicare Advantage insurer. For all Medicare Advantage insurers, hematology and oncology drugs represented the largest proportion of PA spending (range 27-34%; median 33%; weighted mean 30%). PA rates varied widely across specialties. CONCLUSION: PA policies varied substantially across private insurers in the US. Despite limited consensus, all insurers required PA extensively, particularly for physician administered medications. These findings indicate substantial differences in coverage policies between government administered and privately administered Medicare. The results may inform ongoing efforts to focus PA more effectively on low value services and reduce administrative burdens for clinicians and patients.

Trends in low-value cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and change in low-value cancer services. STUDY DESIGN: In this retrospective cohort study, we used administrative claims from the HealthCore Integrated Research Environment, a repository of medical and pharmacy data from US health plans representing more than 80 million members, between January 1, 2016, and March 31, 2021. METHODS: We used linear probability models to investigate the relation between the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and 4 guideline-based metrics of low-value cancer care: (1) conventional fractionation radiotherapy instead of hypofractionated radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer; (2) non-guideline-based antiemetic use for minimal-, low-, or moderate- to high-risk chemotherapies; (3) off-pathway systemic therapy; and (4) aggressive end-of-life care. We identified patients with new diagnoses of breast, colorectal, and/or lung cancer. We excluded members who did not have at least 6 months of continuous insurance coverage and members with prevalent cancers. RESULTS: Among 117,116 members (median [IQR] age, 60 [53-69] years; 72.4% women), 59,729 (51.0%) had breast cancer, 25,751 (22.0%) had colorectal cancer, and 31,862 (27.2%) had lung cancer. The payer mix was 18.7% Medicare Advantage or Medicare supplemental and 81.2% commercial non-Medicare. Rates of low-value cancer services exhibited minimal changes during the pandemic, as adjusted percentage-point differences were 3.93 (95% CI, 1.50-6.36) for conventional radiotherapy, 0.82 (95% CI, -0.62 to 2.25) for off-pathway systemic therapy, -3.62 (95% CI, -4.97 to -2.27) for non-guideline-based antiemetics, and 2.71 (95% CI, -0.59 to 6.02) for aggressive end-of-life care. CONCLUSIONS: Low-value cancer care remained prevalent throughout the pandemic. Policy makers should consider changes to payment and incentive design to turn the tide against low-value cancer care.

Association of Participation in Medicare's Oncology Care Model With Spending, Utilization, and Quality Outcomes Among Commercially Insured and Medicare Advantage Members.

PURPOSE: The Oncology Care Model (OCM), a value-based payment model for traditional Medicare beneficiaries with cancer, yielded total spending reductions that were outweighed by incentive payments, resulting in net losses to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. We studied whether the OCM yielded spillover effects in total episode spending, utilization, and quality among commercially insured and Medicare Advantage (MA) members, who were not targeted by the program. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This observational study used administrative claims from a large national payer, yielding 157,189 total patients with commercial insurance or MA with solid malignancies who initiated 229,376 systemic anticancer therapy episodes before (2012-2015) and during (2016-2021) the OCM at 125 OCM-participating practices (a subset of total OCM practices) and a 1:10 propensity-matched set of 860 non-OCM practices. We used difference-in-differences analyses to assess the association between the OCM and total episode spending, defined as medical spending during a 6-month episode. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization and emergency department (ED) utilization and quality measures. RESULTS: From the pre-OCM to the OCM period, mean total episode payments increased from $45,504 in US dollars (USD) to $46,239 USD for OCM-participating practices, and increased from $50,519 USD to $58,591 USD for non-OCM practices (adjusted difference-in-differences -$6,287 USD [95% CI, -$10,076 USD to -$2,498 USD], P = .001). The OCM was associated with adjusted spending decreases for both high-risk (-$6,756 USD [95% CI, -$10,731 USD to -$2,781 USD], P = .001) and low-risk (-$4,171 USD [95% CI, -$7,799 USD to -$543 USD], P = .025) episodes. OCM-associated spending reductions were strongest for outpatient (-$5,243 USD [95% CI, -$8,589 USD to -$1,897 USD], P = .002) and infused/injected anticancer drug (-$3,031 USD [95% CI, -$5,193 USD to -$869 USD], P = .006) spending. There were no associations between OCM participation and changes in hospital or ED utilization nor quality of care. CONCLUSION: The OCM was associated with reductions in spending for nontargeted members, a spillover effect.

Care cascades following low-value cervical cancer screening in dually enrolled Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Veterans dually enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) and Medicare commonly experience downstream services as part of a care cascade after an initial low-value service. Our objective was to characterize the frequency and cost of low-value cervical cancer screening and subsequent care cascades among Veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used VA and Medicare administrative data from fiscal years 2015 to 2019. The study cohort was comprised of female Veterans aged >65 years and at low risk of cervical cancer who were dually enrolled in VA and Medicare. Within this cohort, we compared differences in the rates and costs of cascade services related to low-value cervical cancer screening for Veterans who received and did not receive screening in FY2018, adjusting for baseline patient- and facility-level covariates using inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: Among 20,972 cohort-eligible Veterans, 494 (2.4%) underwent low-value cervical cancer screening with 301 (60.9%) initial screens occurring in VA and 193 (39%) occurring in Medicare. Veterans who were screened experienced an additional 26.7 (95% CI, 16.4-37.0) cascade services per 100 Veterans compared to those who were not screened, contributing to $2919.4 (95% CI, -265 to 6104.7) per 100 Veterans in excess costs. Care cascades consisted predominantly of subsequent cervical cancer screening procedures and related outpatient visits with low rates of invasive procedures and occurred in both VA and Medicare. CONCLUSIONS: Veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare commonly receive related downstream tests and visits as part of care cascades following low-value cervical cancer screening. Our findings demonstrate that to fully capture the extent to which individuals are subject to low-value care, it is important to examine downstream care stemming from initial low-value services across all systems from which individuals receive care.

Growth of Medicare Advantage After Plan Payment Reductions.

Importance: Various policy proposals would reduce federal payments to Medicare Advantage (MA) plans. However, it is unclear whether payment reductions would compromise beneficiary access to the MA program. Objective: To quantify the association between MA payment reductions under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and MA enrollment growth. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study examined the MA market before and after the ACA, which mandated cuts to MA benchmark payment rates. Using 2008 to 2019 county-level enrollment and payment data, a difference-in-differences analysis was conducted comparing MA enrollment changes between counties with larger vs smaller benchmark reductions, before vs after the ACA. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the MA enrollment rate, defined as the proportion of a county's Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in MA. A secondary analysis examined MA plan payments per member per month. Results: Among 3138 counties with 37 639 county-year observations, ACA-induced benchmark cuts were sizeable and varied, ranging from 0% to 42.9% (mean [SD], 5.9% [6.6%]). Counties with benchmark cuts above the 75th percentile had population-weighted average benchmark cuts of 14.9% compared with 4.4% in other counties. In the 8 years following the ACA, there was no differential change in MA enrollment between counties with larger vs smaller benchmark cuts (difference-in-differences estimate, 0.02 [95% CI, -1.18 to 1.21] percentage points; P = .98). Plan payments differentially fell in counties with larger benchmark cuts by $78.35 (95% CI, $62.21-$94.48) per member per month (P < .001). Conclusion and Relevance: This cohort study found no evidence that the MA benchmark and ensuing payment cuts imposed by the ACA were associated with reduced MA enrollment, compromising access to MA. This evidence can inform ongoing policy debates regarding the growth of MA, concerns about excess payments to MA plans, and proposed Medicare reforms, including further reductions in MA payments.

Coverage Denials: Government And Private Insurer Policies For Medical Necessity In Medicare.

Little is publicly known about coverage denials for medical services that do not meet medical necessity criteria. We characterized the extent of these denials and their key features, using Medicare Advantage claims for a large insurer from the period 2014-19. In this setting, claims could be denied because of traditional Medicare's coverage rules or additional Medicare Advantage private insurer rules. We observed $416 million in denied spending, with 0.81 denials and $60 of denied spending per beneficiary annually. We found that 1.40 percent of services were denied and 0.68 percent of total spending was denied, with rates rising over time. Traditional Medicare's coverage rules accounted for 85 percent of denied services and 64 percent of denied spending; the remaining denials were due to additional Medicare Advantage insurer rules. Denial rates varied greatly across service type and provider type, with the most denials being for laboratory services and hospital outpatient providers. Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage insurer coverage policies each addressed different sources of medical spending; together they contributed to the denial of a modest but nontrivial portion of payments.

Comparison of Low-Value Services Among Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare Beneficiaries.

Importance: Low-value care in the Medicare program is prevalent, costly, potentially harmful, and persistent. Although Medicare Advantage (MA) plans can use managed care strategies not available in traditional Medicare (TM), it is not clear whether this flexibility is associated with lower rates of low-value care. Objectives: To compare rates of low-value services between MA and TM beneficiaries and explore how elements of insurance design present in MA are associated with the delivery of low-value care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed beneficiaries enrolled in MA and TM using claims data from a large, national MA insurer and a random 5% sample of TM beneficiaries. The study period was January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2019. All analyses were conducted from July 2021 to March 2022. Exposures: Enrollment in MA vs TM. Main Outcomes and Measures: Low-value care was assessed using 26 claims-based measures. Regression models were used to estimate the association between MA enrollment and rates of low-value services while controlling for beneficiary characteristics. Stratified analyses explored whether network design, product design, value-based payment, or utilization management moderated differences in low-value care between MA and TM beneficiaries and among MA beneficiaries. Results: Among a study population of 2 470 199 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 75.6 [7.0] years; 1 346 777 [54.5%] female; 229 107 [9.3%] Black and 2 126 353 [86.1%] White individuals), 1 527 763 (61.8%) were enrolled in MA and 942 436 (38.2%) were enrolled in TM. Beneficiaries enrolled in MA received 9.2% (95% CI, 8.5%-9.8%) fewer low-value services in 2019 than TM beneficiaries (23.1 vs 25.4 total low-value services per 100 beneficiaries). Although MA beneficiaries enrolled in health management organization and preferred provider organization products received fewer low-value services than TM beneficiaries, the difference was largest for those enrolled in health management organization products (2.6 fewer [95% CI, 2.4-2.8] vs 2.1 fewer [95% CI, 1.9-2.3] services per 100 beneficiaries, respectively). Across primary care payment arrangements, MA beneficiaries received fewer low-value services than TM beneficiaries, with the largest difference observed for MA beneficiaries whose primary care physicians were reimbursed within 2-sided risk arrangements. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries, those enrolled in MA had lower rates of low-value care than those enrolled in TM; elements of insurance design present in the MA program and absent in TM were associated with reduction in low-value care.