Factors associated with self-reports of limitations in activities of daily living among Medicare Fee-for-Service recipients.

BACKGROUND: Physical function is an important indicator of physical health and predicts mortality. This study identified characteristics associated with limitations in Medicare recipients' activities of daily living. METHODS: 2019 Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Fee-for-Service Medicare Survey data: 79,725 respondents (34% response rate) who were 65 and older and 53% female; 7% Black, 5% Hispanic, 4% Asian American, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islander, 2% Multiracial, 1% American Indian/Alaskan Native; 35% with high school education or less. Walking, getting in and out of chairs, bathing, dressing, toileting, and eating (scored as having no difficulty versus being able to do with difficulty or unable to do) and a scale of these items were regressed on patient characteristics. RESULTS: After adjustment for all characteristics, function limitations were found for those who smoked (effect sizes of significant associations range .04-.13), had chronic health conditions (.02-.33), were 85 years or older (.09-.46), needed assistance completing the survey (.32-1.29), were female (.05-.07), and had low income and assets (.15-.47). CONCLUSIONS: These nationally representative U.S. estimates of physical function characteristics are useful for interventions for vulnerable population subgroups.

Measuring Equity in the Hospital Setting: An HCAHPS Application of the Health Equity Summary Score.

BACKGROUND: Health care quality varies by patient factors, including race-and-ethnicity and preferred language. Addressing inequities requires identifying them and incentivizing equity. OBJECTIVES: We apply an approach first implemented in the Medicare Advantage setting to measure equity in patient experiences by race-and-ethnicity [Asian American and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (AA and NHPI), Black, Hispanic, vs. White] and language preference (English-preferring vs. another-language-preferring). We identify characteristics of hospitals providing high-quality equitable care. RESEARCH DESIGN: We estimated, standardized, and combined performance measures into a Health Equity Summary Score (HESS) using 2016-2019 Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey data. The HCAHPS HESS considered current cross-sectional performance, within-hospital improvement, and overall improvement by race-and-ethnicity and language preference. SUBJECTS: A total of 3333 US hospitals with 2019 HCAHPS Star Ratings. RESULTS: The HCAHPS HESS was calculable for 44% of hospitals. High-scoring (4-5 diamonds on a 1-diamond to 5-diamond scale) hospitals tended to be smaller than intermediate-scoring [3 diamonds (14% of high-scoring hospitals had <100 beds vs. 7% of intermediate-scoring hospitals, P <0.001) and were less often for-profit (20% vs. 31%, P <0.001)]. While a significant percentage (29%) of patients served by high-scoring hospitals were AA and NHPI, Black, or Hispanic, and 9% were another-language-preferring, there were smaller proportions of Black and Hispanic patients in high-scoring versus other hospitals. HESS performance was negatively associated with the percentage of patients preferring another language to English. HESS scores were moderately correlated with overall Star Ratings ( r =0.70). CONCLUSIONS: The HCAHPS HESS and practices of high-scoring hospitals could promote more equitable patient experiences.

Measuring Inconsistency in Quality Across Patient Groups to Target Quality Improvement.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement (QI) may be aimed at improving care for all patients, or it may be targeted at only certain patient groups. Health care providers have little guidance when determining when targeted QI may be preferred. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to develop a method for quantifying performance inconsistency and guidelines for when inconsistency indicates targeted QI, which we apply to the performance of health plans for different patient groups. RESEARCH DESIGN AND MEASURES: Retrospective analysis of 7 Health Care Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measures of clinical care quality. SUBJECTS: All Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries eligible for any of 7 HEDIS measures 2015-2018. RESULTS: MA plans with higher overall performance tended to be less inconsistent in their performance (r=-0.2) across groups defined by race-and-ethnicity and low-income status (ie, dual eligibility for Medicaid or receipt of Low-Income Subsidy). Plan characteristics were usually associated with only small differences in inconsistency. The characteristics associated with differences in consistency [eg, size, Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) status] were also associated with differences in overall performance. We identified 9 (of 363) plans that had large inconsistency in performance across groups (>0.8 SD) and investigated the reasons for inconsistency for 2 example plans. CONCLUSIONS: This newly developed inconsistency metric may help those designing and evaluating QI efforts to appropriately determine when targeted QI is preferred. It can be used in settings where performance varies across groups, which can be defined by patient characteristics, geographic areas, hospital wards, etc. Effectively targeting QI efforts is essential in today's resource-constrained health care environment.

Rates of Disenrollment From Medicare Advantage Plans Are Higher for Racial/Ethnic Minority Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Each year, about 10% of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees voluntarily switch to another MA contract, while another 2% voluntarily switch from MA to fee-for-service Medicare. Voluntary disenrollment from MA plans is related to beneficiaries' negative experiences with their plan, disrupts the continuity of care, and conflicts with goals to reduce Medicare costs. Little is known about racial/ethnic disparities in voluntary disenrollment from MA plans. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate differences in rates of voluntary disenrollment from MA plans by race/ethnicity. SUBJECTS: A total of 116,770,319 beneficiaries enrolled in 736 MA plans in 2015. METHODS: Differences in rates of disenrollment across racial/ethnic groups [Asian or Pacific Islander (API), Black, Hispanic, and White] were summarized using 4 types of logistic regression models: adjusted and unadjusted models estimating overall differences and adjusted and unadjusted models estimating within-plan differences. Unadjusted overall models included only racial/ethnic group probabilities as predictors. Adjusted overall models added age, sex, dual eligibility, disability, and state of residence as control variables. Between-plan differences were estimated by subtracting within-plan differences from overall differences. RESULTS: Adjusted rates of disenrollment were significantly (P<0.001) higher for Hispanic (+1.2 percentage points), Black (+1.2 percentage points), and API beneficiaries (+2.4 percentage points) than for Whites. Within states, all 3 racial/ethnic minority groups tended to be concentrated in higher disenrollment plans. Within plans, API beneficiaries voluntarily disenrolled considerably more often than otherwise similar White beneficiaries. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest the need to address cost, information, and other factors that may create barriers to racial/ethnic minority beneficiaries' enrollment in plans with lower overall disenrollment rates.

Incentivizing Excellent Care to At-Risk Groups with a Health Equity Summary Score.

BACKGROUND: Social risk factors (SRFs) such as minority race-and-ethnicity or low income are associated with quality-of-care, health, and healthcare outcomes. Organizations might prioritize improving care for easier-to-treat groups over those with SRFs, but measuring, reporting, and further incentivizing quality-of-care for SRF groups may improve their care. OBJECTIVE: To develop, as a proof-of-concept, a Health Equity Summary Score (HESS): a succinct, easy-to-understand score that could be used to promote high-quality care to those with SRFs in Medicare Advantage (MA) health plans, which provide care for almost twenty million older and disabled Americans and collect extensive quality measure and SRF data. DESIGN: We estimated, standardized, and combined performance scores for two sets of quality measures for enrollees in 2013-2016 MA health plans, considering both current levels of care, within-plan improvement, and nationally benchmarked improvement for those with SRFs (specifically, racial-and-ethnic minority status and dual-eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid). PARTICIPANTS: All MA plans with publicly reported quality scores and 500 or more 2016 enrollees. MAIN MEASURES: Publicly reported clinical quality and patient experience measures. KEY RESULTS: Almost 90% of plans measured for MA Star Ratings received a HESS; plans serving few patients with SRFs were excluded. The summary score was moderately positively correlated with publicly reported overall Star Ratings (r = 0.66-0.67). High-scoring plans typically had sizable enrollment of both racial-and-ethnic minorities (38-42%) and dually eligible beneficiaries (29-38%). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the feasibility of developing and estimating a HESS that is intended to promote and incentivize excellent care for racial-and-ethnic minorities and dually eligible MA enrollees. The HESS measures SRF-specific performance and does not simply duplicate overall plan Star Ratings. It also identifies plans that provide excellent care to large numbers of those with SRFs. Our methodology could be extended to other SRFs, quality measures, and settings.

Medicare Beneficiaries With a Specialist as Their Personal Doctor Report Better Experiences With Care.

BACKGROUND: Health plans often require that patients have a personal doctor. Older adults rely on specialists for much of their care and may use a specialist in this role, but little is known about how many or which Medicare beneficiaries use specialists as their personal doctor and how their care experiences differ from others'. OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence and characteristics of Medicare beneficiaries with a specialist as a personal doctor and compare their patient experiences and immunization to other beneficiaries'. RESEARCH DESIGN: Logistic regression predicted having a specialist as a personal doctor from beneficiary characteristics. Doubly-robust models compared 7 patient experience and 2 immunization measures for beneficiaries with and without a specialist as their personal doctor. Interactions of a specialist indicator and beneficiary characteristics tested for moderators. STUDY POPULATION: A total of 227,642 Medicare beneficiaries aged 65+ who reported having a personal doctor on the 2014 Medicare CAHPS survey. RESULTS: In total, 20% of beneficiaries reported that their personal doctor was a specialist, fewer than previously reported for the most frequently visited physician (43%); beneficiaries who were older, less healthy, less educated, racial/ethnic minorities, had fee-for-service coverage, or had lower income were more likely to do so. They also reported better patient experiences than those with nonspecialist personal physicians on 6 of 7 measures and more immunizations; the largest difference was for care coordination. Having a specialist personal doctor was associated with particularly positive patient experience for low income, Black, Hispanic, and less healthy beneficiaries. CONCLUSION: Future research should investigate whether specialists as personal doctors may reduce patient-experience disparities for vulnerable patients.

Differences in Hospitalizations Between Fee-for-Service and Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies found lower hospitalization rates for enrollees in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans than for beneficiaries with fee-for-service (FFS) coverage. MA enrollment is increasing, especially for those newly eligible for Medicare, but little is known about how service use in FFS or MA differs for new beneficiaries. OBJECTIVE: To compare differences in rates of hospitalization between MA and FFS. RESEARCH DESIGN: A retrospective study of hospitalization among FFS and MA respondents to the Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (MCAHPS) survey. Differences in hospitalization rates were assessed using multivariable logistic regression models that controlled for patient sociodemographic and health characteristics. Models included an interaction between age and coverage type to determine whether patterns of care were distinct for enrollees recently eligible for Medicare. STUDY POPULATION: In total, 259,335 respondents to the 2013 MCAHPS survey. RESULTS: In total, 14% of FFS and 12% of MA enrollees had ≥1 hospitalization in the 6 months before survey administration. Models adjusted for enrollee demographics found that MA enrollees had 0.81 the odds of being hospitalized relative to those with FFS coverage (95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.84). Differences between groups were substantially reduced and no longer statistically significant when they were fully adjusted (adjusted odds ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.08). Models with interactions indicated no significant age differences in the MA/FFS hospitalization gap. CONCLUSION: Differences in hospital admissions between those with MA and FFS coverage appear to be primarily related to differences in health status.

A Comparison of Methods for Classifying and Modeling Respondents Who Endorse Multiple Racial/Ethnic Categories: A Health Care Experience Application.

BACKGROUND: Race/ethnicity information is vital for measuring disparities across groups, and self-report is the gold standard. Many surveys assign simplified race/ethnicity based on responses to separate questions about Hispanic ethnicity and race and instruct respondents to "check all that apply." When multiple races are endorsed, standard classification methods either create a single heterogenous multiracial group, or attempt to impute the single choice that would have been selected had only one choice been allowed. OBJECTIVES: To compare 3 options for classifying race/ethnicity: (a) hierarchical, classifying Hispanics as such regardless of racial identification, and grouping together all non-Hispanic multiracial individuals; (b) a newly proposed additive model, retaining all original endorsements plus a multiracial indicator; (c) an all-combinations approach, separately categorizing every observed combination of endorsements. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparison of racial/ethnic distributions of patient experience scores; using weighted linear regression, we model patient experience by race/ethnicity using 3 classification systems. SUBJECTS: In total, 259,763 Medicare beneficiaries age 65+ who responded to the 2017 Medicare Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems Survey and reported race/ethnicity. MEASURES: Self-reported race/ethnicity, 4 patient experience measures. RESULTS: Additive and hierarchical models produce similar classifications for non-Hispanic single-race respondents, but differ for Hispanic and multiracial respondents. Relative to the gold standard of the all-combinations model, the additive model better captures ratings of health care experiences and response tendencies that differ by race/ethnicity than does the hierarchical model. Differences between models are smaller with more specific measures. CONCLUSIONS: Additive models of race/ethnicity may afford more useful measures of disparities in health care and other domains. Our results have particular relevance for populations with a higher prevalence of multiracial identification.

Using Ancillary Sociodemographic Data to Identify Sexual Minority Adults Among Those Responding "Something Else" or "Don't Know" to Sexual Orientation Questions.

BACKGROUND: General population surveys are increasingly offering broader response options for questions on sexual orientation-for example, not only gay or lesbian, but also "something else" (SE) and "don't know" (DK). However, these additional response options are potentially confusing for those who may not know what the terms mean. Researchers studying sexual orientation-based disparities face difficult methodological trade-offs regarding how best to classify respondents identifying with the SE and DK categories. OBJECTIVES: Develop respondent-level probabilities of sexual minority orientation without excluding or misclassifying the potentially ambiguous SE and DK responses. Compare 3 increasingly inclusive analytic approaches for estimating health disparities using a single item: (a) omitting SE and DK respondents; (b) classifying SE as sexual minority and omitting DK; and (c) a new approach classifying only SE and DK respondents with >50% predicted probabilities of being sexual minorities as sexual minority. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the sociodemographic information and follow-up questions for SE and DK respondents in the 2013-2014 National Health Interview Survey to generate predicted probabilities of identifying as a sexual minority adult. RESULTS: About 94% of the 144 SE respondents and 20% of the 310 DK respondents were predicted to identify as a sexual minority adult, with higher probabilities for younger, wealthier, non-Hispanic white, and urban-dwelling respondents. Using a more specific definition of sexual minority orientation improved the precision of health and health care disparity estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Predicted probabilities of sexual minority orientation may be used in this and other surveys to improve representation and categorization of those who identify as a sexual minority adult.

Speaking Up and Walking Out: Are Vulnerable Patients Less Likely to Disagree With or Change Doctors?

BACKGROUND: Disparities in clinical process-of-care and patient experiences are well documented for Medicare beneficiaries with ≥1 social risk factors. If such patients are less willing to express disagreement with their doctors or change doctors when dissatisfied, these behaviors may play a role in observed disparities. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between social risk factors and self-reported likelihood of disagreeing with or changing doctors if dissatisfied among the Medicare fee-for-service population. SUBJECTS: Fee-for-service beneficiaries (N=96,317) who responded to the 2014 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey. Subgroups were defined based on age, education, income, and race/ethnicity. METHODS: Respondents reported how likely they would be to express disagreement with their doctors and change doctors if dissatisfied (1=very unlikely to 4=very likely; rescaled to 0-100 points). We fit mixed-effect linear regression models predicting these outcomes from social risk factors, controlling for health status and geographic location. RESULTS: Beneficiaries who were older, less educated, and had lower incomes were least inclined to express disagreement or change doctors (P<0.001). Compared with non-Hispanic whites, Asian/Pacific Islander (-9.5) and Hispanic (-3.6) beneficiaries said they would be less likely, and black (+2.8) beneficiaries more likely, to express disagreement. Asian/Pacific Islander (-8.7), Hispanic (-5.9), and American Indian/Alaska Native (-3.8) beneficiaries were less inclined than non-Hispanic whites to change doctors (P<0.01). DISCUSSION: Reduction in health care disparities may be achieved if doctors and advocates encourage vulnerable patients to express their concerns and perspectives and if communities and caregivers provide support for changing providers when care is poor.

Care Experiences Among Medicare Beneficiaries With and Without a Personal Physician.

BACKGROUND: Having a "personal" physician is a critical element to care continuity. Little is known about which older adults are more likely to lack personal physicians and if their care experiences differ from those with a personal physician. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe care experiences and characteristics associated with not having a personal physician. RESEARCH DESIGN: We compare rates of lacking a personal physician across subgroups. Using doubly robust propensity-score-weighted regression, we compare patient experience among beneficiaries with and without a personal physician. SUBJECTS: A total of 272,463 nationally representative beneficiaries age 65+ responding to the 2012 Medicare CAHPS survey. MEASURES: Beneficiary characteristics, having a personal physician, 4 patient experience measures. RESULTS: Five percent of respondents reported no personal physician. Lacking a personal physician was more common for men, racial/ethnic minorities (eg, 16% of American Indian/Alaska Natives), and the younger and less educated. Those without a personal physician reported substantially poorer experiences on 4 measures (P<0.001); these differences are larger than those observed by key demographic characteristics. Beneficiaries without a personal physician were more than 3 times as likely to have not seen any health care provider in the last 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Even with the access provided by Medicare, a small but nontrivial proportion of seniors report having no personal physician. Those without a personal physician report substantially worse patient experiences and lacking a personal physician is more common for some vulnerable groups. This may underlie some previously observed disparities. Efforts should be made to encourage and help seniors without personal physicians to select one.

Clinician advice to quit smoking among seniors.

OBJECTIVE: Little smoking research in the past 20years includes persons 50 and older; herein we describe patterns of clinician cessation advice to US seniors, including variation by Medicare beneficiary characteristics. METHOD: In 2012-4, we analyzed 2010 Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey data from Medicare beneficiaries over age 64 (n=346,674). We estimated smoking rates and the proportion of smokers whose clinicians encouraged cessation. RESULTS: 12% of male and 8% of female respondents aged 65 and older smoke. The rate decreases with age (14% of 65-69, 3% of 85+) and education (12-15% with no high school degree, 5-6% with BA+). Rates are highest among American Indian/Alaskan Native (16%), multiracial (14%), and African-American (13%) seniors, and in the Southeast (14%). Only 51% of smokers say they receive cessation advice "always" or "usually" at doctor visits, with advice more often given to the young, those in low-smoking regions, Asians, and women. For all results cited p<0.05. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking cessation advice to seniors is variable. Providers may focus on groups or areas in which smoking is less common or when they are most comfortable giving advice. More consistent interventions are needed, including cessation advice from clinicians.

Medicare Advantage enrollees' reports of unfair treatment during health care encounters.

We investigated unfair treatment among 1863 Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees from 21 MA plans using 2022 survey data (40% response rate) in which respondents indicated whether they were treated unfairly in a health care setting based on any of 10 personal characteristics. We calculated reported unfair treatment rates overall and by enrollee characteristics. Nine percent of respondents reported any unfair treatment, most often based on health condition (6%), disability (3%), or age (2%). Approximately 40% of those reporting any unfair treatment endorsed multiple categories. People who qualified for Medicare via disability reported unfair treatment by disability, age, income, race and ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, and gender/gender identity more often than those who qualified via age. Enrollees dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid or eligible for a Low-Income Subsidy (DE/LIS) reported unfair treatment by disability, income, language/accent, race and ethnicity, culture/religion, and sex more often than non-DE/LIS enrollees. Compared with White respondents, racial and ethnic minority respondents more often reported unfair treatment by race and ethnicity, language/accent, culture/religion, and income. Female respondents were more likely than male respondents to report unfair treatment based on age and sex.

Which medicare advantage enrollees are at highest one-year mortality risk?

BACKGROUND: While a number of tools exist to predict mortality among older adults, less research has described the characteristics of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees at higher risk for 1 year mortality. OBJECTIVES: To describe the characteristics of MA enrollees at higher mortality risk using patient survey data. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SUBJECTS: MA enrollees completing the 2019 MA Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Survey. MEASURES: Linked demographic, health, and mortality data from a sample of MA enrollees were used to predict 1-year mortality risk and describe enrollee characteristics across levels of predicted mortality risk. RESULTS: The mortality model had a 0.80 c-statistic. Mortality risks were skewed: 6 % of enrollees had a ≥ 10 % 1-year mortality risk, while 45 % of enrollees had 1 % to < 5 % 1-year mortality risk. Among the high-risk (≥10 %) group, 47 % were age 85+ versus 12 % among those with mortality risk <5 %. 79 % were in fair or poor self-rated health versus 29 % among those with mortality risk of <5 %. 71 % reported needing urgent care in the prior 6 months versus 40 % among those with a mortality risk of 1 to<5 %. CONCLUSIONS: Relatively few older adults enrolled in MA are at high 1-year mortality risk. Nonetheless, MA enrollees over age 85, in fair or poor health, or with recent urgent care needs are far more likely to be in a high mortality risk group.

Medicare Advantage customer service is used most by higher-need patients.

OBJECTIVES: To examine characteristics of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees who use their plan's customer service to help plans understand how to better meet members' needs. STUDY DESIGN: National sample of 259,533 respondents to MA Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey enrolled in any of the 559 MA contracts in 2022. METHODS: We assessed the association between self-reported customer service use in the prior 6 months and enrollee demographic, coverage, health, and health care utilization characteristics. We used weighted linear regression models to test for bivariate and multivariate associations between customer service use and enrollee characteristics. RESULTS: Forty-two percent of MA enrollees reported using customer service in the prior 6 months. Use was 20 percentage points (PP) higher for those in poor vs excellent/very good general health, 13 PP higher for those in poor vs excellent/very good mental health, and 14 PP higher for those reporting 3 or more vs no chronic conditions. Those using customer service more often had lower educational attainment, had limited income and assets, preferred another language to English, and had greater health care utilization. CONCLUSIONS: MA customer service supports a less healthy, higher-need population with greater-than-average barriers to health care, and so should be designed and staffed to effectively serve medically complex, high-need patients. Commercial plan evidence suggests that continuity in customer service support for a member or a given issue may be helpful. Customer service is an important mechanism for improving quality and addressing health equity.

Racial/Ethnic differences in Medicare experiences and immunization: the role of disease burden.

BACKGROUND: Although Medicare provides beneficiaries with primary access to the health care system, racial/ethnic disparities in health care experiences and preventive care are well documented in the Medicare population. OBJECTIVE: To investigate disease burden and its possible impact on racial/ethnic health disparities for measures of secondary and tertiary access to health care, such as access to health plan information, obtaining recommended care in a timely manner, and immunization. SUBJECTS: A total of 355,874 beneficiaries over the age of 64 years who responded to the 2008 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey. METHODS: We fit a series of linear, case-mix adjusted models predicting Medicare CAHPS measures of patient experience and immunization from race/ethnicity, a 0 to 6 count of disease burden, and their interaction. RESULTS: Disparities between non-Hispanic whites and other racial/ethnic groups are largest among beneficiaries with no major health conditions. Disparities between whites and other racial/ethnic groups on getting care quickly and immunization are mitigated at higher levels of disease burden. Disparities persist at higher levels of disease burden for getting information from one's health plan. DISCUSSION: Whites have better overall access to care than other beneficiaries with Medicare in the absence of major health conditions. Disparities in getting care quickly and immunizations are smaller among beneficiaries with greater disease burden, perhaps as a function of integration into the health care system gained through management of health issues. These results underscore the importance of outreach to minorities with low utilization and few or no major health conditions.

Racial/ethnic disparities in Medicare Part D experiences.

OBJECTIVE: To examine racial/ethnic differences in Medicare beneficiary experiences with Medicare Part D prescription drug (PD) coverage. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: 2008 Consumer Assessment of Health Care Providers and Systems survey of U.S. Medicare beneficiaries. STUDY DESIGN: Surveys were administered by mail with phone follow-up to a nationally representative sample (61% response rate). This study examines 201,496 beneficiaries of age 65 and older with PD coverage [6% Hispanic, 7% non-Hispanic Black, 3% non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander (API)]. Key variables are self-reported race/ethnicity and Consumer Assessment of Health Care Providers and Systems getting information and needed PDs measures. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We generated weighted case-mix adjusted means for 4 racial/ethnic groups and for Hispanics separately by English-language or Spanish-language preference status. We calculated within-plan disparities using a linear mixed-effect model, with fixed effects for race/ethnicity, coverage type and case-mix variables, and random effects for contract and contract by race/ethnicity interactions. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Disparities for Hispanic, Black, and API beneficiaries on obtaining needed PDs and information regarding coverage range from -2 to -11 points (0-100 scale) relative to non-Hispanic Whites, with the greatest disparities observed for Spanish-preferring Hispanics and API beneficiaries, especially those with low income. There is wide variation in disparities across contracts, and contracts with the largest disparities for Hispanics have higher proportions of beneficiaries with lower education and income. CONCLUSIONS: Quality improvement efforts may be needed to reduce racial/ethnic disparities in beneficiary experience with PD coverage. Cultural, language, and health literacy barriers in navigating Medicare's Part D program may partially explain the observed disparities.

Poor self-rated mental health and Medicare beneficiaries' routine care-seeking.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the relationship between self-rated mental health (SRMH) and infrequent routine care among Medicare beneficiaries and to investigate the roles of managed care and having a personal doctor. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of data from the 2018 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey. METHODS: Logistic regression was used to predict infrequent routine care (having not made an appointment for routine care in the last 6 months) from SRMH, Medicare coverage type (fee-for-service [FFS] vs Medicare Advantage [MA], the managed care version of Medicare), and the interaction of these variables. Models that did and did not include having a personal doctor were compared. All models controlled for demographics and physical health. RESULTS: Overall, 14.9% of beneficiaries did not make a routine care appointment in the last 6 months, with rates adjusted for demographics and physical health ranging from 14.5% for those with "excellent" SRMH to 19.2% for those with "poor" SRMH. Beneficiaries with poor SRMH were less likely to make a routine care appointment in FFS than in MA (20.1% vs 16.4%, respectively, had not done so in the last 6 months; P < .05). Accounting for having a personal doctor reduced the association between SRMH and infrequent routine care by about a third. CONCLUSIONS: Extra efforts are needed to ensure receipt of routine care by beneficiaries with poor mental health-particularly in FFS, where more should be done to ensure that beneficiaries have a personal doctor.

Community-dwelling adults with functional limitations are at greater risk for sleep disturbances.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether sleep disturbances vary along a continuum of functional limitations in a large nationally representative sample of US adults. METHODS: Using 2014-2015 National Health Interview Survey data (n = 33,424), we considered associations between each of 5 sleep disturbance measures (duration, trouble falling asleep, trouble staying asleep, use of sleep medications, waking rested) and Functional Limitations Index score, which distinguishes among adults with little-or-no (least-limited), moderate (somewhat-limited), and high functional limitations (most-limited). RESULTS: Somewhat-limited and most-limited respondents reported significantly worse sleep health for all sleep disturbance measures than people with little-or-no limitations, even controlling for body mass index, psychological distress, and 14 health indicators. CONCLUSIONS: People with significant self-reported limitations in physical functioning, independent of specific disabilities or disabling condition, report more sleep disturbances. Clinicians may want to evaluate the sleep health of patients with functional limitations.

Distinguishing neighborhood and individual social risk factors in health care.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate (a) the magnitude of the independent associations of neighborhood-level and person-level social risk factors (SRFs) with quality, (b) whether neighborhood-level SRF associations may be proxies for person-level SRF associations, and (c) how the association of person-level SRFs and quality varies by neighborhood-level SRFs. DATA SOURCES: 2015-2016 Medicare Advantage HEDIS data, Medicare beneficiary administrative data, and 2016 American Community Survey (ACS). STUDY DESIGN: Mixed effects linear regression models (1) estimated overall inequities by neighborhood-level and person-level SRFs, (2) compared neighborhood-level associations to person-level associations, and (3) tested the interactions of person-level SRFs with corresponding neighborhood-level SRFs. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Beneficiary-level SES and disability administrative data and five-year ACS neighborhood-level SRF information were each linked to HEDIS data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: For all or nearly all HEDIS measures, quality was worse in neighborhoods lower in SES and in neighborhoods with higher proportions of residents with a disability. Quality by neighborhood racial and ethnic composition was mixed. Accounting for corresponding person-level SRFs reduced neighborhood SRF associations by 25% for disability, 43% for SES, and 74%-102% for racial and ethnic groups. Person-level SRF coefficients were not consistently reduced in models that added neighborhood-level SRFs. In 19 of 35 instances, there were significant (p < 0.05) interactions between neighborhood-level and corresponding person-level SRFs. Significant interactions were always positive for disability, SES, Black, and Hispanic, indicating more negative neighborhood effects for people with SRFs that did not match their neighborhood and more positive neighborhood effects for people with SRFs that matched their neighborhood. CONCLUSIONS: Relying solely on neighborhood-level SRF models that omit similar person-level SRFs overattributes inequities to neighborhood characteristics. Neighborhood-level characteristics account for much less variation in these measures' scores than similar person-level SRFs. Inequity-reduction programs may be most effective when targeting neighborhoods with a high proportion of people with a given SRF.