Comparison of Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility and Use between Commercial, Medicare, and Medicare Advantage Enrollees.

OBJECTIVE: Lung cancer screening does not require patient cost-sharing for insured people in the U.S. Little is known about whether other factors associated with patient selection into different insurance plans affect screening rates. We examined screening rates for enrollees in commercial, Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS), and Medicare Advantage plans. METHODS: County-level smoking rates from the 2017 County Health Rankings were used to estimate the number of enrollees eligible for lung cancer screening in two large retrospective claims databases covering: a 5% national sample of Medicare FFS enrollees; and 100% sample of enrollees associated with large commercial and Medicare Advantage carriers. Screening rates were estimated using observed claims, stratified by payer, before aggregation into national estimates by payer and demographics. Chi-square tests were used to examine differences in screening rates between payers. RESULTS: There were 1,077,142 enrollees estimated to be eligible for screening. The overall estimated screening rate for enrollees by payer was 1.75% for commercial plans, 3.37% for Medicare FFS, and 4.56% for Medicare Advantage plans. Screening rates were estimated to be lowest among females (1.55%-4.02%), those aged 75-77 years (0.63%-2.87%), those residing in rural areas (1.88%-3.56%), and those in the West (1.16%-3.65%). Among Medicare FFS enrollees, screening rates by race/ethnicity were non-Hispanic White (3.71%), non-Hispanic Black (2.17%) and Other (1.68%). CONCLUSIONS: Considerable variation exists in lung cancer screening between different payers and across patient characteristics. Efforts targeting historically vulnerable populations could present opportunities to increase screening.

Recent trends in high-volume Medicare stroke thrombectomy provider characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Intracranial mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is increasingly indicated for use in acute ischemic stroke patients. We analyzed recent trends in the characteristics and geographic distributions of physicians providing this service with frequency to Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: We linked public data sources to elucidate and visualize trends in high-volume MT providers between 2016 and 2019. RESULTS: High-volume MT providers increased by 184% between 2016 and 2019. The number of neurosurgeons, neurologists, and radiologists in this physician population increased by 251%, 205%, and 139%, respectively. Male practitioners accounted for 96% of providers in the most recent year of analysis. International medical graduates accounted for roughly one-third of these physicians across all 4 years of analysis. As of 2019, the three states with the most high-volume MT providers were Florida, California, and Texas, accounting for 7%, 7%, and 6% of providers, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: High-volume providers of MT services for Medicare beneficiaries represent a dynamic and rapidly expanding subset of physicians with diverse specialty backgrounds.