Financial Hardship Among Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage Enrollees With and Without Food Insecurity.

BACKGROUND: Compared to traditional Medicare (TM), Medicare Advantage (MA) plans impose out-of-pocket cost limits and offer extra benefits, potentially providing financial relief for MA enrollees, especially for those with food insecurity. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the prevalence of food insecurity differs between TM and MA enrollees at baseline and then examine whether MA enrollment in a baseline year is associated with less financial hardships in the following year, relative to TM enrollment, especially for those experiencing food insecurity. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective longitudinal cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Our analysis included 2807 Medicare beneficiaries (weighted sample size, 23,963,947) who maintained continuous enrollment in either TM or MA in both 2020 and 2021 from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. MAIN MEASURES: We assessed outcomes related to financial hardships in health care and non-health care domains (measured in 2021). Our primary independent variables were food insecurity and MA enrollment (measured in 2020). RESULTS: The point estimate of food insecurity prevalence was greater among MA enrollees than TM enrollees, but the difference was not statistically significant (1.1 percentage points [95% CI, - 1.0, 3.4]). Furthermore, there is evidence that compared to TM enrollment, MA enrollment did not mitigate the risk of financial hardship, particularly for food-insecure enrollees. Rather, food-secure MA enrollees faced greater financial hardship in the following year than food-secure TM enrollees (11.2% [8.9-13.6] and 7.6% [6.9-8.3] for problems paying medical bills and 5.5% [4.6-6.4] and 2.8% [2.1-3.6] for paying medical bills over time). Moreover, the point estimate of financial hardship was higher among food-insecure MA enrollees than food-insecure TM enrollees (21.5% [5.4-37.5] and 11.2% [4.1-18.4] and 23.7% [9.6-37.9] and 6.9% [0.5-13.3]) despite the lack of statistical significance. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the promise of financial protection offered by MA plans has not been fully realized, particularly for those with food insecurity.

The effect of Medicare eligibility on diagnosis of chronic conditions.

OBJECTIVES: The near-universal access to Medicare coverage at age 65 years improves access to care. However, little is known about whether Medicare eligibility promotes the diagnosis of chronic diseases. We examined the effects of Medicare eligibility at age 65 years on the diagnosis of chronic conditions. STUDY DESIGN: Using data from the 2007-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we employed a regression discontinuity design. METHODS: Our sample includes 43,620 individuals aged 59 to 71 years. Our primary outcomes were diagnoses of 19 chronic conditions. Using a regression discontinuity design, we exploited the discontinuity in eligibility for Medicare at age 65 years and compared individuals just before and after age 65 years. RESULTS: Medicare eligibility at age 65 years led to significant increases in having any coverage or Medicare coverage: 8.8 percentage points (95% CI, 8.4-9.2) and 78.1 percentage points (95% CI, 74.9-81.4), respectively. However, there were no or small changes in the diagnosis of chronic conditions at age 65 years. Specifically, there were no significant changes in the diagnoses of 17 chronic conditions, and the changes were minor in magnitude. Significant changes were observed only in the diagnosis of stroke and cancer, at -0.6 percentage points (95% CI, -1.0 to -0.2) and -1.7 percentage points (95% CI, -2.8 to -0.6), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that Medicare coverage did not necessarily lead to increased diagnosis of chronic conditions. Further research is necessary to explore the underlying mechanisms behind this observation.

Health Care Spending, Use, and Financial Hardship Among Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage Enrollees With Mental Health Symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the differences in health care spending and utilization, and financial hardship between Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees with mental health symptoms. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: We identified Medicare beneficiaries with mental health symptoms using the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 and the Kessler-6 Psychological Distress Scale in the 2015-2021 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes included health care spending and utilization (both general and mental health services), and financial hardship. The primary independent variable was MA enrollment. RESULTS: MA enrollees with mental health symptoms were 2.3 percentage points (95% CI: -3.4, -1.2; relative difference: 16.1%) less likely to have specialty mental health visits than TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. There were no significant differences in total health care spending, but annual out-of-pocket spending was $292 (95% CI: 152-432; 18.2%) higher among MA enrollees with mental health symptoms than TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. Additionally, MA enrollees with mental health symptoms were 5.0 (95% CI: 2.9-7.2; 22.3%) and 2.5 percentage points (95% CI: 0.8-4.2; 20.9%) more likely to have difficulty paying medical bills over time and to experience high financial burden than TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that MA enrollees with mental health symptoms were more likely to experience limited access to mental health services and high financial hardship compared to TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. There is a need to develop policies aimed at improving access to mental health services while reducing financial burden for MA enrollees.

Characteristics and Health Care Spending of Persistently and Transiently High-cost Older Adults in Korea.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined differences in health care spending and characteristics among older adults in Korea by high-cost status (persistently, transiently, and never high-cost). METHODS: We identified 1 364 119 older adults using data from the Korean National Insurance Claims Database for 2017-2019. Outcomes included average annual total health care spending and high-cost status for 2017-2019. Linear regression was used to estimate differences in the outcomes while adjusting for individual-level characteristics. RESULTS: Persistently and transiently high-cost older adults had higher health care spending than never high-cost older adults, but the difference in health care spending was greater among persistently high-cost older adults than among transiently high-cost older adults (US$20 437 vs. 5486). Despite demographic and socioeconomic differences between transiently high-cost and never high-cost older adults, the presence of comorbid conditions remained the most significant factor. However, there were no or small differences in the prevalence of comorbid conditions between persistently high-cost and transiently high-cost older adults. Rather, notable differences were observed in socioeconomic status, including disability and receipt of Medical Aid. CONCLUSIONS: Medical risk factors contribute to high health care spending to some extent, but social risk factors may be a source of persistent high-cost status among older adults in Korea.

Medicare Advantage enrollment by immigration and English proficiency status.

OBJECTIVES: Complex Medicare Advantage (MA) health plan choices may overwhelm immigrants, especially for those facing decision-making constraints due to limited English proficiency (LEP). We examined the trends and patterns of MA enrollment by immigration and English proficiency status. STUDY DESIGN: We employed a cross-sectional design using data from the 2008-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. METHODS: Our outcome was enrollment in an MA plan. Our primary independent variables were immigration and English proficiency status. We categorized the sample into 3 groups: LEP immigrants, non-LEP immigrants, and US-born residents. After adjusting for individual-level characteristics, we estimated the adjusted rates of MA enrollment for each group. RESULTS: Our adjusted analysis showed that MA enrollment was higher among immigrants than US-born residents, but the highest enrollment was found among LEP immigrants (LEP immigrants: 45.5%; 95% CI, 42.7%-48.2%; non-LEP immigrants: 42.1%; 95% CI, 39.4%-44.8%; US-born residents: 35.1%; 95% CI, 34.5%-35.6%). MA enrollment was higher among LEP immigrants with better health status (good self-reported health: 45.4%; 95% CI, 41.9%-48.8%; poor self-reported health: 41.4%; 95% CI, 37.7%-45.1%). However, we found small to no differences in the adjusted rates of MA enrollment between those with good vs poor self-reported health in both the non-LEP immigrants and US-born residents groups. We found no consistent enrollment patterns by socioeconomic status such as race/ethnicity, education, and income. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest higher MA enrollment among immigrants, especially for LEP immigrants. Future research should study the care experience of immigrants in MA.

Use of high- and low-value care among US adults by education levels.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare reform in the United States has focused on improving the value of health care, but there are some concerns about the inequitable delivery of value-based care. OBJECTIVE: We examine whether the receipt of high- and low-value care differs by education levels. METHODS: We employed a repeated cross-sectional study design using data from the 2010-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Our outcomes included 8 high-value services across 3 categories and 9 low-value services across 3 categories. Our primary independent variable was education level: (i) no degree, (ii) high school diploma, and (iii) college graduate. We conducted a linear probability model while adjusting for individual-level characteristics and estimated the adjusted values of the outcomes for each education group. RESULTS: In almost all services, the use of high-value care was greater among more educated adults than less educated adults. Compared to those with no degree, those with a college degree were significantly more likely to receive all high-value services except for HbA1c measurement, ranging from blood pressure measurement (4.5 percentage points [95% CI: 3.9-5.1]) to colorectal cancer screening (15.6 percentage points [95% CI: 13.9-17.3]). However, there were no consistent patterns of the use of low-value care by education levels. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that more educated adults were more likely to receive high-value cancer screening, high-value diagnostic and preventive testing, and high-value diabetes care than less educated adults. These findings highlight the importance of implementing tailored policies to address education-based inequities in the delivery of high-value services in the United States.

Differences in use of high- and low-value health care between immigrant and US-born adults.

OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in the use of high- and low-value health care between immigrant and US-born adults. DATA SOURCE: The 2007-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. STUDY DESIGN: We split the sample into younger (ages 18-64 years) and older adults (ages 65 years and over). Our outcome measures included the use of high-value care (eight services) and low-value care (seven services). Our key independent variable was immigration status. For each outcome, we ran regressions with and without individual-level characteristics. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: N/A. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Before accounting for individual-level characteristics, the use of high- and low-value care was lower among immigrant adults than US-born adults. After accounting for individual-level characteristics, this difference decreased in both groups of younger and older adults. For high-value care, significant differences were observed in five services and the direction of the differences was mixed. The use of breast cancer screening was lower among immigrant than US-born younger and older adults (-5.7 [95% CI: -7.4 to -3.9] and -2.9 percentage points [95% CI: -5.6 to -0.2]) while the use of colorectal cancer screening was higher among immigrant than US-born younger and older adults (2.6 [95% CI: 0.5 to 4.8] and 3.6 [95% CI: 0.2 to 7.0] percentage points). For low-value care, we did not identify significant differences except for antibiotics for acute upper respiratory infection among younger adults and opioids for back pain among older adults (-3.5 [95% CI: -5.5 to -1.5] and -3.8[95% CI: -7.3 to -0.2] percentage points). Particularly, differences in socioeconomic status, health insurance, and care access between immigrant and US-born adults played a key role in accounting for differences in the use of high- and low-value health care. The use of high-value care among immigrant and US-born adults increased over time, but the use of low-value care did not decrease. CONCLUSION: Differential use of high- and low-value care between immigrant and US-born adults may be partly attributable to differences in individual-level characteristics, especially socioeconomic status, health insurance, and access to care.

Unmet Need for Medical Care Among Fee-for-Service Medicare Beneficiaries with High and Low Need.

BACKGROUND: Unmet need for medical care is common among Medicare beneficiaries, but less is known whether unmet need differs between those with high and low levels of need. OBJECTIVE: To examine unmet need for medical care among fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries by level of care need. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We included 29,123 FFS Medicare beneficiaries from the 2010-2016 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. MAIN MEASURES: Our outcomes included three measures of unmet need for medical care. We also examined the reasons for not obtaining needed medical care. Our primary independent variable was a categorization of groups by levels of care need: those with low need (the relatively healthy and those with simple chronic conditions) and those with high need (those with minor complex chronic conditions, those with major complex chronic conditions, the frail, and the non-elderly disabled). RESULTS: The rates of reporting unmet need for medical care were highest among the non-elderly disabled (23.5% [95% CI: 19.8-27.3] for not seeing a doctor despite medical need, 23.8% [95% CI: 20.0-27.6] for experiencing delayed care, and 12.9% [95% CI: 10.2-15.6] for experiencing trouble in getting needed care). However, the rates of reporting unmet need were relatively low among the other groups (ranging from 3.1 to 9.9% for not seeing a doctor despite medical need, from 3.4 to 5.9% for experiencing delayed care, and from 1.9 to 2.9% for experiencing trouble in getting needed care). The most common reason for not seeing a doctor despite medical need was concerns about high costs for the non-elderly disabled (24%), but perception that the issue was not too serious was the most common reason for the other groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our findings suggest the need for targeted policy interventions to address unmet need for non-elderly disabled FFS Medicare beneficiaries, especially for improving affordability of care.

Effects of Medicare eligibility and enrollment at age 65 among immigrants and US-born residents.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the impacts of Medicare coverage among immigrants is of high policy importance, but there is currently limited evidence. In this study, we examined the effects of near universal access to Medicare coverage at age 65 years between immigrants and US-born residents. METHODS: Using the 2007-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we employed a regression discontinuity design, which exploits the eligibility for Medicare at age 65 years. Our outcomes were health insurance coverage, healthcare spending, access to and use of health care, and self-reported health status. RESULTS: Medicare eligibility at age 65 led to significant increases in Medicare coverage among immigrants and US-born residents (74.6 [95% CI: 71.6-77.5] and 81.6 [95% CI: 80.5-82.7] percentage points). Medicare enrollment at age 65 decreased total healthcare spending and out-of-pocket spending by $1579 (95% CI: -2092 to 1065) and $423 (95% CI: -544 to 303) for immigrants and $1186 (95% CI: -2359 to 13) and $450 (95% CI: -774 to 127) for US-born residents. After Medicare enrollment at age 65, immigrants reported only limited improvements in overall access to and use of health care, but they reported significant increases in the use of high-value care (11.5 [95% CI: 6.8-16.2], 8.3 [95% CI: 6.0-10.6], 8.4 [95% CI: 1.0-15.8], and 2.3 [95% CI: 0.9-3.7] percentage points increase for colorectal cancer screening, eye examination for diabetes, influenza vaccine, and cholesterol measurement) and improvements in self-reported health (5.9 [95% CI: 0.9-10.8] and 4.8 [95% CI: 0.5-9.0] percentage points increase for good perceived physical and mental health). Medicare enrollment also increased prescription drug spending by $705 (95% CI: 292-1117), despite the unchanged use of prescription drugs. For US-born residents, use of high-value care, self-reported health, and prescription drug use and spending did not change substantially after Medicare enrollment. CONCLUSION: Medicare has the potential to improve care among older adult immigrants.

Racial and ethnic disparities in access to and enrollment in high-quality Medicare Advantage plans.

OBJECTIVE: Racial and ethnic minority enrollees in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans tend to be in lower-quality plans, measured by a 5-star quality rating system. We examine whether differential access to high-rated plans was associated with this differential enrollment in high-rated plans by race and ethnicity among MA enrollees. DATA SOURCES: The Medicare Master Beneficiary Summary File and MA Landscape File for 2016. STUDY DESIGN: We first examined county-level MA plan offerings by race and ethnicity. We then examined the association of racial and ethnic differences in enrollment by star rating by controlling for the following different sets of covariates: (1) individual-level characteristics only, and (2) individual-level characteristics and county-level MA plan offerings. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Not applicable PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Racial and ethnic minority enrollees had, on average, more MA plans available in their counties of residence compared to White enrollees (16.1, 20.8, 20.2, vs. 15.1 for Black, Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and White enrollees), but had fewer number of high-rated plans (4-star plans or higher) and/or more number of low-rated plans (3.5-star plans or lower). While racial and ethnic minority enrollees had lower enrollment in 4-4.5 star plans than White enrollees, this difference substantially decreased after accounting for county-level MA plan offerings (-9.1 to -0.5 percentage points for Black enrollees, -15.9 to -5.0 percentage points for Asian/Pacific Islander enrollees, and -12.7 to 0.6 percentage points for Hispanic enrollees). Results for Black enrollees were notable as the racial difference reversed when we limited the analysis to those who live in counties that offer a 5-star plan. After accounting for county-level MA plan offerings, Black enrollees had 3.2 percentage points higher enrollment in 5-star plans than White enrollees. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in enrollment in high-rated MA plans by race and ethnicity may be explained by limited access and not by individual characteristics or enrollment decisions.

Access to care and satisfaction with care among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries by level of care need.

BACKGROUND: Variation among fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries by level of care need for access to care and satisfaction with care is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We examined access to care and satisfaction with care among FFS Medicare beneficiaries by level of care need. METHODS: We employed a cross-sectional study design. Using the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, we categorized 17,967 FFS Medicare beneficiaries into six groups based on level of care need: the relatively healthy (11.0%), those with simple chronic conditions (26.1%), those with minor complex chronic conditions (28.6%), those with major complex chronic conditions (14.2%), the frail (6.2%), and the non-elderly disabled or end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (13.9%). Outcome measures included multiple indicators for access to care and satisfaction with care. For each outcome, we conducted a linear probability model while adjusting for individual-level and county-level characteristics and estimated the adjusted value of the outcome by level of care need. RESULTS: The non-elderly disabled or ESRD were more likely to experience limited access to care and poor satisfaction with care than other five care need groups. Particularly, the rates of reporting trouble accessing needed medical care were the highest among the non-elderly disabled or ESRD (12.4% [95% CI: 9.6-15.3] vs. 2.1 [95% CI: 1.5-2.8] to 2.5 [95% CI: 1.6-3.5]). The leading reason for trouble accessing needed care among the non-elderly disabled or ESRD was attributable to affordability (59.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Policymakers need to develop targeted approaches to improve access to care and satisfaction with care for the non-elderly with a disability or ESRD.

Differences between integrated and non-integrated plans in Medicare Advantage.

OBJECTIVE: To understand differences in financial performance, quality performance, supplemental benefits provision, and enrollee composition between integrated and non-integrated plans in the Medicare Advantage (MA) program. DATA SOURCES: We used data from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services for 2015-2017. We included 156 integrated MA plans (31 unique contracts) and 2096 non-integrated MA plans (392 unique contracts). STUDY DESIGN: We estimated linear probably models for financial performance, quality performance, supplemental benefits provision, and enrollee composition with state fixed effects and contract random effects. We adjusted for county-level market structure-related factors, cost-related factors, and demand-related factors. Our primary independent variable was an indicator of plan-provider integration. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Integrated MA plans were associated with $19.4 (95% CI: 9.2, 29.7) and $16.6 (95% CI: 10.3, 22.9) higher Part C and Part D monthly premiums, but were associated with higher star quality ratings. There were no significant differences in revenues and plan payments per enrollee between integrated and non-integrated MA plans. Integrated MA plans were associated with $40.5 (95% CI: -54.0, -26.9) lower non-claims costs than non-integrated MA plans. There was limited evidence that integrated MA plans provided more generous supplemental benefits than non-integrated MA plans. Enrollment rates in integrated MA plans were particularly low among socially marginalized groups (3.4 [95% CI: -5.9, -1.0], 4.7 [95% CI: -8.5, -0.9], and 4.4 [95% CI: -6.4, -2.4] percentage points lower among non-Hispanic Black, Medicare-Medicaid dual eligible, and the disabled). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that integrated MA plans may achieve higher efficiency and quality, but these benefits may not be experienced by all beneficiaries due to disparities in enrollment. As these models continue to spread, it is critical to develop policies to ensure that MA enrollees have equal access to integrated plans.

Effects of Medicare Advantage on preventive care use and health behavior.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollment on preventive care use and health behavior. DATA SOURCES: The Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, the Area Health Resources File, the Geographic Variation Public Use File, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services annual risk and ratebook files for 2012-2016. STUDY DESIGN: Outcomes included 11 measures of preventive care use and six measures of health behavior. My primary independent variable was MA enrollment. For each outcome, I first conducted linear regression analysis while adjusting for individual-level and county-level characteristics. Then, I conducted the following alternative analyses to account for differences in observed and/or unobserved characteristics between MA and traditional Medicare (TM) enrollees: propensity score (PS) matching analysis and instrumental variable (IV) analysis. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: I extracted 9399 MA enrollees and 15,543 TM enrollees. FINDINGS: Linear regression and PS matching analyses showed that MA enrollment was statistically significantly associated with higher likelihood of having blood pressure measurement, cholesterol measurement, and influenza vaccine, lower likelihood of receiving an HbA1C test, and higher likelihood of currently smoking. However, the magnitude of the associations was small. There were no statistically significant associations in other measures. IV analyses also found no or limited evidence that MA enrollment led to statistically significant changes in preventive care use and health behavior. Specifically, MA enrollment led to statistically significant improvements in the likelihood of doing any physical activities (1.29 [95% CI: 0.51-2.07]) or doing muscle-strengthening activities (0.72 [95% CI: 0.03-1.41]). No statistically significant changes were observed in other measures. CONCLUSIONS: MA plans may not necessarily increase the use of preventive services and improve health behaviors. As improvements in preventive services and health behavior may have the potential to achieve better outcomes while lowering costs, policy makers should consider developing targeted interventions for MA to achieve those improvements.

Effects of Medicare eligibility and enrollment at age 65 years on the use of high-value and low-value care.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of Medicare eligibility and enrollment on the use of high-value and low-value care services. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: The 2002-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. STUDY DESIGN: We employed a regression discontinuity design, which exploits the discontinuity in eligibility for Medicare at age 65 and compares individuals just before and after age 65. Our primary outcomes included the use of high-value care services (eight services) and low-value care services (seven services). To examine the effects of Medicare eligibility, we conducted a regression discontinuity analysis. To examine the effects of Medicare enrollment, we used the discontinuity in the probability of having Medicare coverage around the age eligibility cutoff and conducted an instrumental variable analysis. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: N/A. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Medicare eligibility and enrollment led to statistically significant increases in the use of only two high-value services: cholesterol measurement [2.1 percentage points (95%: 0.4-3.7) (2.2% relative change) and 2.4 percentage points (95%: 0.4-4.4)] and receipt of the influenza vaccine [3.0 percentage points (95%: 0.3-5.6) (6.0% relative change) and 3.6 percentage points (95%: 0.4-6.8)]. Medicare eligibility and enrollment led to statistically significant increases in the use of two low-value services: antibiotics for acute upper respiratory infections [6.9 percentage points (95% CI: 0.8-13.0) (24.0% relative change) and 8.2 percentage points (95% CI: 0.8-15.5)] and radiographs for back pain [4.6 percentage points (95% CI: 0.1-9.2) (36.8% relative change) and 6.2 percentage points (95% CI: 0.1-12.3)]. However, there was no significant change in the use of other high-value and low-value care services. CONCLUSION: Medicare eligibility and enrollment at age 65 years led to increases in the use of some high-value and low-value care services, but there were no changes in the use of the majority of other services. Policymakers should consider refining the Medicare program to enhance the value of care delivered.

Association of Medicare Advantage Star Ratings With Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Hospitalizations for Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions.

BACKGROUND: Enrollment in high-quality Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, measured by a 5-star quality rating system, was lower among racial and ethnic minority enrollees than White enrollees partly due to fewer high-quality plans available in their counties of residence. This may contribute to racial and ethnic disparities in ambulatory care sensitive condition (ACSC) hospitalizations. OBJECTIVE: We examined whether there were racial and ethnic disparities in ACSC hospitalizations among MA enrollees overall and by star rating. METHODS: Using the Medicare enrollment and claims data for 2016, we identified White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander enrollees in MA plans. We estimated racial and ethnic disparities in ACSC hospitalizations (per 10,000 enrollees) overall and by star rating. RESULTS: We found that the adjusted rates of ACSC hospitalizations were significantly higher among Black enrollees than White enrollees overall [39.4 (95% confidence interval: 36.3-42.5)]. However, no significant disparities were found among Hispanic and Asian/Pacific Islander enrollees. The adjusted rates of ACSC hospitalizations were higher in lower-rated plans than higher-rated plans in all racial and ethnic groups. The significant disparities in ACSC hospitalizations by star rating were the most pronounced between White and Black enrollees. We found suggestive evidence that enrollment in lower-rated plans was associated with higher disparities in ACSC hospitalizations between White and Black enrollees. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial disparities in ACSC hospitalizations exist between White and Black enrollees in MA plans, especially for lower-rated plans. Policies aimed at reducing racial disparities in ACSC hospitalizations could include improving access to high-rated plans.

Variations in Medicare Advantage Switching Rates Among African American and Hispanic Medicare Beneficiaries With Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias, by Sex and Dual Eligibility.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to identify rates of switching to Medicare Advantage (MA) among fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) by race/ethnicity and whether these rates vary by sex and dual-eligibility status for Medicare and Medicaid. METHODS: Data came from the Medicare Master Beneficiary Summary File from 2017 to 2018. The outcome of interest for this study was switching from FFS to MA during any month in 2018. The primary independent variable was race/ethnicity including non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic African American, and Hispanic beneficiaries. Two interaction terms among race/ethnicity and dual eligibility, and race/ethnicity and sex were included. The model adjusted for age, year of ADRD diagnosis, the number of chronic/disabling conditions, total health care costs, and ZIP code fixed effects. RESULTS: The study included 2,284,175 FFS Medicare beneficiaries with an ADRD diagnosis in 2017. Among dual-eligible beneficiaries, adjusted rates of switching were higher among African American (1.91 percentage points [p.p.], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.68-2.15) and Hispanic beneficiaries (1.36 p.p., 95% CI: 1.07-1.64) compared to non-Hispanic White beneficiaries. Among males, adjusted rates were higher among African American (3.28 p.p., 95% CI: 2.97-3.59) and Hispanic beneficiaries (2.14 p.p., 95% CI: 1.86-2.41) compared to non-Hispanic White beneficiaries. DISCUSSION: Among persons with ADRD, African American and Hispanic beneficiaries are more likely than White beneficiaries to switch from FFS to MA. This finding underscores the need to monitor the quality and equity of access and care for these populations.

Insurance coverage and health care spending by state-level Medigap regulations.

OBJECTIVES: Medigap protects traditional Medicare (TM) beneficiaries against catastrophic expenses. Federal regulations around Medigap enrollment and pricing are limited to the first 6 months after turning 65 years old. Eight states institute regulations that apply to later enrollment; half use community rating (charging everyone the same premium) and half use both community rating and guaranteed issue (requiring insurers to accept any beneficiary irrespective of health conditions). We examined the impact of state-level Medigap regulations on insurance coverage and health care spending for Medicare beneficiaries. STUDY DESIGN: We used a retrospective cohort study design. Using the 2010-2016 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, we identified beneficiaries with TM only, TM + Medigap, or Medicare Advantage (MA) by state-level Medigap regulations. METHODS: Outcomes were insurance coverage and health care spending. We used an instrumental variable approach to address endogenous insurance choice. We conducted 2-stage least squares regression while controlling for individual-level characteristics and area-level demographic characteristics. Then we used the recycled prediction methods to predict enrollment and spending outcomes for the 3 state-level Medigap regulation scenarios. RESULTS: Although enrollment in TM only was consistent across regulation scenarios, the scenario with community rating and guaranteed issue had lower Medigap enrollment and higher MA enrollment than the no-regulation scenario. Despite negligible health differences, TM + Medigap beneficiaries had higher Medicare spending than TM-only beneficiaries, suggesting moral hazard. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest a link between additional regulations and lower Medigap and higher MA enrollment. Policy makers should consider the potential effects on insurance coverage, premiums, financial protection, and moral hazard when designing Medigap regulations.

Effect of Medicare Advantage on health care use and care dissatisfaction in mental illness.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollment on health care use and dissatisfaction with care received among Medicare beneficiaries with mental illness. DATA SOURCES: I identified traditional Medicare (TM) and MA beneficiaries with mental illness using the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey for 2012-2016. STUDY DESIGN: I included two types of outcomes: four measures of health care use and 10 measures of care dissatisfaction. My primary independent variable was enrollment in TM versus MA. To address selective enrollment into MA, I used an instrumental variable (IV) approach. Following prior research, I decomposed the MA benchmark into exogenous and endogenous components and then used the exogenous component as my instrument. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Not Applicable. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: IV analyses showed that compared with TM enrollment, MA enrollment significantly decreased outpatient hospital visits and medical provider visits by 6.73 (95% CI: -12.10 to -1.36) and 36.48 (95% CI: -52.67 to -20.28). However, there were no significant changes in inpatient hospital admissions and prescription drug purchases. Compared with TM enrollment, MA enrollment significantly increased dissatisfaction with out-of-pocket expenses by 25.51 percentage points (95% CI: 0.43 to 50.60). However, there were no significant changes in other measures of care dissatisfaction in terms of access to care, quality of care, and prescription medication. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that MA enrollment may lead to low health care use among those with mental illness, indicating efficient care delivery. Also, MA enrollment may not preclude those with mental illness from accessing needed care. However, high dissatisfaction with out-of-pocket expenses among MA beneficiaries may imply the use of out-of-network providers. Further research is warranted to investigate whether high dissatisfaction with out-of-pocket expenses may be attributable to MA's narrow networks for mental services.