Assessing Area-Level Deprivation as a Proxy for Individual-Level Social Risks.

INTRODUCTION: Concerns about the opportunity costs of social screening initiatives have led some healthcare organizations to consider using social deprivation indices (area-level social risks) as proxies for self-reported needs (individual-level social risks). Yet, little is known about the effectiveness of such substitutions across different populations. METHODS: This analysis explores how well the highest quartile (cold spot) of three different area-level social risk measures-the Social Deprivation Index, Area Deprivation Index, and Neighborhood Stress Score-corresponds with six individual-level social risks and three risk combinations among a national sample of Medicare Advantage members (N=77,503). Data were derived from area-level measures and cross-sectional survey data collected between October 2019 and February 2020. Agreement between individual and individual-level social risks, sensitivity values, specificity values, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values was calculated for all measures in summer/fall 2022. RESULTS: Agreement between area and individual-level social risks ranged from 53% to 77%. Sensitivity for each risk and risk category never exceeded 42%; specificity values ranged from 62% to 87%. Positive predictive values ranged from 8% to 70%, and negative predictive values ranged from 48% to 93%. There were modest performance discrepancies across area-level measures. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide additional evidence that area-level deprivation indices may be inconsistent indicators of individual-level social risks, supporting policy efforts to promote individual-level social screening programs in healthcare settings.

Association Between a Bundled Payment Program for Lower Extremity Joint Replacement and Patient Outcomes Among Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries.

Importance: Much of the evidence for bundled payments has been drawn from models in the traditional Medicare program. Although private insurers are increasingly offering bundled payment programs, it is not known whether they are associated with changes in episode spending and quality. Objective: To evaluate whether a voluntary bundled payment program offered by a national Medicare Advantage insurer was associated with changes in episode spending or quality of care for beneficiaries receiving lower extremity joint replacement (LEJR) surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional study of 23 034 LEJR surgical episodes that emulated a stepped-wedge design by using the time-varying, geographically staggered rollout of the bundled payment program from January 1, 2012, to September 30, 2019. Episode-level multivariable regression models were estimated within practice to compare changes before and after program participation, using episodes at physician practices that had not yet begun participating in the program during a given time period (but would go on to do so) as the control. Data analyses were performed from July 1, 2021, to June 30, 2022. Exposures: Physician practice participation in the bundled payment program. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was episode spending (plan and beneficiary). Secondary outcomes included postacute care use (skilled nursing facility and home health care), surgical setting (inpatient vs outpatient), and quality (90-day complications [including deep vein thrombosis, wound infection, fracture, or dislocation] and readmissions). Results: The final analytic sample included 23 034 LEJR episodes (6355 bundled episodes and 16 679 control episodes) from 109 physician practices participating in the program. Of the beneficiaries, 7730 were male and 15 304 were female, 3057 were Black, 19 351 were White, 447 were of other race or ethnicity (assessed according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services beneficiary race and ethnicity code, which reflects data reported to the Social Security Administration), and 179 were of unknown race and ethnicity. The mean (SD) age was 70.9 (7.2) years. Participation in the bundled payment program was associated with a 2.7% (95% CI, 1.3%-4.1%) decrease in spending per episode (mean episodic spending, $21 964 [95% CI, $21 636-$22 296] vs $22 562 [95% CI, $22 346-$22 779]), as well as reductions in skilled nursing facility use after discharge (21.3% for bundled episodes vs 25.0% for control episodes; odds ratio [OR], 0.81 [95% CI, 0.67-0.98]) and increased use of the outpatient surgical setting (14.1% for bundled episodes vs 8.4% for control episodes; OR, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.53-2.09]). The program was not associated with changes in quality outcomes, including 90-day complications (8.8% for bundled episodes vs 8.6% for control episodes; OR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.86-1.20]) and readmissions (4.3% for bundled episodes vs 4.6% for control episodes; OR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.75-1.13]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of an LEJR bundled payment program offered by a national Medicare Advantage insurer, findings suggest that physician practice participation in the program was associated with a decrease in episode spending without changes in quality. Bundled payments offered by private insurers, including Medicare Advantage plans, are an alternate payment option to fee for service that may reduce spending for LEJR episodes while maintaining quality of care.

Association of Health-Related Social Needs With Quality and Utilization Outcomes in a Medicare Advantage Population With Diabetes.

Importance: Recent research highlights the association of social determinants of health with health outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Objective: To examine associations between health-related social needs (HRSNs) and health care quality and utilization outcomes in a Medicare Advantage population with T2D. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used medical and pharmacy claims data from 2019. An HRSN survey was given between October 16, 2019, and February 29, 2020, to Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. Inclusion criteria were diagnosis of T2D, age of 20 to 89 years, continuous Medicare Advantage enrollment in 2019, and response to the HRSN survey. Data were analyzed between June 2021 and January 2022. Exposures: Enrollment in Medicare Advantage, diagnosis of T2D, and completion of a survey on HRSNs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality outcomes included diabetes medication adherence, statin adherence, completion of a glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) laboratory test in the past 12 months, and controlled HbA1c. Utilization outcomes included all-cause hospitalization, potentially avoidable hospitalization, emergency department discharge, and readmission. Results: Of the 21 528 Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with T2D included in the study (mean [SD] age, 71.0 [8.3] years; 55.4% women), most (56.9%) had at least 1 HRSN. Among the population with T2D reporting HRSNs, the most prevalent were financial strain (73.6%), food insecurity (47.5%), and poor housing quality (39.1%). In adjusted models, loneliness (odds ratio [OR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99), lack of transportation (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.92), utility insecurity (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.98), and housing insecurity (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.91) were each associated with lower diabetes medication adherence. Loneliness and lack of transportation were associated with increased emergency visits (marginal effects of 173.0 [95% CI, 74.2-271.9] and 244.6 [95% CI, 150.4-338.9] emergency visits per 1000 beneficiaries for loneliness and transportation, respectively). Food insecurity was the HRSN most consistently associated with higher acute care utilization (marginal effects of 84.6 [95% CI, 19.8-149.4] emergency visits, 30.4 [95% CI, 9.5-51.3] inpatient encounters, and 17.1 [95% CI, 4.7-29.5] avoidable hospitalizations per 1000 beneficiaries). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with T2D, some HRSNs were associated with care quality and utilization. The results of the study may be used to direct interventions to the social needs most associated with T2D health outcomes and inform policy decisions at the insurance plan and community level.

Association Between Self-reported Health-Related Social Needs and Acute Care Utilization Among Older Adults Enrolled in Medicare Advantage.

Importance: There is increased focus on identifying and addressing health-related social needs (HRSNs). Understanding how different HRSNs relate to different health outcomes can inform targeted, evidence-based policies, investments, and innovations to address HRSNs. Objective: To examine the association between self-reported HRSNs and acute care utilization among older adults enrolled in Medicare Advantage. Design Setting and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from a large, national survey of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries to identify the presence of HRSNs. Survey data were linked to medical claims, and regression models were used to estimate the association between HRSNs and rates of acute care utilization from January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019. Exposures: Self-reported HRSNs, including food insecurity, financial strain, loneliness, unreliable transportation, utility insecurity, housing insecurity, and poor housing quality. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause hospital stays (inpatient admissions and observation stays), avoidable hospital stays, all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, avoidable ED visits, and 30-day readmissions. Results: Among a final study population of 56 155 Medicare Advantage beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 74.0 [5.8] years; 32 779 [58.4%] women; 44 278 [78.8%] White; and 7634 [13.6%] dual eligible for Medicaid), 27 676 (49.3%) reported 1 or more HRSNs. Health-related social needs were associated with statistically significantly higher rates of all utilization measures, with the largest association observed for avoidable hospital stays (incident rate ratio for any HRSN, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.35-1.74; P < .001). Compared with beneficiaries without HRSNs, beneficiaries with an HRSN had a 53.3% higher rate of avoidable hospitalization (incident rate ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.35-1.74; P < .001). Financial strain and unreliable transportation were each independently associated with increased rates of hospital stays (marginal effects of 26.5 [95% CI, 14.2-38.9] and 51.2 [95% CI, 30.7-71.8] hospital stays per 1000 beneficiaries, respectively). All HRSNs, except for utility insecurity, were independently associated with increased rates of ED visits. Unreliable transportation had the largest association with increased hospital stays and ED visits, with marginal effects of 51.2 (95% CI, 30.7-71.8) and 95.5 (95% CI, 65.3-125.8) ED visits per 1000 beneficiaries, respectively. Only unreliable transportation and financial strain were associated with increased rates of 30-day readmissions, with marginal effects of 3.3% (95% CI, 2.0%-4.0%) and 0.4% (95% CI, 0.2%-0.6%), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of older adults enrolled in Medicare Advantage, self-reported HRSNs were common and associated with statistically significantly increased rates of acute care utilization, with variation in which HRSNs were associated with different utilization measures. These findings provide evidence of the unique association between certain HRSNs and different types of acute care utilization, which could help refine the development and targeting of efforts to address HRSNs.

A real-world comparison of cardiovascular, medical and costs outcomes in new users of SGLT2 inhibitors versus GLP-1 agonists.

AIMS: To compare SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes, treatment persistence/discontinuation, healthcare utilization and costs. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized medical and pharmacy claims to identify new SGLT2 inhibitor or GLP-1 agonist users from January 2015 to June 2017. A total of 5,507 patients were included in each treatment group after 1:1 propensity score matching. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare CV outcomes and treatment discontinuation. Healthcare utilization and costs were compared using Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: No differences in the primary composite CV outcome or secondary CV outcome were observed. Patients using GLP-1 agonists were more likely to discontinue treatment (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.21) and more likely to have an inpatient hospitalization (14.4% vs. 11.9%, P < 0.001) or emergency department visit (27.4% vs. 23.5%, P < 0.001) compared to patients on SGLT2 inhibitors. The average per-person per-month cost difference was +$179 for total cost (P < 0.001), +$70 for medical cost (P < 0.001) and +$108 for pharmacy cost (P < 0.001) for GLP-1 agonists compared to SGLT2 inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in composite CV outcomes were not established. However, other findings that favored SGLT2 inhibitors should be weighed against the known risks associated with this therapeutic class.