RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The association of historical redlining policies, a marker of structural racism, with contemporary heart failure (HF) risk among White and Black individuals is not well established. METHODS: We aimed to evaluate the association of redlining with the risk of HF among White and Black Medicare beneficiaries. Zip code-level redlining was determined by the proportion of historically redlined areas using the Mapping Inequality Project within each zip code. The association between higher zip code redlining proportion (quartile 4 versus quartiles 1-3) and HF risk were assessed separately among White and Black Medicare beneficiaries using generalized linear mixed models adjusted for potential confounders, including measures of the zip code-level Social Deprivation Index. RESULTS: A total of 2 388 955 Medicare beneficiaries (Black n=801 452; White n=1 587 503; mean age, 71 years; men, 44.6%) were included. Among Black beneficiaries, living in zip codes with higher redlining proportion (quartile 4 versus quartiles 1-3) was associated with increased risk of HF after adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities (risk ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.04-1.12]; P<0.001). This association remained significant after further adjustment for area-level Social Deprivation Index (risk ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.002-1.08]; P=0.04). A significant interaction was observed between redlining proportion and Social Deprivation Index (Pinteraction<0.01) such that higher redlining proportion was significantly associated with HF risk only among socioeconomically distressed regions (above the median Social Deprivation Index). Among White beneficiaries, redlining was associated with a lower risk of HF after adjustment for age, sex, and comorbidities (risk ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.89-0.99]; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Historical redlining is associated with an increased risk of HF among Black patients. Contemporary zip code-level social determinants of health modify the relationship between redlining and HF risk, with the strongest relationship between redlining and HF observed in the most socioeconomically disadvantaged communities.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Medicare , Características del Vecindario , Determinantes Sociales de la Salud , Anciano , Humanos , Masculino , Población Negra , Comorbilidad , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/etnología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/psicología , Medicare/economía , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores Socioeconómicos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Población Blanca , Estrés Financiero/economía , Estrés Financiero/epidemiología , Estrés Financiero/etnología , Características del Vecindario/estadística & datos numéricos , Determinantes Sociales de la Salud/etnología , Determinantes Sociales de la Salud/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation launched the Medicare Bundled Payments for Care Improvement-Advanced (BPCI-A) program for hospitals in October 2018. Information is needed about the effects of the program on health care utilization and Medicare payments. METHODS: We conducted a modified segmented regression analysis using Medicare claims and including patients with discharge dates from January 2017 through September 2019 to assess differences between BPCI-A participants and two control groups: hospitals that never joined the BPCI-A program (nonjoining hospitals) and hospitals that joined the BPCI-A program in January 2020, after the conclusion of the intervention period (late-joining hospitals). The primary outcomes were the differences in changes in quarterly trends in 90-day per-episode Medicare payments and the percentage of patients with readmission within 90 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes were mortality, volume, and case mix. RESULTS: A total of 826 BPCI-A participant hospitals were compared with 2016 nonjoining hospitals and 334 late-joining hospitals. Among BPCI-A hospitals, the mean baseline 90-day per-episode Medicare payment was $27,315; the change in the quarterly trends in the intervention period as compared with baseline was -$78 per quarter. Among nonjoining hospitals, the mean baseline 90-day per-episode Medicare payment was $25,994; the change in quarterly trends as compared with baseline was -$26 per quarter (difference between nonjoining hospitals and BPCI-A hospitals, $52 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 34 to 70] per quarter; P<0.001; 0.2% of the baseline payment). Among late-joining hospitals, the mean baseline 90-day per-episode Medicare payment was $26,807; the change in the quarterly trends as compared with baseline was $4 per quarter (difference between late-joining hospitals and BPCI-A hospitals, $82 [95% CI, 41 to 122] per quarter; P<0.001; 0.3% of the baseline payment). There were no meaningful differences in the changes with regard to readmission, mortality, volume, or case mix. CONCLUSIONS: The BPCI-A program was associated with small reductions in Medicare payments among participating hospitals as compared with control hospitals. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.).
Asunto(s)
Economía Hospitalaria , Medicare/economía , Paquetes de Atención al Paciente/economía , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/economía , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Grupos Diagnósticos Relacionados , Episodio de Atención , Femenino , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Hospitales/normas , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mortalidad , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Análisis de Regresión , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
In recent years, health care policy makers have focused increasingly on addressing social drivers of health as a strategy for improving health and health equity. Impacts of social, economic, and environmental conditions on health are well established. However, less is known about the implementation and impact of approaches used by health care providers and payers to address social drivers of health in clinical settings. This article reviews current efforts by US health care organizations and public payers such as Medicaid and Medicare to address social drivers of health at the individual and community levels. We summarize the limited available evidence regarding intervention impacts on health care utilization, costs, and integration of care and identify key lessons learned from current implementation efforts.
Asunto(s)
Determinantes Sociales de la Salud , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Medicare/economía , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicaid/economía , Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud/economíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Depressive symptoms are prevalent among knee osteoarthritis (KOA) patients and may lead to additional medical costs. We compared medical costs in Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) respondents with KOA with and without self-reported depressive symptoms. METHODS: We identified a KOA cohort using ICD-9/10 diagnostic codes in both Part A and Part B claims among community-dwelling MCBS respondents from 2003 to 2019. We determined the presence of depressive symptoms using self-reported data on sadness or anhedonia. We considered three groups: 1) without depressive symptoms, 2) with depressive symptoms, no billable services, and 3) with depressive symptoms and billable services. We used a generalized linear model with log-transformed outcomes to compare annual total direct medical costs among the three groups, adjusting for age, gender, race, history of fall, Total Joint Replacement, comorbidities, and calendar year. RESULTS: The analysis included 4118 MCBS respondents with KOA. Of them, 27% had self-reported depressive symptoms, and 6% reported depressive symptoms and received depression-related billable services. The adjusted mean direct medical costs were $8598/year for those without depressive symptoms, $9239/year for those who reported depressive symptoms and received no billable services, and $14,229/year for those who reported depressive symptoms and received billable services. CONCLUSION: While over one quarter of Medicare beneficiaries with KOA self-reported depressive symptoms, only 6% received billable medical services. The presence of depressive symptoms led to higher direct medical costs, even among those who did not receive depression-related billable services.
Asunto(s)
Depresión , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Medicare , Osteoartritis de la Rodilla , Humanos , Osteoartritis de la Rodilla/economía , Osteoartritis de la Rodilla/psicología , Estados Unidos , Masculino , Femenino , Medicare/economía , Anciano , Depresión/economía , Depresión/epidemiología , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Persona de Mediana Edad , AutoinformeRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The association of hospital market competition, financial costs, and quality of oncologic care has not been well-defined. This study sought to evaluate variations in patient outcomes and financial expenditures after complex cancer surgery across high- and low-competition markets. METHODS: Medicare 100% Standard Analytic Files were used to identify patients with lung, esophageal, gastric, hepatopancreaticobiliary, or colorectal cancer who underwent surgical resection between 2018 and 2021. Data were merged with the annual hospital survey database, and the hospital market Herfindahl-Hirschman index was used to categorize hospitals into low- and high-concentration markets. Multi-level, multivariable regression models adjusting for patient characteristics (i.e., age, sex, comorbidities, and social vulnerability), year of procedure, and hospital factors (i.e., case volume, nurse-bed ratio, and teaching status) were used to assess the association between hospital market competition and outcomes. RESULTS: Among 117,641 beneficiaries who underwent complex oncologic surgery, the mean age was 73.8 ± 6.1 years, and approximately one-half of the cohort was male (n = 56,243, 47.8%). Overall, 63.8% (n = 75,041) of the patients underwent care within a high-competition market. Notably, there was marked geographic variation relative to market competition. High versus low market-competition hospitals were more likely to be in high social vulnerability areas (35.1 vs 27.5%; p < 0.001), as well as care for racial/ethnic minority individuals (13.8 vs 7.7%; p < 0.001), and patients with more comorbidities (≥ 2 Elixhauser comorbidities: 63.1 vs 61.1%; p < 0.001). In the multivariable analysis, treatment at hospitals in high- versus low-competition markets was associated with lower odds of achieving a textbook outcome (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-0.99; p = 0.009). Patients at high-competition hospitals had greater mean index hospitalization costs ($19,462.2 [16211.9] vs $18,844.7 [14994.7]) and 90-day post-discharge costs ($7807.8 [15431.3] vs $7332.8 [14038.2]) (both p < 0.001) than individuals at low-competition hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital market competition was associated with poor achievement of an optimal postoperative outcome and greater hospitalization costs.
Asunto(s)
Competencia Económica , Neoplasias , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Neoplasias/cirugía , Neoplasias/economía , Estudios de Seguimiento , Medicare/economía , Pronóstico , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano de 80 o más AñosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: This study was designed to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date understanding of population-level reoperation rates and incremental healthcare costs associated with reoperation for patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study using Merative™ MarketScan® commercial insurance data and Medicare 5% fee-for-service claims data. The study included females aged 18-64 years in the commercial cohort and females aged 18 years and older in the Medicare cohort, who underwent initial BCS for breast cancer in 2017-2019. Reoperation rates within a year of the initial BCS and overall 1-year healthcare costs stratified by reoperation status were measured. RESULTS: The commercial cohort included 17,129 women with a median age of 55 (interquartile range [IQR] 49-59) years, and the Medicare cohort included 6977 women with a median age of 73 (IQR 69-78) years. Overall reoperation rates were 21.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.5-21.8%) for the commercial cohort and 14.9% (95% CI 14.1-15.7%) for the Medicare cohort. In both cohorts, reoperation rates decreased as age increased, and conversion to mastectomy was more prevalent among younger women in the commercial cohort. The mean healthcare costs during 1 year of follow-up from the initial BCS were $95,165 for the commercial cohort and $36,313 for the Medicare cohort. Reoperations were associated with 24% higher costs in both the commercial and Medicare cohorts, which translated into $21,607 and $8559 incremental costs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of reoperation after BCS have remained high and have contributed to increased healthcare costs. Continuing efforts to reduce reoperation need more attention.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Mastectomía Segmentaria , Reoperación , Humanos , Femenino , Reoperación/estadística & datos numéricos , Reoperación/economía , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Mama/economía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Mastectomía Segmentaria/economía , Mastectomía Segmentaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Estudios de Seguimiento , Estados Unidos , Adolescente , Adulto Joven , Mastectomía/economía , Medicare/economía , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , PronósticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Federal rules mandate that hospitals publish payer-specific negotiated prices for all services. Little is known about variation in payer-negotiated prices for surgical oncology services or their relationship to clinical outcomes. We assessed variation in payer-negotiated prices associated with surgical care for common cancers at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers and determined the effect of increasing payer-negotiated prices on the odds of morbidity and mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of 63 NCI-designated cancer center websites was employed to assess variation in payer-negotiated prices. A retrospective cohort study of 15,013 Medicare beneficiaries undergoing surgery for colon, pancreas, or lung cancers at an NCI-designated cancer center between 2014 and 2018 was conducted to determine the relationship between payer-negotiated prices and clinical outcomes. The primary outcome was the effect of median payer-negotiated price on odds of a composite outcome of 30 days mortality and serious postoperative complications for each cancer cohort. RESULTS: Within-center prices differed by up to 48.8-fold, and between-center prices differed by up to 675-fold after accounting for geographic variation in costs of providing care. Among the 15,013 patients discharged from 20 different NCI-designated cancer centers, the effect of normalized median payer-negotiated price on the composite outcome was clinically negligible, but statistically significantly positive for colon [aOR 1.0094 (95% CI 1.0051-1.0138)], lung [aOR 1.0145 (1.0083-1.0206)], and pancreas [aOR 1.0080 (1.0040-1.0120)] cancer cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Payer-negotiated prices are statistically significantly but not clinically meaningfully related to morbidity and mortality for the surgical treatment of common cancers. Higher payer-negotiated prices are likely due to factors other than clinical quality.
Asunto(s)
Instituciones Oncológicas , National Cancer Institute (U.S.) , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Femenino , Masculino , Instituciones Oncológicas/economía , Estudios Transversales , National Cancer Institute (U.S.)/economía , Anciano , Medicare/economía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/economía , Neoplasias/cirugía , Neoplasias/economía , Neoplasias Pulmonares/cirugía , Neoplasias Pulmonares/economía , Estudios de Seguimiento , Tasa de Supervivencia , Pronóstico , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economía , Neoplasias del Colon/cirugía , Neoplasias del Colon/economíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: On October 11, 2023, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) expanded the indications for carotid artery stenting (CAS) to include patients with ≥50% symptomatic or ≥70% asymptomatic carotid stenosis. The aim of this article was to investigate the implications of this decision. METHODS: The reasons behind the increased coverage for CAS are analyzed and discussed, as well as the various Societies supporting or opposing the expansion of indications for CAS. RESULTS: The benefits associated with expanding CAS indications include providing an additional therapeutic option to patients and enabling individualization of treatment according to patient-specific characteristics. The drawbacks of expanding CAS indications include a possible bias in decision-making and an increase in inappropriate CAS procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The purpose of the CMS recommendation to expand indications for CAS is to improve the available therapeutic options for patients. Hopefully this decision will not be misinterpreted and will be used to improve patient options and patient outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Estenosis Carotídea , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S. , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Selección de Paciente , Stents , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Estenosis Carotídea/terapia , Estenosis Carotídea/cirugía , Estenosis Carotídea/diagnóstico por imagen , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Enfermedades Asintomáticas , Resultado del Tratamiento , Formulación de Políticas , Medicare/economíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The vast majority of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) undergoing repairs receive endovascular interventions (EVARs) instead of open operations (OARs). Although EVARs have better short-term outcomes, OARs have improved longer-term durability and require less radiographic follow-up and monitoring, which may have significant implications on health care economics surrounding provision of AAA care nationally. Herein, we compared costs associated with EVAR and OAR of both infrarenal and complex AAAs. METHODS: We examined patients undergoing index elective EVARs or OARs of infrarenal and complex AAAs in the 2014-2019 Vascular Quality Initiative-Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network (VQI-VISION) dataset. We defined overall costs as the aggregated longitudinal costs associated with: (1) the index surgery; (2) reinterventions; and (3) imaging tests. We evaluated overall costs up to 5 years after infrarenal AAA repair and 3 years for complex AAA repair. Multivariable regressions adjusted for case-mix when evaluating cost differences between EVARs vs OARs. RESULTS: We identified 23,746 infrarenal AAA repairs (8.7% OAR, 91% EVAR) and 2279 complex AAA repairs (69% OAR, 31% EVAR). In both cohorts, patients undergoing EVARs were more likely to be older and have more comorbidities. The cost for the index procedure for EVARs relative to OARs was lower for infrarenal AAAs ($32,440 vs $37,488; P < .01) but higher among complex AAAs ($48,870 vs $44,530; P < .01). EVARs had higher annual imaging and reintervention costs during each of the 5 postoperative years for infrarenal aneurysms and the 3 postoperative years for complex aneurysms. Among patients undergoing infrarenal AAA repairs who survived 5 years, the total 5-year cost of EVARs was similar to that of OARs ($35,858 vs $34,212; -$223 [95% confidence interval (CI), -$3042 to $2596]). For complex AAA repairs, the total cost at 3 years of EVARs was greater than OARs ($64,492 vs $42,212; +$9860 [95% CI, $5835-$13,885]). For patients receiving EVARs for complex aneurysms, physician-modified endovascular grafts had higher index procedure costs ($55,835 vs $47,064; P < .01) although similar total costs on adjusted analyses (+$1856 [95% CI, -$7997 to $11,710]; P = .70) relative to Zenith fenestrated endovascular grafts among those that were alive at 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: Longer-term costs associated with EVARs are lower for infrarenal AAAs but higher for complex AAAs relative to OARs, driven by reintervention and imaging costs. Further analyses to characterize the financial viability of EVARs for both infrarenal and complex AAAs should evaluate hospital margins and anticipated changes in costs of devices.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Medicare , Humanos , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/economía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Procedimientos Endovasculares/economía , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Masculino , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Femenino , Factores de Tiempo , Medicare/economía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/economía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios Retrospectivos , Bases de Datos Factuales , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The provision of high-quality hospital care requires adequate space, buildings, and equipment, although redundant infrastructure could also drive service overprovision. OBJECTIVE: To explore the distribution of physical hospital resources-that is, capital assets-in the United States; its correlation with indicators of community health and nonhealth factors; and the association between hospital capital density and regional hospital utilization and costs. RESEARCH DESIGN: We created a dataset of n=1733 US counties by analyzing the 2019 Medicare Cost Reports; 2019 State Inpatient Database Community Inpatient Statistics; 2020-2021 Area Health Resource File; 2016-2020 American Community Survey; 2022 PLACES; and 2019 CDC WONDER. We first calculated aggregate hospital capital assets and investment at the county level. Next, we examined the correlation between community's medical need (eg, chronic disease prevalence), ability to pay (eg, insurance), and supply factors with 4 metrics of capital availability. Finally, we examined the association between capital assets and hospital utilization/costs, adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: Counties with older and sicker populations generally had less aggregate hospital capital per capita, per hospital day, and per hospital discharge, while counties with higher income or insurance coverage had more hospital capital. In linear regressions controlling for medical need and ability to pay, capital assets were associated with greater hospital utilization and costs, for example, an additional $1000 in capital assets per capita was associated with 73 additional discharges per 100,000 population (95% CI: 45-102) and $19 in spending per bed day (95% CI: 12-26). CONCLUSIONS: The level of investment in hospitals is linked to community wealth but not population health needs, and may drive use and costs.
Asunto(s)
Hospitalización , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitalización/economía , Costos de Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicare/economía , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Salud Pública/economíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Fragmented readmissions, when admission and readmission occur at different hospitals, are associated with increased charges compared with nonfragmented readmissions. We assessed if hospital participation in health information exchange (HIE) was associated with differences in total charges in fragmented readmissions. DATA SOURCE: Medicare Fee-for-Service Data, 2018. STUDY DESIGN: We used generalized linear models with hospital referral region and readmission month fixed effects to assess relationships between information sharing (same HIE, different HIEs, and no HIE available) and total charges of 30-day readmissions among fragmented readmissions; analyses were adjusted for patient-level clinical/demographic characteristics and hospital-level characteristics. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: We included beneficiaries with a hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, syncope, urinary tract infection, dehydration, or behavioral issues with a 30-day readmission for any reason. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In all, 279,729 admission-readmission pairs were included, 27% of which were fragmented (n=75,438); average charges of fragmented readmissions were $64,897-$71,606. Compared with fragmented readmissions where no HIE was available, the average marginal effects of same-HIE and different-HIE admission-readmission pairs were -$2329.55 (95% CI: -7333.73, 2674.62) and -$3905.20 (95% CI: -7592.85, -307.54), respectively. While the average marginal effects of different-HIE pairs were lower than those for no-HIE fragmented readmissions, the average marginal effects of same-HIE and different-HIE pairs were not significantly different from each other. CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistical differences in charges between fragmented readmissions to hospitals that share an HIE or that do not share an HIE compared with hospitals with no HIE available.
Asunto(s)
Intercambio de Información en Salud , Medicare , Readmisión del Paciente , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicare/economía , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Intercambio de Información en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Planes de Aranceles por Servicios/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Collaborative care integrates mental health treatment into primary care and has been shown effective. Yet even in states where its use has been encouraged, take-up remains low and there are potential financial barriers to care. OBJECTIVE: Describe patient out-of-pocket costs and variations in referral patterns for collaborative care in Colorado. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective observational study using administrative medical claims data to identify outpatient visits with collaborative care. For individuals with ≥1 visit, we measure spending and visits at the month level. Among physicians with billings for collaborative care, we measure prevalence of eligible patients with collaborative care utilization. SUBJECTS: Patients with Medicare, Medicare Advantage, or commercial health insurance in Colorado, 2018-2019. OUTCOMES: Out-of-pocket costs (enrollee payments to clinicians), total spending (insurer+enrollee payments to clinicians), percent of patients billed collaborative care. RESULTS: Median total spending (insurer+patient cost) was $48.32 (IQR: $41-$53). Median out-of-pocket cost per month in collaborative care was $8.35 per visit (IQR: $0-$10). Patients with commercial insurance paid the most per month (median: $15); patients with Medicare Advantage paid the least (median: $0). Among clinicians billing for collaborative care (n=193), a mean of 12 percent of eligible patients utilized collaborative care; family practice and advanced practice clinicians' patients utilized it most often. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care remains underused with fewer than 1 in 6 potentially eligible patients receiving care in this setting. Out-of-pocket costs varied, though were generally low; uncertainty about costs may contribute to low uptake.
Asunto(s)
Seguro de Costos Compartidos , Gastos en Salud , Atención Primaria de Salud , Derivación y Consulta , Humanos , Colorado , Derivación y Consulta/economía , Derivación y Consulta/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Femenino , Masculino , Seguro de Costos Compartidos/economía , Estados Unidos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Atención Primaria de Salud/economía , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Adulto , Medicare/economía , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hospitals are resurrecting the outdated "team nursing" model of staffing that substitutes lower-wage staff for registered nurses (RNs). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether reducing the proportion of RNs to total nursing staff in hospitals is in the best interest of patients, hospitals, and payers. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional, retrospective. SUBJECTS: In all, 6,559,704 Medicare patients in 2676 general acute-care US hospitals in 2019. MEASURES: Patient outcomes: in-hospital and 30-day mortality, 30-day readmission, length of stay, and patient satisfaction. Avoidable Medicare costs associated with readmissions and cost savings to hospitals associated with shorter stays are projected. RESULTS: A 10 percentage-point reduction in RNs was associated with 7% higher odds of in-hospital death, 1% higher odds of readmission, 2% increase in expected days, and lower patient satisfaction. We estimate a 10 percentage-point reduction in RNs would result in 10,947 avoidable deaths annually and 5207 avoidable readmissions, which translates into roughly $68.5 million in additional Medicare costs. Hospitals would forgo nearly $3 billion in cost savings annually because of patients requiring longer stays. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing the proportion of RNs in hospitals, even when total nursing personnel hours are kept the same, is likely to result in significant avoidable patient deaths, readmissions, longer lengths of stay, and decreased patient satisfaction, in addition to excess Medicare costs and forgone cost savings to hospitals. Estimates represent only a 10 percentage-point dilution in skill mix; however, the team nursing model includes much larger reductions of 40-50 percentage-points-the human and economic consequences of which could be substantial.
Asunto(s)
Tiempo de Internación , Medicare , Personal de Enfermería en Hospital , Readmisión del Paciente , Admisión y Programación de Personal , Humanos , Personal de Enfermería en Hospital/economía , Personal de Enfermería en Hospital/provisión & distribución , Estudios Transversales , Estudios Retrospectivos , Admisión y Programación de Personal/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos , Medicare/economía , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Femenino , Satisfacción del Paciente , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , AncianoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate inter-hospital variation in 90-day total episode spending for sepsis, estimate the relative contributions of each component of spending, and identify drivers of spending across the distribution of episode spending on sepsis care. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Medicare fee-for-service claims for beneficiaries (n=324,694) discharged from acute care hospitals for sepsis, defined by MS-DRG, between October 2014 and September 2018. RESEARCH DESIGN: Multiple linear regression with hospital-level fixed effects was used to identify average hospital differences in 90-day episode spending. Separate multiple linear regression and quantile regression models were used to evaluate drivers of spending across the episode spending distribution. RESULTS: The mean total episode spending among hospitals in the most expensive quartile was $30,500 compared with $23,150 for the least expensive hospitals ( P <0.001). Postacute care spending among the most expensive hospitals was almost double that of least expensive hospitals ($7,045 vs. $3,742), accounting for 51% of the total difference in episode spending between the most expensive and least expensive hospitals. Female patients, patients with more comorbidities, urban hospitals, and BPCI-A-participating hospitals were associated with significantly increased episode spending, with the effect increasing at the right tail of the spending distribution. CONCLUSION: Inter-hospital variation in 90-day episode spending on sepsis care is driven primarily by differences in post-acute care spending.
Asunto(s)
Planes de Aranceles por Servicios , Gastos en Salud , Medicare , Sepsis , Humanos , Sepsis/economía , Sepsis/terapia , Estados Unidos , Femenino , Masculino , Medicare/economía , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Planes de Aranceles por Servicios/economía , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Costos de Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Episodio de AtenciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Medicare's voluntary bundled payment programs have demonstrated generally favorable results. However, it remains unknown whether uneven hospital participation in these programs in communities with greater shares of minorities and patients of low socioeconomic status results in disparate access to practice redesign innovations. OBJECTIVE: Examine whether communities with higher proportions of marginalized individuals were less likely to be served by a hospital participating in Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCI-Advanced). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using ordinary least squares regression controlling for patient and community factors. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare fee-for-service patients enrolled from 2015-2017 (pre-BPCI-Advanced) and residing in 2,058 local communities nationwide defined by Hospital Service Areas (HSAs). Each community's share of marginalized patients was calculated separately for each of the share of beneficiaries of Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, or dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid. MAIN MEASURES: Dichotomous variable indicating whether a given community had at least one hospital that ever participated in BPCI-Advanced from 2018-2022. KEY RESULTS: Communities with higher shares of dual-eligible individuals were less likely to be served by a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced than communities with the lowest quartile of dual-eligible individuals (Q4: -15.1 percentage points [pp] lower than Q1, 95% CI: -21.0 to -9.1, p < 0.001). There was no consistent significant relationship between community proportion of Black beneficiaries and likelihood of having a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced. Communities with higher shares of Hispanic beneficiaries were more likely to have a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced than those in the lowest quartile (Q4: 19.2 pp higher than Q1, 95% CI: 13.4 to 24.9, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Communities with greater shares of dual-eligible beneficiaries, but not racial or ethnic minorities, were less likely to be served by a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced Policymakers should consider approaches to incentivize more socioeconomically uniform participation in voluntary bundled payments.
Asunto(s)
Medicare , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Estudios Transversales , Medicare/economía , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Paquetes de Atención al Paciente/economía , Planes de Aranceles por Servicios/economía , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano de 80 o más AñosRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Medicare , United States Department of Veterans Affairs , Veteranos , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Masculino , Femenino , Medicare/economía , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , United States Department of Veterans Affairs/economía , Estudios Transversales , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Servicios de Salud para Veteranos/economíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Prior studies suggest cost-sharing decreases buprenorphine dispensing. However, these studies used databases that only report prescriptions filled by patients, not those that were "abandoned." Consequently, the studies could not calculate the probability of buprenorphine prescription abandonment or evaluate whether cost-sharing is associated with abandonment. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between cost-sharing and buprenorphine prescription abandonment. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of the IQVIA Formulary Impact Analyzer, a pharmacy transaction database representing 63% of U.S. retail pharmacies. The database includes transaction records ("claims") for prescriptions even if they are not filled. PARTICIPANTS: Buprenorphine claims in 2022 among commercially insured and Medicare patients. MAIN MEASURES: We evaluated the association between cost-sharing per 30-day supply and abandonment using logistic regression, controlling for patient characteristics, product type, and buprenorphine use in the prior 180 days. We assessed for effect modification by prior buprenorphine use. KEY RESULTS: Analyses included 2,346,994 and 1,242,596 buprenorphine prescription claims for commercially insured and Medicare patients, respectively. Among these claims, mean (SD) cost-sharing per 30-day supply was $28.1 (46.4) and $8.4 (20.2), and 1.5% and 1.2% were abandoned. Each $10 increase in cost-sharing per 30-day supply was associated with a 0.09 (95% CI: 0.09, 0.10) and 0.09 (95% CI: 0.08, 0.10) percentage-point increase in abandonment among commercially insured and Medicare patients. Among commercially insured and Medicare patients without prior buprenorphine use, respectively, a $10 increase in cost-sharing per 30-day supply was associated with a 0.12 (95% CI: 0.11, 0.14) and 0.13 (95% CI: 0.07, 0.18) percentage-point higher increase in the probability of abandonment compared with patients with > 90 days of prior buprenorphine use. CONCLUSIONS: Among commercially insured and Medicare patients, buprenorphine prescription abandonment is rare and only minimally associated with cost-sharing. Findings suggest elimination of buprenorphine cost-sharing should only be one component of a larger, multi-faceted campaign to increase buprenorphine dispensing.
Asunto(s)
Buprenorfina , Seguro de Costos Compartidos , Buprenorfina/economía , Buprenorfina/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Estudios Transversales , Seguro de Costos Compartidos/economía , Masculino , Femenino , Estados Unidos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/tratamiento farmacológico , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/economía , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/economía , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Tratamiento de Sustitución de Opiáceos/economía , Tratamiento de Sustitución de Opiáceos/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Antagonistas de Narcóticos/economía , Antagonistas de Narcóticos/uso terapéutico , Medicare/economía , Analgésicos Opioides/economía , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To examine patterns of Accountable Care Organizations (ACO) leakage, the receipt of healthcare by ACO-assigned patients from institutions outside assigned ACO network, among patients with gynecologic cancer. ACO leakage was estimated as rates of patients seeking care external to their ACO assignment. Factors associated with ACO leakage were identified and cost differences within the first year of cancer diagnosis described. METHODS: Medicare 5% data (2013-2017) was used to quantify rates of leakage among gynecologic cancer patients with stable ACO assignment. Crude and multivariable adjusted risk ratios of ACO leakage risk factors were estimated using log-binomial regression models. Overall and cancer-specific spending differences by ACO leakage status were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: Overall incidence of ACO leakage was 28.1% with highest leakage for outpatient care and uterine cancer patients. ACO leakage risk was 56% higher among Black relative to White patients, and 77% more for those in higher relative to lowest quintiles of median household income. Leakage decreased by 3% and 8% with each unit increase in ACO size and number of subspecialists, respectively. Healthcare costs were 19.5% higher for leakage patients. CONCLUSIONS: ACO leakage rates among gynecologic cancer patients was overall modest, with some regional and temporal variation, higher leakage for certain subgroups and substantially higher Medicare spending in inpatient and outpatient settings for patients with ACO leakage. These findings identify targets for further investigations and strategies to encourage oncologists to participate in ACOs and prevent increased health care costs associated with use of non-ACO providers.
Asunto(s)
Organizaciones Responsables por la Atención , Neoplasias de los Genitales Femeninos , Gastos en Salud , Medicare , Humanos , Femenino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Medicare/economía , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias de los Genitales Femeninos/economía , Neoplasias de los Genitales Femeninos/epidemiología , Anciano , Organizaciones Responsables por la Atención/economía , Organizaciones Responsables por la Atención/estadística & datos numéricos , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Incidencia , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: For elderly patients with high-grade gliomas, 3-week hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) is noninferior to standard long-course radiotherapy (LCRT). We analyzed real-world utilization of HFRT with and without systemic therapy in Medicare beneficiaries treated with RT for primary central nervous system (CNS) tumors using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data. METHODS: Radiation modality, year, age (65-74, 75-84, or ≥85 years), and site of care (freestanding vs hospital-affiliated) were evaluated. Utilization of HFRT (11-20 fractions) versus LCRT (21-30 or 31-40 fractions) and systemic therapy was evaluated by multivariable logistic regression. Medicare spending over the 90-day episode after RT planning initiation was analyzed using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2019, a total of 10,702 RT courses (ie, episodes) were included (28% HFRT; 65% of patients aged 65-74 years). A considerable minority died within 90 days of RT planning initiation (n=1,251; 12%), and 765 (61%) of those received HFRT. HFRT utilization increased (24% in 2015 to 31% in 2019; odds ratio [OR], 1.2 per year; 95% CI, 1.1-1.2) and was associated with older age (≥85 vs 65-74 years; OR, 6.8; 95% CI, 5.5-8.4), death within 90 days of RT planning initiation (OR, 5.0; 95% CI, 4.4-5.8), hospital-affiliated sites (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.3-1.6), conventional external-beam RT (vs intensity-modulated RT; OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 2.3-3.1), and no systemic therapy (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3; P<.001 for all). Increasing use of HFRT was concentrated in hospital-affiliated sites (P=.002 for interaction). Most patients (69%) received systemic therapy with no differences by site of care (P=.12). Systemic therapy utilization increased (67% in 2015 to 71% in 2019; OR, 1.1 per year; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1) and was less likely for older patients, patients who died within 90 days of RT planning initiation, those who received conventional external-beam RT, and those who received HFRT. HFRT significantly reduced spending compared with LCRT (adjusted ß for LCRT = +$8,649; 95% CI, $8,544-$8,755), whereas spending modestly increased with systemic therapy (adjusted ß for systemic therapy = +$270; 95% CI, $176-$365). CONCLUSIONS: Although most Medicare beneficiaries received LCRT for primary brain tumors, HFRT utilization increased in hospital-affiliated centers. Despite high-level evidence for elderly patients, discrepancy in HFRT implementation by site of care persists. Further investigation is needed to understand why patients with short survival may still receive LCRT, because this has major quality-of-life and Medicare spending implications.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias del Sistema Nervioso Central , Medicare , Hipofraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación , Humanos , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Medicare/economía , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Masculino , Femenino , Neoplasias del Sistema Nervioso Central/radioterapia , Neoplasias del Sistema Nervioso Central/economía , Neoplasias del Sistema Nervioso Central/mortalidad , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
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.