Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 49
Filter
2.
JAMA Health Forum ; 4(11): e233892, 2023 Nov 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37976050

ABSTRACT

This cross-sectional study examines denials of Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program coverage due to procedural reasons.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Medicaid , United States/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Insurance Coverage , Health Services Accessibility
3.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 42(11): 1507-1516, 2023 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37931191

ABSTRACT

Since 1965, the US federal government has incentivized physicians to practice in high-need areas of the country through the designation of Health Professional Shortage Areas (HPSAs). Despite its being in place for more than half a century and directing more than a billion dollars annually, there is limited evidence of the HPSA program's effectiveness at reducing geographic disparities in access to care and health outcomes. Using a generalized difference-in-differences design with matching, we found no statistically significant changes in mortality or physician density from 1970 to 2018 after a county-level HPSA designation. As a result, we found that 73 percent of counties designated as HPSAs remained physician shortage areas for at least ten years after their inclusion in the program. Fundamental improvements to the program's design and incentive structure may be necessary for it to achieve its intended results.


Subject(s)
Medically Underserved Area , Physicians , Humans , United States , Health Personnel
4.
BMJ ; 382: e074289, 2023 07 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37433620

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether health systems in the United States modify treatment or discharge decisions for otherwise similar patients based on health insurance coverage. DESIGN: Regression discontinuity approach. SETTING: American College of Surgeons' National Trauma Data Bank, 2007-17. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged between 50 and 79 years with a total of 1 586 577 trauma encounters at level I and level II trauma centers in the US. INTERVENTIONS: Eligibility for Medicare at age 65 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was change in health insurance coverage, complications, in-hospital mortality, processes of care in the trauma bay, treatment patterns during hospital admission, and discharge locations at age 65 years. RESULTS: 1 586 577 trauma encounters were included. At age 65, a discontinuous increase of 9.6 percentage points (95% confidence interval 9.1 to 10.1) was observed in the share of patients with health insurance coverage through Medicare at age 65 years. Entry to Medicare at age 65 was also associated with a decrease in length of hospital stay for each encounter, of 0.33 days (95% confidence interval -0.42 to -0.24 days), or nearly 5%), which coincided with an increase in discharges to nursing homes (1.56 percentage points, 95% confidence interval 0.94 to 2.16 percentage points) and transfers to other inpatient facilities (0.57 percentage points, 0.33 to 0.80 percentage points), and a large decrease in discharges to home (1.99 percentage points, -2.73 to -1.27 percentage points). Relatively small (or no) changes were observed in treatment patterns during the patients' hospital admission, including no changes in potentially life saving treatments (eg, blood transfusions) or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that differences in treatment for otherwise similar patients with trauma with different forms of insurance coverage arose during the discharge planning process, with little evidence that health systems modified treatment decisions based on patients' coverage.


Subject(s)
Body Fluids , Medicare , Adult , Humans , Aged , United States/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Hospitals , Hospitalization , Nursing Homes
5.
JAMA ; 329(19): 1662-1670, 2023 05 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37191702

ABSTRACT

Importance: Amid efforts in the US to promote health equity, there is a need to assess recent progress in reducing excess deaths and years of potential life lost among the Black population compared with the White population. Objective: To evaluate trends in excess mortality and years of potential life lost among the Black population compared with the White population. Design, setting, and participants: Serial cross-sectional study using US national data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 1999 through 2020. We included data from non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic Black populations across all age groups. Exposures: Race as documented in the death certificates. Main outcomes and measures: Excess age-adjusted all-cause mortality, cause-specific mortality, age-specific mortality, and years of potential life lost rates (per 100 000 individuals) among the Black population compared with the White population. Results: From 1999 to 2011, the age-adjusted excess mortality rate declined from 404 to 211 excess deaths per 100 000 individuals among Black males (P for trend <.001). However, the rate plateaued from 2011 through 2019 (P for trend = .98) and increased in 2020 to 395-rates not seen since 2000. Among Black females, the rate declined from 224 excess deaths per 100 000 individuals in 1999 to 87 in 2015 (P for trend <.001). There was no significant change between 2016 and 2019 (P for trend = .71) and in 2020 rates increased to 192-levels not seen since 2005. The trends in rates of excess years of potential life lost followed a similar pattern. From 1999 to 2020, the disproportionately higher mortality rates in Black males and females resulted in 997 623 and 628 464 excess deaths, respectively, representing a loss of more than 80 million years of life. Heart disease had the highest excess mortality rates, and the excess years of potential life lost rates were largest among infants and middle-aged adults. Conclusions and relevance: Over a recent 22-year period, the Black population in the US experienced more than 1.63 million excess deaths and more than 80 million excess years of life lost when compared with the White population. After a period of progress in reducing disparities, improvements stalled, and differences between the Black population and the White population worsened in 2020.


Subject(s)
Black or African American , Life Expectancy , Mortality , Adult , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Black People/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Ethnicity , Health Promotion , Life Expectancy/ethnology , Life Expectancy/trends , Mortality/ethnology , Mortality/trends , United States/epidemiology , Black or African American/statistics & numerical data , White/statistics & numerical data
7.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 42(1): 105-114, 2023 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36623215

ABSTRACT

The objective of risk adjustment is not to predict spending accurately but to support the social goals of a payment system, which include equity. Setting population-based payments at accurate predictions risks entrenching spending levels that are insufficient to mitigate the impact of social determinants on health care use and effectiveness. Instead, to advance equity, payments must be set above current levels of spending for historically disadvantaged groups. In analyses intended to guide such reallocations, we found that current risk adjustment for the community-dwelling Medicare population overpredicts annual spending for Black and Hispanic beneficiaries by $376-$1,264. The risk-adjusted spending for these populations is lower than spending for White beneficiaries despite the former populations' worse risk-adjusted health and functional status. Thus, continued movement from fee-for-service to population-based payment models that omit race and ethnicity from risk adjustment (as current models do) should result in sizable resource reallocations and incentives that support efforts to address racial and ethnic disparities in care. We found smaller overpredictions for less-educated beneficiaries and communities with higher proportions of residents who are Black, Hispanic, or less educated, suggesting that additional payment adjustments that depart from predictive accuracy are needed to support health equity. These findings also suggest that adding social risk factors as predictors to spending models used for risk adjustment may be counterproductive or accomplish little.


Subject(s)
Health Equity , United States , Humans , Risk Adjustment , Medicare , Fee-for-Service Plans , Ethnicity
8.
Ann Intern Med ; 176(1): 22-28, 2023 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36469920

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Medicaid, the primary source of insurance coverage for disadvantaged Americans, was originally designed as a temporary safety-net program. No studies have used long-run data to assess the recent use of the program by beneficiaries. OBJECTIVE: To assess patterns of short- and long-term enrollment among beneficiaries, using a 10-year longitudinal panel of Michigan Medicaid eligibility data. DESIGN: Primary analyses assessing trends in Medicaid enrollment among cohorts of existing and new beneficiaries. SETTING: Administrative records from Michigan Medicaid for the period 2011 to 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 3.97 million Medicaid beneficiaries. MEASUREMENTS: Short- and long-term enrollment in the program. RESULTS: The sample includes 3.97 million unique beneficiaries enrolled at some point between 2011 and 2020. Among a cohort of 1.23 million beneficiaries enrolled in 2011, over half (53%) were also enrolled in Medicaid in June 2020, spending, on average, two-thirds of that period (67%) on Medicaid. These beneficiaries, however, experienced substantial lapses in coverage, as only 25% were continuously enrolled throughout the period. Enrollment was less stable when assessed from the perspective of newly enrolled beneficiaries, of whom only 37% remained enrolled at the end of the study period. LIMITATION: Primary estimates from a single state. CONCLUSION: For many beneficiaries, Medicaid has served as their primary source of coverage for at least a decade. This pattern would justify increasing investments in the program to improve long-term health outcomes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Self-funded.


Subject(s)
Insurance Coverage , Medicaid , Humans , United States , Cohort Studies , Michigan
10.
JAMA Health Forum ; 3(10): e223856, 2022 10 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36306118

ABSTRACT

Importance: Racial and ethnic disparities in delayed medical care for reasons that are not directly associated with the cost of care remain understudied. Objective: To describe trends in racial and ethnic disparities in barriers to timely medical care among adults during a recent 20-year period. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a serial cross-sectional study of 590 603 noninstitutionalized adults in the US using data from the National Health Interview Survey from 1999 to 2018. Data analyses were performed from December 2021 through August 2022. Exposures: Self-reported race, ethnicity, household income, and sex. Main Outcomes and Measures: Temporal trends in disparities regarding 5 specific barriers to timely medical care: inability to get through by telephone, no appointment available soon enough, long waiting times, inconvenient office or clinic hours, and lack of transportation. Results: The study cohort comprised 590 603 adult respondents (mean [SE] age, 46.00 [0.07] years; 329 638 [51.9%] female; 27 447 [4.7%] Asian, 83 929 [11.8%] Black, 98 692 [13.8%] Hispanic/Latino, and 380 535 [69.7%] White). In 1999, the proportion of each race and ethnicity group reporting any of the 5 barriers to timely medical care was 7.3% among the Asian group; 6.9%, Black; 7.9%, Hispanic/Latino; and 7.0%, White (P > .05 for each difference compared with White individuals). From 1999 to 2018, this proportion increased across all 4 race and ethnicity groups (by 5.7, 8.0, 8.1, and 5.9 percentage points [pp] among Asian, Black, Hispanic/Latino, and White individuals, respectively; P < .001 for each), slightly increasing the disparities between groups. In 2018, compared with White individuals, the proportion reporting any barrier was 2.1 and 3.1 pp higher among Black and Hispanic/Latino individuals (P = .03 and P = .001, respectively). There was no significant difference in prevalence between Asian and White individuals. There was a significant increase in the difference in prevalence between Black individuals and White individuals who reported delaying care because of long waiting times at the clinic or medical office and because of a lack of transportation (1.5 pp and 1.8 pp; P = .03 and P = .01, respectively). In addition, the difference in prevalence between Hispanic/Latino and White individuals who reported delaying care because of long waiting times increased significantly (2.6 pp; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this serial cross-sectional study of data from the National Health Interview Survey suggest that barriers to timely medical care in the US increased for all population groups from 1999 to 2018, with associated increases in disparities among race and ethnicity groups. Interventions beyond those currently implemented are needed to improve access to medical care and to eliminate disparities among race and ethnicity groups.


Subject(s)
Ethnicity , Hispanic or Latino , Adult , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Male , Cross-Sectional Studies , Black People , Cohort Studies
11.
JAMA Health Forum ; 3(6): e221398, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35977238

ABSTRACT

Importance: Administrative records indicate that more than half of the 80 million Medicaid enrollees identify as belonging to a racial and ethnic minority group. Despite this, disparities within the Medicaid program remain understudied. For example, we know of no studies examining racial differences in Medicaid spending, a potential measure of how equitably state resources are allocated. Objectives: To examine whether and to what extent there are differences in health care spending and utilization between Black and White enrollees in Medicaid. Design Setting and Participants: This cross-sectional study used calendar year 2016 administrative data from 3 state Medicaid programs and included 1 966 689 Black and White Medicaid enrollees. Analyses were performed between January 28, 2021, and October 18, 2021. Exposures: Self-reported race. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates and racial differences in health care spending and utilization (including Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set [HEDIS] access measures). Results: Of 1 966 689 Medicaid adults and children (mean [SD] age, 20.3 [17.1] years; 1 119 136 [56.9%] female), 867 183 (44.1%) self-identified as non-Hispanic Black and 1 099 506 (55.9%) self-identified as non-Hispanic White. Results were adjusted for age, sex, Medicaid eligibility category, zip code, health status, and usual source of care. On average, annual spending on Black adult (19 years or older) Medicaid enrollees was $317 (95% CI, $259-$375) lower than White enrollees, a 6% difference. Among children (18 years or younger), annual spending on Black enrollees was $256 (14%) lower (95% CI, $222-$290). Adult Black enrollees also had 19.3 (95% CI, 16.78-21.84), or 4%, fewer primary care encounters per 100 enrollees per year compared with White enrollees. Among children, the differences in primary care utilization were larger: Black enrollees had 90.1 (95% CI, 88.2-91.8) fewer primary care encounters per 100 enrollees per year compared with White enrollees, a 23% difference. Black enrollees had lower utilization of most other services, including high-value prescription drugs, but higher emergency department use and rates of HEDIS preventive screenings. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of US Medicaid enrollees in 3 states, Black enrollees generated lower spending and used fewer services, including primary care and recommended care for acute and chronic conditions, but had substantially higher emergency department use. While Black enrollees had higher rates of HEDIS preventive screenings, ensuring equitable access to all services in Medicaid must remain a national priority.


Subject(s)
Ethnicity , Medicaid , Adult , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Expenditures , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Male , Minority Groups , United States , Young Adult
12.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(7): e2222138, 2022 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35857326

ABSTRACT

Importance: Little is known about small-area variations in health care spending and utilization across the 3 major funders of health care in the US: Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers. Objective: To measure regional health spending and utilization across Medicare, Medicaid, and the privately insured; to observe whether there are regions that are simultaneously low spending for all 3 payers; and to determine what factors are correlated with regional spending and utilization by payer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Observational cross-sectional analysis of the US health system in 2016 and 2017 for 241 of 306 hospital referral regions (HRRs) and 2 states. Participants include individuals with employer-sponsored coverage from Aetna, Humana, or UnitedHealth; individuals with Medicaid fee-for-service coverage in 2016 and 2017; and individuals with Medicare coverage. The analysis was carried out from January 2020 to May 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Spending per beneficiary and inpatient days per beneficiary by payer and overall. Results: The data include 25 381 167 individuals with employer-sponsored coverage, 69 891 299 with Medicaid coverage in 2016 and 2017, and 26 711 426 individuals with Medicare fee-for-service coverage. The percentage of enrollees who identified as female was 54.1% in the Medicaid program, 56.2% in the Medicare program, and 50.4% in private insurance. The mean (SD) age was 26.9 (21.8) years for Medicaid and 75.0 (7.9) years for Medicare enrollees; for private insurance enrollees, just age brackets were reported: 18 to 24 years (15.9%), 25 to 34 years (24.2%), 35 to 44 years (21.3%), 45 to 54 years (20.8%), and 55 to 64 years (17.8%). In 2017, the mean (SD) HRR-level spending per beneficiary was $4441 ($710) for private insurance, $10 281 ($1294) for Medicare, and $6127 ($1428) for Medicaid. Across HRRs, the correlation coefficients and 95% CIs were 0.020 (-0.106 to 0.146; P = .76) for private insurance and Medicare spending, 0.213 (0.090 to 0.330; P < .001) for private insurance and Medicaid, and 0.162 (0.037 to 0.282; P < .01) for Medicare and Medicaid. Just 3 HRRs (Boulder, Colorado; Bloomington, Illinois; and Olympia, Washington) were in the lowest spending quintile for all 3 insurance programs; 4 HRRs were in the highest (The Bronx, New York; Manhattan, New York; White Plains, New York; and Dallas, Texas). By contrast, the correlation coefficients and 95% CIs for utilization, measured in hospital days, were 0.465 (0.361 to 0.559; P < .001) for private insurance and Medicare, 0.527 (0.429 to 0.612; P < .001) for private insurance and Medicaid, and 0.278 (0.157 to 0.390; P < .001) for Medicare and Medicaid. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that payer-specific factors are correlated with health spending variation among Medicare beneficiaries, Medicaid beneficiaries, and the commercially insured and that payer-specific policies will be necessary to improve efficiency in the US health sector.


Subject(s)
Medicaid , Medicare , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Fee-for-Service Plans , Female , Health Expenditures , Humans , United States , Young Adult
13.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 41(5): 760-768, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35500192

ABSTRACT

States have increasingly outsourced the provision of Medicaid services to private managed care plans. To ensure that plans maintain access to care, many states set network adequacy standards that require plans to contract with a minimum number of physicians. In this study we used data from the period 2015-17 for four states to assess the level of Medicaid participation among physicians listed in the provider network directories of each managed care plan. We found that about one-third of outpatient primary care and specialist physicians contracted with Medicaid managed care plans in our sample saw fewer than ten Medicaid beneficiaries in a year. Care was highly concentrated: 25 percent of primary care physicians provided 86 percent of the care, and 25 percent of specialists, on average, provided 75 percent of the care. Our findings suggest that current network adequacy standards might not reflect actual access; new methods are needed that account for beneficiaries' preferences and physicians' willingness to serve Medicaid patients.


Subject(s)
Medicaid , Physicians , Humans , Managed Care Programs , Specialization , United States
14.
Am J Med ; 135(9): 1083-1092.e14, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35472394

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Disparities in multimorbidity prevalence indicate health inequalities, as the risk of morbidity does not intrinsically differ by race/ethnicity. This study aimed to determine if multimorbidity differences by race/ethnicity are decreasing over time. METHODS: Serial cross-sectional analysis of the National Health Interview Survey, 1999-2018. Included individuals were ≥18 years old and categorized by self-reported race, ethnicity, age, and income. The main outcomes were temporal trends in multimorbidity prevalence based on the self-reported presence of ≥2 of 9 common chronic conditions. FINDINGS: The study sample included 596,355 individuals (4.7% Asian, 11.8% Black, 13.8% Latino/Hispanic, and 69.7% White). In 1999, the estimated prevalence of multimorbidity was 5.9% among Asian, 17.4% among Black, 10.7% among Latino/Hispanic, and 13.5% among White individuals. Prevalence increased for all racial/ethnic groups during the study period (P ≤ .001 for each), with no significant change in the differences between them. In 2018, compared with White individuals, multimorbidity was more prevalent among Black individuals (+2.5 percentage points) and less prevalent among Asian and Latino/Hispanic individuals (-6.6 and -2.1 percentage points, respectively). Among those aged ≥30 years, Black individuals had multimorbidity prevalence equivalent to that of Latino/Hispanic and White individuals aged 5 years older, and Asian individuals aged 10 years older. CONCLUSIONS: From 1999 to 2018, a period of increasing multimorbidity prevalence for all the groups studied, there was no significant progress in eliminating disparities between Black individuals and White individuals. Public health interventions that prevent the onset of chronic conditions in early life may be needed to eliminate these disparities.


Subject(s)
Ethnicity , Multimorbidity , Adolescent , Adult , Chronic Disease , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Prevalence , United States/epidemiology
15.
Ann Intern Med ; 175(3): 314-324, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34978862

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Risk adjustment is used widely in payment systems and performance assessments, but the extent to which it distinguishes plan or provider effects from confounding due to patient differences is typically unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the degree to which risk-adjusted measures of health plan performance adequately adjust for the variation across plans that arises because of differences in patient characteristics (residual confounding). DESIGN: Comparison between plan performance estimates based on enrollees who made plan choices (observational population) and estimates based on enrollees assigned to plans (randomized population). SETTING: Natural experiment in which more than two thirds of a state's Medicaid population in 1 region was randomly assigned to 1 of 5 plans. PARTICIPANTS: 137 933 enrollees in 2013 to 2014, of whom 31.1% selected a plan and 68.9% were randomly assigned to 1 of the same 5 plans. MEASUREMENTS: Annual total spending (that is, payments to providers), primary care use, dental care use, and avoidable emergency department visits, all scored as plan-specific deviations from the "average" plan performance within each population. RESULTS: Enrollee characteristics were appreciably imbalanced across plans in the observational population, as expected, but were not in the randomized population. Annual total spending varied across plans more in the observational population (SD, $147 per enrollee) than in the randomized population (SD, $70 per enrollee) after accounting for baseline differences in the observational and randomized populations and for differences across plans. On average, a plan's spending score (its deviation from the "average" performance) in the observational population differed from its score in the randomized population by $67 per enrollee in absolute value (95% CI, $38 to $123), or 4.2% of mean spending per enrollee (P = 0.009, rejecting the null hypothesis that this difference would be expected from sampling error). The difference was reduced modestly by risk adjustment to $62 per enrollee (P = 0.012). Residual confounding was similarly substantial for most other performance measures. Further adjustment for social factors did not materially change estimates. LIMITATION: Potential heterogeneity in plan effects between the 2 populations. CONCLUSION: Residual confounding in risk-adjusted performance assessments can be substantial and should caution policymakers against assuming that risk adjustment isolates real differences in plan performance. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Arnold Ventures.


Subject(s)
Medicaid , Humans , Random Allocation , United States
16.
Ann Emerg Med ; 78(5): 593-598, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34353651

ABSTRACT

STUDY OBJECTIVE: There is a continued movement toward health data transparency, accelerated by the 21st Century CURES Act, which mandated the automatic and immediate release of clinical notes, often termed "open notes." Differences in utilization among different patient demographics and disproportionately affected populations within the emergency department (ED) are not yet known. METHODS: This was an observational study of 10 EDs and 3 urgent care centers across a single health system over a 13-week period from February 1, 2021 to May 2, 2021. Primary outcomes included the proportion of patients with patient portal access to open notes at the time of encounter, the proportion of patients with access who opened the clinical note, and time from clinical note signing to patient read. RESULTS: Among 98,725 patient visits, less than half (48.9%) had patient portal access, of which 13.7% read an open note. Access was less likely in patients who were under age 18 (odds ratio 0.10, 95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.11), older than 65 (0.82, 0.73 to 0.93), Black non-Hispanic (0.66, 0.61 to 0.73), non-English speakers, and on public insurance. Patients were less likely to read open notes if they identified as Black non-Hispanic (0.61, 0.57 to 0.66), spoke Spanish (0.70, 0.60 to 0.81), or were on public insurance. CONCLUSION: We identified substantial differences in digital access to clinical notes as well as patient utilization of open notes in a large, diverse sample. Health transparency initiatives must address not only technology adoption broadly but also the unique barriers faced by populations experiencing disadvantage to facilitate equitable access to and awareness about digital health tools without the unintended consequence of expanding disparities.


Subject(s)
Access to Information , Clinical Decision-Making , Electronic Health Records , Emergency Service, Hospital , Health Policy , Health Records, Personal , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Young Adult
17.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(7): e2115342, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34213558

ABSTRACT

Importance: Hospital advertising has been touted as a tool to improve consumer decision-making, but little is known about its association with objective measures of hospital quality. Objective: To document recent trends in hospital advertising in the US and examine the association between concurrent measures of hospital advertising and quality. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cross-sectional study of all general acute care hospitals operating in the US between January 2008 and December 2016. Data were analyzed from December 6, 2019, to July 15, 2020. Exposure: Annualized advertising spending for each hospital as measured by a market research firm. Main Outcomes and Measures: Four composites of hospital performance from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hospital Compare database were used: risk-standardized mortality rate, risk-standardized readmission rate, Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers & Systems (CAHPS) Overall Patient Experience Rating (scale of 1-5; higher scores indicate a more positive patient experience rating), and overall 5-star rating. Linear models adjusted for hospital bed size, hospital revenue, and geographic census region. Results: The study sample included, on average, 4569 general acute care hospitals per year between 2008 and 2016. During this time, approximately half of acute care hospitals (2239 of 4569 [49%]) advertised their services to consumers and spent a total of $3.39 billion. Relative to hospitals that never advertised, advertising hospitals were more likely to be nonprofit facilities (mean [SD], 66% [47%] vs 51% [50%]; P < .001), had larger bed sizes (mean [SD], 234.3 [210.7] beds vs 84.8 [110.6] beds; P < .001), and had higher net incomes (mean [SD], $17 800 000 [$49 000 000] vs $134 099 [$51 600 000]; P < .001). There was no observed association between hospital advertising and performance. For example, hospitals that advertised had a mean (SD) CAHPS 5-star rating of 3.2 (0.9) stars compared with 3.3 (1.0) stars among hospitals that did not advertise, an insignificant difference (P = .92). We observed no difference in performance between advertising and nonadvertising hospitals in 30-day readmission rates (mean [SD], 15.5% [0.8%] vs 15.6% [1.0%]; P = .25), mortality rates (mean [SD], 12.7% [4.0%] vs 12.0% [4.1%]; P = .46), and overall 5-star hospital ratings (mean [SD], 3.1 [0.8] stars vs 3.0 [0.9] stars; P = .50). A significant difference was observed in adjusted mortality rates across terciles of advertising spending, with lower mortality rates for the hospitals with higher ad spending (2016, mean [SD] mortality composite for hospitals in the highest tercile, 11.2% [4.2%] vs hospitals in the middle tercile, 12.0% [3.8%], and for hospitals in the lowest tercile, 12.7% [4.1%]; P = .003). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cross-sectional study suggest that the amount hospitals spent on direct-to-consumer advertising was not associated with publicly reported measures of hospital quality; instead, hospital advertising spending was higher for financially stable hospitals with higher net incomes.


Subject(s)
Advertising/statistics & numerical data , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Hospitals/standards , Advertising/methods , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , United States
18.
Health Serv Res ; 56(4): 668-676, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33624290

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of a forced disruption to Medicaid managed care plans and provider networks on health utilization and outcomes for children with persistent asthma. DATA SOURCES: Medicaid managed care administrative claims data from 2013 to 2016, obtained from a southeastern state. STUDY DESIGN: A difference-in-difference analysis compared patients' outpatient, inpatient, and emergency department (ED) utilization and receipt of recommended services before and after implementation of a statewide redistribution of patients among nine managed care plans. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Enrollment data for children with asthma were linked to the administrative claims. Children were included if they had a diagnosis of persistent asthma in 2013 and if they were enrolled continuously throughout 2014-2016. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Among the 28 537 children with asthma, 26% were forced to switch their managed care plan after the redistribution. Of these, 67% also switched their primary care provider (PCP). Relative to those who remained in their plan, disruption was associated with an additional 2.1 percentage-point decrease in the number of children who had an outpatient visit per quarter [95%CI -2.8, -1.3], from 71% to 66% (compared to plan stayers: 74% to 71%). Among children experiencing a change to their plan, there was overall a decrease in the proportion of children receiving an asthma-specific visit per quarter, but there was less of a decrease in children that also changed their PCP [1.6 percentage points, 95%CI 0.7, 2.5], from 9.7% to 8.3% (compared to those who did not switch their PCP: 12% to 8.6%). Indicators of asthma care quality and emergent care utilization were not significantly different between the two periods. CONCLUSIONS: While there was a decrease in the number of outpatient visits associated with forced disruption of Medicaid managed care plans for children with persistent asthma, there were no consistent associations with worse asthma quality performance or higher emergent health care utilization.


Subject(s)
Asthma/epidemiology , Managed Care Programs/statistics & numerical data , Medicaid/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Quality of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Insurance Claim Review , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Residence Characteristics , United States
19.
JAMA Health Forum ; 2(9): e212861, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35977185

ABSTRACT

This cross-sectional regression discontinuity analysis compares deaths slightly younger and older than 65 years to examine the relationship between access to health insurance coverage and COVID-19 mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Medicare , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Eligibility Determination , Humans , Pandemics , United States/epidemiology
20.
JAMA Intern Med ; 180(12): 1672-1679, 2020 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33074283

ABSTRACT

Importance: Enrollment in Medicaid managed care plans has increased rapidly, particularly in national commercial insurance plans. Whether the type of managed care plan is associated with the use of health services for Medicaid beneficiaries is unknown. Objective: To compare the use of outpatient and acute care between Medicaid enrollees randomly assigned to a national commercial managed care plan or a local Medicaid-focused managed care plan. Design, Setting, and Participants: This natural experiment of a cohort of Medicaid enrollees randomly assigned to 2 managed care plans in a Northeastern US state was conducted from June 30, 2009, to June 30, 2013. Statistical analysis was performed from September 1, 2019, to August 30, 2020. Interventions: Assignment to a Medicaid-focused insurance plan or a commercial managed care plan. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outpatient visits, emergency department visits, and total inpatient and ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations. Results: A total of 8010 patients were included in the analysis: 4737 were assigned to a Medicaid-focused plan (2795 female [59.0%]; mean [SD] age, 17.8 [3.2] years) and 3273 to a commercial managed care plan (1915 female [58.5%]; mean [SD] age, 17.9 [3.3] years). Those randomly assigned to the Medicaid-focused plan had a mean (SD) of 6.67 (9.18) annual outpatient visits per person, and those assigned to the commercial plan had a mean (SD) of 8.36 (11.77) annual outpatient visits per person (adjusted absolute difference, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.31-2.13]; 22% relative difference). The increased use of outpatient visits in the commercial plan was associated with an increase in specialty care visits (mean [SD], 2.34 [6.31] visits in Medicaid-focused plan vs 3.75 [9.32] visits in commerical plan; adjusted absolute difference, 1.43 visits [95% CI, 1.25-1.56 visits]; 61% relative difference). Mean (SD) annual emergency department visits were 0.49 (1.39) per person in the Medicaid-focused plan and 0.51 (1.40) in the commercial plan (adjusted absolute difference, 0.02 [95% CI, -0.02 to 0.05]). Mean (SD) annual inpatient admissions were 0.067 (0.45) per person in the Medicaid-focused plan and 0.069 (0.53) in the commercial plan (adjusted absolute difference, 0.003 [95% CI, -0.01 to 0.02]). Plan assignment was not significantly associated with ambulatory care-sensitive admissions. Results were consistent in instrumental variables analyses that accounted for disenrollment and switching. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with Medicaid managed care enrollees assigned to a Medicaid-focused plan, those assigned to a commercial plan had more outpatient visits, particularly for specialty care, but had similar rates of emergency department visits and hospitalizations. These findings suggest that the type of managed care plan may be associated with health services use and spending among Medicaid beneficiaries and that random assignment may help states understand how well different plans perform for enrollees.


Subject(s)
Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Managed Care Programs/statistics & numerical data , Medicaid/statistics & numerical data , Primary Health Care/standards , Adolescent , Ambulatory Care , Female , Humans , Male , Outpatients/statistics & numerical data , Patient Satisfaction/statistics & numerical data , Random Allocation , State Health Plans/standards , United States , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...