Contract Termination and Insurance Enrollment Among Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries.

Importance: Approximately one-fifth of Medicare Advantage (MA) contracts terminated their participation in the MA program between 2011 and 2020. Little is known about subsequent insurance choices following a termination. Objective: To examine the insurance destinations of MA enrollees and the characteristics of enrollees who switch into traditional Medicare (TM) after a contract termination. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study examined MA program data of MA beneficiaries in the Medicare Master Beneficiary File from 2016 to 2018. Statistical analysis was performed from June 2023 to April 2024. Exposures: Beneficiary characteristics, including age, sex, race and ethnicity, dual eligibility; hospital, nursing home, and home health utilization; and contract characteristics, including plan type, vertical integration, premium, and MA star rating. Main Outcome and Measures: The main outcome was switching to TM in the year immediately after termination. We also evaluated the characteristics of contracts among those who remained in MA. Results: A total of 117 681 beneficiaries were included in this analysis (64 654 [54.9%] female; 409 [0.4%] American Indian or Alaska Native; 2817 [2.4%] Asian; 76 725 [16.8%] Black; 11 131 [9.5%] Hispanic; 81 226 [69.0%] White; and 2373 [2.0%] other race or ethnicity; 27 078 [23.0%] dual-eligible; mean [SD] age, 71.2 [10.4] years). Following a contract termination, 20.1% (95% CI, 19.9%-20.4%) of enrollees switched to TM, including 32.7% (95% CI, 32.4%-33.1%) of dual-eligible beneficiaries and 16.4% (95% CI, 16.2%-16.5%) of non-dual-eligible beneficiaries. In nonterminated contracts, the concurrent switch rate was 6.2% (95% CI, 6.2%-6.2%) for all, 10.4% (95% CI, 10.4%-10.4%) for dual-eligible beneficiaries and 5.1% (95% CI, 5.1%-5.1%) for non-dual-eligible enrollees. The highest switch rates to TM were among Black enrollees (32.3% [95% CI, 31.7%-32.8%]) and those with prior use of hospital (31.3% [95% CI, 30.7%-31.9%], nursing home, 41.4% [95% CI, 40.4%-42.4%], or home health care (28.3% [95% CI, 27.4%-29.2%]). Beneficiaries who stayed in MA selected higher-rated star plans (mean posttermination contract star rating of 3.8 [95% CI, 3.8-3.8] stars compared with 3.3 [95% CI, 3.3-3.3] stars in the terminated year), but did not pay more in monthly premiums with 66.5% (95% CI, 66.2%-66.8%) paying the same or lower premiums. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, 1 in 5 MA beneficiaries switched to TM after a contract termination, with Black beneficiaries and those with more intensive health needs having the highest switch rates. These findings highlight the need to examine consequences of contract terminations and subsequent insurance destinations on access to care and health outcomes, especially among those with marginalized race and ethnicity, those who are dual-eligible, and beneficiaries with higher health care needs.

Addressing the Marketing Practices of Medicare Advantage Plans.

The Medicare Advantage (MA) Program, home to nearly half of the eligible Medicare population, has recently come under increased scrutiny. Recent investigations conducted by the United States Senate Committee on Finance and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) have uncovered marketing practices of MA insurance agents that "were not complying with current regulation and unduly pressuring beneficiaries, as well as failing to provide accurate or enough information to assist a beneficiary in making an informed enrollment decision." These findings come at a time in which MA programs are under investigation for denials of prior authorization requests that fall within Medicare guidelines for covered health services. In this Commentary we consider the backdrop for the growing scrutiny of the MA program and the implications thereof to its future trajectory.

Medicare Advantage customer service is used most by higher-need patients.

OBJECTIVES: To examine characteristics of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees who use their plan's customer service to help plans understand how to better meet members' needs. STUDY DESIGN: National sample of 259,533 respondents to MA Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey enrolled in any of the 559 MA contracts in 2022. METHODS: We assessed the association between self-reported customer service use in the prior 6 months and enrollee demographic, coverage, health, and health care utilization characteristics. We used weighted linear regression models to test for bivariate and multivariate associations between customer service use and enrollee characteristics. RESULTS: Forty-two percent of MA enrollees reported using customer service in the prior 6 months. Use was 20 percentage points (PP) higher for those in poor vs excellent/very good general health, 13 PP higher for those in poor vs excellent/very good mental health, and 14 PP higher for those reporting 3 or more vs no chronic conditions. Those using customer service more often had lower educational attainment, had limited income and assets, preferred another language to English, and had greater health care utilization. CONCLUSIONS: MA customer service supports a less healthy, higher-need population with greater-than-average barriers to health care, and so should be designed and staffed to effectively serve medically complex, high-need patients. Commercial plan evidence suggests that continuity in customer service support for a member or a given issue may be helpful. Customer service is an important mechanism for improving quality and addressing health equity.

Medicare-Covered Services Near the End of Life in Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare.

Importance: Financial incentives in Medicare Advantage (MA), the managed care alternative to traditional Medicare (TM), were designed to reduce overutilization. For patients near the end of life (EOL), MA incentives may reduce potentially burdensome care and encourage hospice but could also restrict access to costly but necessary services. Objective: To compare receipt of potentially burdensome treatments and transfers and potentially necessary postacute services in the last 6 months of life in individuals with MA vs TM. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective analysis of Medicare claims data among older Medicare beneficiaries who died between 2016 and 2018. The study included Medicare decedents aged 66 years or older covered by TM (n = 659 135) or MA (n = 360 430). All decedents and the subset of decedents with 1 or more emergent hospitalizations with a life-limiting condition (cancer, dementia, end-stage organ failure) that would likely qualify for hospice care were included. Exposure: MA enrollment. Main Outcomes: Receipt of potentially burdensome hospitalizations and treatments; receipt of postdischarge home and facility care. Results: The study included 659 135 TM enrollees (mean [SD] age at death, 83.3 [9.0] years, 54% female, 15.1% non-White, 55% with 1 or more life-limiting condition) and 360 430 MA enrollees (mean [SD] age at death 82.5 [8.7] years, 53% female, 19.3% non-White, 49% with 1 or more life-limiting condition). After regression adjustment, MA enrollees were less likely to receive potentially burdensome treatments (-1.6 percentage points (pp); 95% CI, -2.1 to -1.1) and less likely to die in a hospital (-3.3 pp; 95% CI, -4.0 to -2.7) compared with TM. However, when hospitalized, MA enrollees were more likely to die in the hospital (adjusted difference, 1.3 pp; 95% CI, 1.1-1.5) and less likely to be transferred to rehabilitative or skilled nursing facilities (-5.2 pp; 95% CI, -5.7 to -4.6). Higher rates of home health and home hospice among those discharged home offset half of the decline in facility use. Results were unchanged in the life-limiting conditions sample. Conclusions: MA enrollment was associated with lower rates of potentially burdensome and facility-based care near the EOL. Greater use of home-based care may improve quality of care but may also leave patients without adequate assistance after hospitalization.

Medicare Advantage Plan and Health System Vertical Integration, 2011-2020.

This cross-sectional study compares the beneficiary and plan characteristics and trends in enrollment, premiums, star ratings, and benefits of nonintegrated, non­legacy-integrated, and legacy-integrated Medicare Advantage plans between 2011 and 2020.

Medicare Advantage Plan Star Ratings and County Social Vulnerability.

Importance: The star rating of a Medicare Advantage (MA) plan is meant to represent plan performance, and it determines the size of quality bonuses. Consumer access to MA plans with a high star rating may vary by the extent of social vulnerability in geographic regions. Objective: To examine the association between a county's Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) and the star rating of a county's MA plans. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used 2023 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data for all MA plans linked to 2020 county-level SVI data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Data were analyzed from March to October 2023. Exposure: Quintile rank of county based on composite and theme-specific SVI scores, with quartile 1 (Q1) representing the least vulnerable counties and Q5, the most vulnerable counties. The SVI is a multidimensional measure of a county's social vulnerability across 4 themes: socioeconomic status, household characteristics (such as disability, age, and language), racial and ethnic minority status, and housing type and transportation. Main Outcomes and Measures: County-level mean star rating and the number of MA plans with low-rated (<3.5 stars), high-rated (3.5 or 4.0 stars), and highest-rated (≥4.5 stars) plans. Results: Across 3075 counties, the median county-level star rating was 4.1 (IQR, 3.9-4.3) in Q1 counties and 3.8 (IQR, 3.6-4.0) in Q5 counties (P < .001). The mean star rating of MA plans was lower (difference, -0.24 points; 95% CI, -0.28 to -0.21 points; P < .001), the number of low-rated plans was higher (incidence rate ratio, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.61-2.06; P < .001), and the number of highest-rated plans was lower (incidence rate ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.70-0.81; P < .001) in Q5 counties compared with Q1 counties. Similar patterns were found across theme-specific SVI score quintiles and for 2022 star ratings. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, the most socially vulnerable counties were found to have the fewest highest-rated plans for MA beneficiaries. As MA enrollment grows in socially vulnerable regions, this may exacerbate regional differences in health outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries.

Prevalence of Independence at Home-Qualifying Beneficiaries in Traditional Medicare, 2014-2021.

Importance: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Innovation Center Independence at Home (IAH) demonstration, a test of home-based primary care operating in a value-based shared-savings payment model, ended December 2023 after a decade of consistently showing savings to Medicare. It is important to assess whether high-need, IAH-qualified beneficiaries continue to pose a growing challenge to traditional Medicare (TM) or if Medicare Advantage (MA), with programmatic features favorable to caring for this subset of the general Medicare population, can disproportionately provide such care. Objective: To examine the size and share of IAH-qualified beneficiaries in TM and MA. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used all Medicare claims data and MA encounter data for 2014 and 2021. IAH qualifying criteria were applied to the TM populations enrolled in Parts A and B in 2014 and 2021, and to MA enrollees in 2021. Growth in the number of IAH-qualified TM beneficiaries from 2014 to 2021 was calculated, and the proportions and numbers of IAH-qualified enrollees in the total 2021 TM and MA populations were compared. Data were analyzed between April and June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The number and share of beneficiaries meeting IAH criteria in TM and MA; the share of TM spending among IAH-qualified beneficiaries. Results: Among 64 million Medicare beneficiaries in 2021, there were 30.55 million beneficiaries in TM with Parts A and B coverage, down from 33.82 million in 2014. The number of IAH-qualified beneficiaries in TM grew 51%, from 2.16 million to 3.27 million, while their proportionate share in TM grew 67% from 6.4% to 10.7% of TM between 2014 and 2021. IAH-qualified beneficiaries represented $155 billion in 2021 Medicare Parts A and B spending, 44% of all TM spending, up from 29% of total spending in 2014. In 2021, 2.15 million IAH-qualified beneficiaries represented 8.0% of Medicare Advantage enrollees. Combining TM and MA, 5.42 million IAH-qualified beneficiaries represented 9.3% of all Medicare beneficiaries, with 3.27 million (60.3%) being insured by TM. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of IAH-qualified Medicare beneficiaries, the share of IAH-qualified beneficiaries in TM grew between 2014 and 2021, with 60% of Medicare high-need beneficiaries accounting for 44% of TM spending. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services should continue to operate value-based programs like IAH that are specifically designed for these high-needs individuals.

Unfulfilled home health referrals lead to higher mortality among Medicare Advantage members.

OBJECTIVES: Medicare Advantage (MA) members referred to home health after inpatient hospitalization may or may not receive these services for a variety of member- and health care system-related reasons. Our objective was to compare outcomes among MA members referred to home health following hospitalization who receive home health services vs those who do not. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective quasi-experimental study. METHODS: Following acute hospitalization, members with discharge orders to receive home health services between January 2021 and October 2022 were identified in a medical claims database consisting of MA beneficiaries. Members who received services within 30 days of discharge were balanced using inverse propensity score weighting on member- and admission-related covariates with a comparator group of members who did not receive services. Primary outcomes included mortality and readmissions in the ensuing 30, 90, and 180 days. Secondary outcomes included emergency department visits, primary care visits, and per-member per-month costs. RESULTS: The home health-treated group consisted of 2115 discharges, and the untreated group consisted of 761 discharges. The treated group experienced lower mortality at 30 days (2% vs 3%, respectively; OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36-0.92), 90 days (8% vs 10%; OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60-0.98), and 180 days (11% vs 14%; OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.65-0.99). The treated group also experienced higher readmissions at 30 days (13% vs 10%; OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01-1.60), 90 days (24% vs 16%; OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.39-2.05), and 180 days (33% vs 24%; OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.29-1.79). CONCLUSION: MA members referred to home health after acute hospitalization who did not receive home health services had higher mortality.

The impacts of supplemental benefits on Medicare Advantage plan composition.

OBJECTIVES: In 2019 and 2020, Medicare Advantage (MA) plans received historic flexibility to begin to address members' nonmedical and social needs through a set of primarily health-related benefits (PHRBs) and Special Supplemental Benefits for the Chronically Ill (SSBCIs). We aimed to evaluate the impact of adoption on the number and composition of new MA plan enrollees. STUDY DESIGN: A difference-in-differences design of retrospective Medicare enrollment data linked to publicly available plan and county-level data. METHODS: We linked individual-level Medicare enrollment data to publicly available, plan-level MA benefit, crosswalk, and penetration files from 2016 to 2020. We compared the number of new enrollees and the proportion of new enrollees who were Black, Hispanic, younger than 65 years, partially and fully Medicare and Medicaid dual eligible, and disabled in plans that adopted a PHRB or SSBCI vs a set of matched control plans that did not. RESULTS: In fully adjusted models, PHRB adoption was associated with a 2.2% decrease in the proportion of fully dual-eligible new members (95% CI, -4.0% to -0.5%). SSBCI adoption was associated with a 2.3% decrease in the proportion of new members younger than 65 years (95% CI, -3.6% to -0.9%). After accounting for multiple comparisons, these results were no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSION: We determined that supplemental benefit adoption was not associated with demographic shifts in MA plan enrollment.

Incorporating Medicare Advantage Admissions Into the CMS Hospital-Wide Readmission Measure.

Importance: Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollment is rapidly expanding, yet Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) claims-based hospital outcome measures, including readmission rates, have historically included only fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries. Objective: To assess the outcomes of incorporating MA data into the CMS claims-based FFS Hospital-Wide All-Cause Unplanned Readmission (HWR) measure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study assessed differences in 30-day unadjusted readmission rates and demographic and risk adjustment variables for MA vs FFS admissions. Inpatient FFS and MA administrative claims data were extracted from the Integrated Data Repository for all admissions for Medicare beneficiaries from July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019. Measure reliability and risk-standardized readmission rates were calculated for the FFS and MA cohort vs the FFS-only cohort, overall and within specialty subgroups (cardiorespiratory, cardiovascular, medicine, surgery, neurology), then changes in hospital performance quintiles were assessed after adding MA admissions. Main Outcome and Measure: Risk-standardized readmission rates. Results: The cohort included 11 029 470 admissions (4 077 633 [37.0%] MA; 6 044 060 [54.8%] female; mean [SD] age, 77.7 [8.2] years). Unadjusted readmission rates were slightly higher for MA vs FFS admissions (15.7% vs 15.4%), yet comorbidities were generally lower among MA beneficiaries. Test-retest reliability for the FFS and MA cohort was higher than for the FFS-only cohort (0.78 vs 0.73) and signal-to-noise reliability increased in each specialty subgroup. Mean hospital risk-standardized readmission rates were similar for the FFS and MA cohort and FFS-only cohorts (15.5% vs 15.3%); this trend was consistent across the 5 specialty subgroups. After adding MA admissions to the FFS-only HWR measure, 1489 hospitals (33.1%) had their performance quintile ranking changed. As their proportion of MA admissions increased, more hospitals experienced a change in their performance quintile ranking (147 hospitals [16.3%] in the lowest quintile of percentage MA admissions; 408 [45.3%] in the highest). The combined cohort added 63 hospitals eligible for public reporting and more than 4 million admissions to the measure. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, adding MA admissions to the HWR measure was associated with improved measure reliability and precision and enabled the inclusion of more hospitals and beneficiaries. After MA admissions were included, 1 in 3 hospitals had their performance quintile changed, with the greatest shifts among hospitals with a high percentage of MA admissions.

New Supplemental Benefits and Plan Ratings Among Medicare Advantage Enrollees.

Importance: In 2018, the US Congress gave Medicare Advantage (MA) historic flexibility to address members' social needs with a set of Special Supplemental Benefits for the Chronically Ill (SSBCIs). In response, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services expanded the definition of primarily health-related benefits (PHRBs) to include nonmedical services in 2019. Uptake has been modest; MA plans cited a lack of evidence as a limiting factor. Objective: To evaluate the association between adopting the expanded supplemental benefits designed to address MA enrollees' nonmedical and social needs and enrollees' plan ratings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study compared the plan ratings of MA enrollees in plans that adopted an expanded PHRB, SSBCI, or both using difference-in-differences estimators with MA Consumer Assessment of Health Care Providers and Systems survey data from March to June 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2021 linked to Medicare administrative claims and publicly available benefits and enrollment data. Data analysis was performed between April 2023 and March 2024. Exposure: Enrollees in MA plans that adopted a PHRB and/or SSBCI in 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Enrollee plan rating on a 0- to 10-point scale, with 0 indicating the worst health plan possible and 10 indicating the best health plan possible. Results: The study sample included 388 356 responses representing 467 MA contracts and 2558 plans in 2021. Within the weighted population of responders, the mean (SD) age was 74.6 (8.7) years, 57.2% were female, 8.9% were fully Medicare-Medicaid dual eligible, 74.6% had at least 1 chronic medical condition, 13.7% had not graduated high school, 9.7% were helped by a proxy, 45.1% reported fair or poor physical health, and 15.6% were entitled to Medicare due to disability. Adopting both a new PHRB and SSBCI benefit in 2021 was associated with an increase of 0.22 out of 10 points (95% CI, 0.4-4.0 points) in mean enrollee plan ratings. There was no association between adoption of only a PHRB (adjusted difference, -0.12 points; 95% CI, -0.26 to 0.02 points) or SSBCI (adjusted difference, 0.09 points; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.21 points) and plan rating. Conclusions and Relevance: Medicare Advantage plans that adopted both benefits saw modest increases in mean enrollee plan ratings. This evidence suggests that more investments in supplemental benefits were associated with improved plan experiences, which could contribute to improved plan quality ratings.

Primary care visit cadence and hospital admissions in high-risk patients.

OBJECTIVES: Most Medicare beneficiaries obtain supplemental insurance or enroll in Medicare Advantage (MA) to protect against potentially high cost sharing in traditional Medicare (TM). We examined changes in Medicare supplemental insurance coverage in the context of MA growth. STUDY DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional analysis of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey from 2005 to 2019. METHODS: We determined whether Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older were enrolled in MA (without Medicaid), TM without supplemental coverage, TM with employer-sponsored supplemental coverage, TM with Medigap, or Medicaid (in TM or MA). RESULTS: From 2005 to 2019, beneficiaries with TM and supplemental insurance provided by their former (or current) employer declined by approximately half (31.8% to 15.5%) while the share in MA (without Medicaid) more than doubled (13.4% to 35.1%). The decline in supplemental employer-sponsored insurance use was greater for White and for higher-income beneficiaries. Over the same period, beneficiaries in TM without supplemental coverage declined by more than a quarter (13.9% to 10.1%). This decline was largest for Black, Hispanic, and lower-income beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid rise in MA enrollment from 2005 to 2019 was accompanied by substantial changes in supplemental insurance with TM. Our results emphasize the interconnectedness of different insurance choices made by Medicare beneficiaries.

Medicare Advantage plan characteristics associated with sorting their beneficiaries to providers that generate fewer avoidable hospital stays.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether certain Medicare Advantage (MA) plan characteristics are associated with driving beneficiaries to providers that generate fewer avoidable hospital stays. DATA SOURCES: This paper primarily used 2018-2019 MA encounter data and traditional Medicare (TM) claims data for a nationally representative 20% sample of Medicare beneficiaries. STUDY DESIGN: For each plan design aspect-plan type, carrier, star rating, and network breadth-we estimated two adjusted Poisson regressions of avoidable hospital stays: one without clinician fixed effects and the other with. We calculated the difference between the coefficients to evaluate the extent to which patient sorting affected avoidable hospital stays relative to TM. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: Our sample included Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older who were continuously enrolled in either MA or TM during 2018-2019. Beneficiaries in our sample had one or more chronic, ambulatory care-sensitive conditions. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Patient sorting can be attributed to certain characteristics of plan design aspects. For plan type, HMOs account for 86%, with PPOs accounting for only 14%. For carriers, Humana and smaller carriers account for 89%. For star ratings, high-star contracts account for 94%, with other stars only accounting for 6%. By network design, narrow network plan-counties explained 20% of the patient sorting effect. CONCLUSIONS: While MA plans were found to be associated with driving beneficiaries to providers that generate fewer avoidable hospital stays, the effect is not homogeneous across the characteristics of MA plans. HMOs and high-star contracts are drivers of this MA phenomenon.

Which medicare advantage enrollees are at highest one-year mortality risk?

BACKGROUND: While a number of tools exist to predict mortality among older adults, less research has described the characteristics of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees at higher risk for 1 year mortality. OBJECTIVES: To describe the characteristics of MA enrollees at higher mortality risk using patient survey data. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SUBJECTS: MA enrollees completing the 2019 MA Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Survey. MEASURES: Linked demographic, health, and mortality data from a sample of MA enrollees were used to predict 1-year mortality risk and describe enrollee characteristics across levels of predicted mortality risk. RESULTS: The mortality model had a 0.80 c-statistic. Mortality risks were skewed: 6 % of enrollees had a ≥ 10 % 1-year mortality risk, while 45 % of enrollees had 1 % to < 5 % 1-year mortality risk. Among the high-risk (≥10 %) group, 47 % were age 85+ versus 12 % among those with mortality risk <5 %. 79 % were in fair or poor self-rated health versus 29 % among those with mortality risk of <5 %. 71 % reported needing urgent care in the prior 6 months versus 40 % among those with a mortality risk of 1 to<5 %. CONCLUSIONS: Relatively few older adults enrolled in MA are at high 1-year mortality risk. Nonetheless, MA enrollees over age 85, in fair or poor health, or with recent urgent care needs are far more likely to be in a high mortality risk group.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Hospital Readmission and Frequent Hospitalizations Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia: Traditional Medicare Versus Medicare Advantage.

OBJECTIVES: Examine racial/ethnic disparities in 30-day readmission and frequent hospitalizations among Medicare beneficiaries with dementia in traditional Medicare (TM) versus Medicare Advantage (MA). METHODS: In this case-control study, we used 2018-2019 TM and MA claims data. Participants included individuals 65+ with 2 years of continuous enrollment, diagnosis of dementia, a minimum of 4 office visits in 2018, and at least 1 hospitalization in 2019, (cases: TM [n = 36,656]; controls: MA [n = 29,366]). We conducted matching based on health-need variables and applied generalized linear models adjusting for demographics, health-related variables, and healthcare encounters. RESULTS: TM was associated with higher odds of 30-day readmission (OR = 1.07 [CI: 1.02 to 1.12]) and frequent hospitalizations (OR = 1.10 [CI: 1.06 to 1.14]) compared to MA. Hispanic and Black enrollees in TM had higher odds of frequent hospitalizations compared with Hispanic and Black enrollees in MA, respectively (OR = 1.35 [CI: 1.19 to 1.54]) and (OR = 1.26 [CI: 1.13 to 1.40]). MA was associated with lower Hispanic-White and Black-White disparities in frequent hospitalizations by 5.8 (CI: -0.09 to -0.03) and 4.4 percentage points (PP; CI: -0.07 to -0.02), respectively. For 30-day readmission, there was no significant difference between Black enrollees in TM and MA (OR = 1.04 [CI: 0.92 to 1.18]), but Hispanic enrollees in TM had higher odds of readmission than Hispanics in MA (OR = 1.23 [CI: 1.06 to 1.43]). MA was associated with a lower Hispanic-White disparity in readmission by 1.9 PP (CI: -0.004 to -0.01). DISCUSSION: MA versus TM was associated with lower risks of 30-day readmission and frequent hospitalizations. Moreover, MA substantially reduced Hispanic-White and Black-White disparities in frequent hospitalizations compared with TM.

Medication adherence star ratings measures, health care resource utilization, and cost.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between missed CMS Star Ratings quality measures for medication adherence over 3 years for diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia medications (9 measures) and health care utilization and relative costs. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: The study examined eligible patients who qualified for the diabetes, statin, and renin-angiotensin system antagonist medication adherence measures in 2018, 2019, and 2020 and were continuously enrolled in a Medicare Advantage prescription drug plan from 2017 through 2021. A total of 103,900 patients were divided into 4 groups based on the number of adherence measures missed (3 medication classes over 3 years): (1) missed 0 measures, (2) missed 1 measure, (3) missed 2 or 3 measures, and (4) missed 4 or more measures. To achieve a quality measure, patients had to meet the Pharmacy Quality Alliance 80% threshold of proportion of days covered during the calendar year. RESULTS: The mean age of the cohort was 71.1 years, and 49.9% were female. Compared with patients who missed 0 of 9 adherence measures, those who missed 1 measure, 2 or 3 measures, and 4 or more measures experienced 12% to 26%, 22% to 42%, and 24% to 50% increased risks, respectively, of all-cause and diabetes-related inpatient stays and all-cause and diabetes-related emergency department visits (all  P  values < .01). Additionally, patients who missed 1, 2 or 3, and 4 or more adherence measures experienced 14%, 19%, and 20% higher monthly medical costs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Missing Star Ratings quality measures for medication adherence was associated with an increased likelihood of health care resource utilization and increased costs for patients taking medications to treat diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia.

Traditional Medicare supplemental insurance and the rise of Medicare Advantage.

OBJECTIVES: Most Medicare beneficiaries obtain supplemental insurance or enroll in Medicare Advantage (MA) to protect against potentially high cost sharing in traditional Medicare (TM). We examined changes in Medicare supplemental insurance coverage in the context of MA growth. STUDY DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional analysis of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey from 2005 to 2019. METHODS: We determined whether Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older were enrolled in MA (without Medicaid), TM without supplemental coverage, TM with employer-sponsored supplemental coverage, TM with Medigap, or Medicaid (in TM or MA). RESULTS: From 2005 to 2019, beneficiaries with TM and supplemental insurance provided by their former (or current) employer declined by approximately half (31.8% to 15.5%) while the share in MA (without Medicaid) more than doubled (13.4% to 35.1%). The decline in supplemental employer-sponsored insurance use was greater for White and for higher-income beneficiaries. Over the same period, beneficiaries in TM without supplemental coverage declined by more than a quarter (13.9% to 10.1%). This decline was largest for Black, Hispanic, and lower-income beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid rise in MA enrollment from 2005 to 2019 was accompanied by substantial changes in supplemental insurance with TM. Our results emphasize the interconnectedness of different insurance choices made by Medicare beneficiaries.