Encouraging Medicare Advantage Enrollees to Switch to Higher Quality Plans: Assessing the Effectiveness of a "Nudge" Letter.

There are considerable quality differences across private Medicare Advantage insurance plans, so it is important that beneficiaries make informed choices. During open enrollment for the 2013 coverage year, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services sent letters to beneficiaries enrolled in low-quality Medicare Advantage plans (i.e., plans rated less than 3 stars for at least 3 consecutive years by Medicare) explaining the stars and encouraging them to reexamine their choices. To understand the effectiveness of these low-cost, behavioral "nudge" letters, we used a beneficiary-level national retrospective cohort and performed multivariate regression analysis of plan selection during the 2013 open enrollment period among those enrolled in plans rated less than 3 stars. Our analysis controls for beneficiary demographic characteristics, health and health care spending risks, the availability of alternative higher rated plan options in their local market, and historical disenrollment rates from the plans. We compared the behaviors of those beneficiaries who received the nudge letters with those who enrolled in similar poorly rated plans but did not receive such letters. We found that beneficiaries who received the nudge letter were almost twice as likely (28.0% [95% confidence interval = 27.7%, 28.2%] vs. 15.3% [95% confidence interval = 15.1%, 15.5%]) to switch to a higher rated plan compared with those who did not receive the letter. White beneficiaries, healthier beneficiaries, and those residing in areas with more high-performing plan choices were more likely to switch plans in response to the nudge. Our findings highlight both the importance and efficacy of providing timely and actionable information to beneficiaries about quality in the insurance marketplace to facilitate informed and value-based coverage decisions.

Medicare's Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS): quality measurement and beneficiary attribution.

PURPOSE: To explore two issues that are relevant to inclusion of PQRS reporting in a value-based payment system: (1) what are the characteristics of PQRS reports and the providers who file them; and (2) could PQRS provide active attribution information to supplement existing attribution algorithms? DESIGN AND METHODS: Using data from five states for the years 2008 (the first full year of the program) and 2009, we examined the number and type of providers who reported PQRS measures and the types of measures that were reported. We then compared the PQRS reporting provider to the provider who supplied the plurality of the beneficiary's non-hospital evaluation and management (NH-E&M) visits. RESULTS: Although PQRS-reporting providers provide only 17 percent of the beneficiary's NH-E&M visits on average in 2009, the provider who provided the plurality of visits supplied only 50 percent of such visits, on average. IMPLICATIONS: PQRS reporting alone cannot solve the attribution problem that is inherent in traditional fee-for-service Medicare, but as PQRS participation increases, it could help improve both attribution and information regarding the quality of health care services delivered to Medicare beneficiaries.

Temporal national trends of minimally invasive and retropubic radical prostatectomy outcomes from 2003 to 2007: results from the 100% Medicare sample.

BACKGROUND: Although the use of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP) has increased, there are few comprehensive population-based studies assessing temporal trends and outcomes relative to retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP). OBJECTIVE: Assess temporal trends in the utilization and outcomes of MIRP and RRP among US Medicare beneficiaries from 2003 to 2007. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A population-based retrospective study of 19 594 MIRP and 58 638 RRP procedures was performed from 2003 to 2007 from the 100% Medicare sample, composed of almost all US men ≥ 65 yr of age. INTERVENTION: MIRP and RRP. MEASUREMENTS: We measured 30-d outcomes (cardiac, respiratory, vascular, genitourinary, miscellaneous medical, miscellaneous surgical, wound complications, blood transfusions, and death), cystography utilization within 6 wk of surgery, and late complications (anastomotic stricture, ureteral complications, rectourethral fistulae, lymphocele, and corrective incontinence surgery). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: From 2003 to 2007, MIRP increased from 4.9% to 44.5% of radical prostatectomies while RRP decreased from 89.4% to 52.9%. MIRP versus RRP subjects were younger (p<0.001) and had fewer comorbidities (p<0.001). Decreased MIRP genitourinary complications (6.2-4.1%; p = 0.002), miscellaneous surgical complications (4.7-3.7%; p=0.030), transfusions (3.5-2.2%; p=0.005), and postoperative cystography utilization (40.3-34.1%; p<0.001) were observed over time. Conversely, overall RRP perioperative complications increased (27.4-32.0%; p<0.001), including an increase in perioperative mortality (0.5-0.8%, p=0.009). Late RRP complications increased, with the exception of fewer anastomotic strictures (10.2-8.8%; p=0.002). In adjusted analyses, RRP versus MIRP was associated with increased 30-d mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 2.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55-4.59; p<0.001) and more perioperative (OR: 1.60; 95% CI, 1.45-1.76; p<0.001) and late complications (OR: 2.52; 95% CI, 2.20-2.89; p<0.001). Limitations include the inability to distinguish MIRP with versus without robotic assistance and also the lack of pathologic information. CONCLUSIONS: From 2003 to 2007, there were fewer MIRP transfusions, genitourinary complications, and miscellaneous surgical complications, whereas most RRP perioperative and late complications increased. RRP versus MIRP was associated with more postoperative mortality and complications.

Clinician feedback on using episode groupers with Medicare claims data.

CMS is investigating techniques that might help identify costly physician practice patterns. One method presently under evaluation is to compare resource use for certain episodes of care using commercially available episode grouping software. Although this software has been used by the private sector to classify insured individuals' medical claims into episodes of care, it has never been used with fee-for-service Medicare claims except in the studies by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) and CMS. This study reviews and reports on clinician feedback on the most obvious and important decisions that must be faced by Medicare to use grouped claims data as the foundation for a physician performance measurement system. The panel reactions show the importance of bringing persons with clinical knowledge into the development process. The clinician feedback confirms that additional research is needed.

Adverse selection in the Medicare prescription drug program.

The Medicare Part D drug benefit created choices for beneficiaries among many prescription drug plans with varying levels of coverage. As a result, Medicare enrollees with high prescription drug costs have strong incentives to enroll in Part D, especially in plans with more comprehensive coverage. To measure this potential problem of "adverse selection," which could threaten plans' finances, we compared baseline characteristics among groups of beneficiaries with various drug coverage arrangements in 2006. We found some significant differences. For example, enrollees in stand-alone prescription drug plans, especially in plans offering benefits in the coverage gap, or "doughnut hole," had higher baseline drug costs and worse health than enrollees in Medicare Advantage prescription drug plans. Although risk-adjusted payments and other measures have been put in place to account for selection, these patterns could adversely affect future Medicare costs and should be watched carefully.

Diagnosis-based risk adjustment for medicare prescription drug plan payments.

The 2003 Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act (MMA) created Medicare Part D, a voluntary prescription drug benefit program. The benefit is a government subsidized prescription drug benefit within Medicare. This article focuses on the development of the prescription drug risk-adjustment model used to adjust payments to reflect the health status of plan enrollees.

Risk-adjustment system for the Medicare capitated ESRD program.

Medicare is the principal payer for medical services for those in the U.S. population suffering from end-stage renal disease (ESRD). By law, beneficiaries diagnosed with ESRD may not subsequently enroll in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, however, the potential benefits of managed care for this population have stimulated interest in changing the law and developing demonstration plans. We describe a new risk-adjustment system developed for Medicare to pay for ESRD beneficiaries in managed care plans. The model improves on current payment methodology by adjusting payments for treatment status and comorbidities.

Risk adjustment of Medicare capitation payments using the CMS-HCC model.

This article describes the CMS hierarchical condition categories (HCC) model implemented in 2004 to adjust Medicare capitation payments to private health care plans for the health expenditure risk of their enrollees. We explain the model's principles, elements, organization, calibration, and performance. Modifications to reduce plan data reporting burden and adaptations for disabled, institutionalized, newly enrolled, and secondary payer subpopulations are discussed.