Economic Impact of Progression from Mild Cognitive Impairment to Alzheimer Disease in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists on the economic burden of individuals who progress from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer disease and related dementia disorders (ADRD). OBJECTIVES: To assess the all-cause health care resource utilization and costs for individuals who develop ADRD following an MCI diagnosis compared to those with stable MCI. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study from January 01, 2014, to December 31, 2019. SETTING: The Merative MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Databases were used. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals were included if they: (1) were aged 50 years or older; (2) had ≥1 claim with an MCI diagnosis based on the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) code of 331.83 or the Tenth Revision (ICD-10) code of G31.84; and had continuous enrollment. Individuals were excluded if they had a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease or ADRD or prescription of ADRD medication. MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes included all-cause utilization and costs per patient per year in the first 12 months following MCI diagnosis, in total and by care setting: inpatient admissions, emergency department (ED) visits, outpatient visits, and pharmacy claims. RESULTS: Out of the total of 5185 included individuals, 1962 (37.8%) progressed to ADRD (MCI-to-ADRD subgroup) and 3223 (62.2%) did not (Stable MCI subgroup). Adjusted all-cause utilization was higher for all care settings in the MCI-to-ADRD subgroup compared with the Stable MCI subgroup. Adjusted all-cause mean total costs ($34 599 vs $24 541; mean ratio [MR], 1.41 [95% CI, 1.31-1.51]; P<.001), inpatient costs ($47 463 vs $38 004; MR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.08-1.44]; P=.002), ED costs ($4875 vs $3863; MR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.11-1.43]; P<.001), and outpatient costs ($16 652 vs $13 015; MR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.20-1.37]; P<.001) were all significantly higher for the MCI-to-ADRD subgroup compared with the Stable MCI subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals who progressed from MCI to ADRD had significantly higher health care costs than individuals with stable MCI. Early identification of MCI and delaying its progression is important to improve patient and economic outcomes.

Quality, Spending, Utilization, and Outcomes Among Dual-Eligible Medicare-Medicaid Beneficiaries in Integrated Care Programs: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Most dual-eligible Medicare-Medicaid beneficiaries are enrolled in bifurcated insurance programs that pay for different components of care. Therefore, policymakers are prioritizing expansion of integrated care plans (ICPs) that manage both Medicare and Medicaid benefits and spending. Objective: To review evidence of the association between ICPs and health care spending, quality, utilization, and patient outcomes among dual-eligible beneficiaries. Evidence Review: A search was conducted of PubMed/MEDLINE (January 1, 2010, through November 1, 2023) and Google Scholar (January 1, 2010, through October 1, 2023) and augmented with reports from US federal and state government websites. Three categories of ICPs were evaluated: Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE), Medicare-Medicaid Plans (MMPs), and Fully Integrated Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans (FIDE-SNPs) and related models aligning Medicare and Medicaid coverage. The review included studies that evaluated beneficiaries dually eligible for and enrolled in full Medicaid; compared an ICP to a nonintegrated arrangement; and evaluated utilization, spending, care coordination, patient experience, or health for 100 or more beneficiaries. Findings: In all, 26 ICP evaluations met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis: 5 of PACE, 13 of MMPs, and 8 of FIDE-SNPs and other aligned models. Evidence generally showed associated reductions in long-term nursing home stays in PACE (3 of 4 studies) and FIDE-SNPs and related aligned models (3 of 5 studies) but was mixed in evaluations of MMPs. Four of 9 studies of MMPs and 2 of 3 studies of FIDE-SNPs found higher outpatient use, although other studies showed no difference. Evidence on Medicaid spending was limited, whereas 8 of 10 studies of MMPs showed an association between these plans and higher Medicare spending. Evidence was mixed or inconclusive regarding care coordination and hospitalizations, and it was insufficient to evaluate patient satisfaction, health, and outcomes in beneficiary subgroups (eg, those with serious mental illness). Furthermore, studies had limited ability to control for bias from unmeasured differences between enrollees of ICPs compared with nonintegrated models. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review found variability and gaps in evidence regarding ICPs and spending, quality, utilization, and outcomes. Studies found some ICPs were associated with reductions in long-term nursing home admissions, and several identified increases in outpatient care. However, MMPs were primarily associated with higher Medicare spending. Evidence for other outcomes was limited or inconclusive. Research addressing these evidence gaps is needed to guide ongoing efforts to integrate coverage and care for dual-eligible beneficiaries.

Medicare Payment for Opioid Treatment Programs.

Importance: Medicare began paying for medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) that dispense methadone and other MOUD in January 2020. There has been little research describing the response to this payment change and whether it resulted in more patients receiving MOUD or just a shift in who pays for this care. Objective: To describe how many and which Medicare beneficiaries receive care from OTPs and how this compares to those receiving MOUD in other settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included all patients receiving MOUD care identified in 2019-2022 100% US Medicare Parts B and D claims. Patients receiving care in an OTP who were dually insured with Medicare and Medicaid in the 2019-2020 Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System were also included. Exposure: Receiving MOUD care in an OTP. Main Outcomes and Measures: Comparisons of 2022 beneficiaries treated in OTPs vs other non-OTP settings in 2022. Results: The share of Medicare beneficiaries treated by OTPs rose steadily from 4 per 10 000 (14 160 beneficiaries) in January 2020 to 7 per 10 000 (25 596 beneficiaries) in August 2020, then plateaued through December 2022; of 38 870 patients (23% ≥66 years; 35% female) treated at an OTP in 2022, 96% received methadone. Patients in OTPs, compared to those receiving MOUD in other settings, were more likely be 65 years and younger (65% vs 62%; P < .001), less likely to be White (72% vs 82%; P < .001), and more likely to be an urban resident (86% vs 74%; P < .001). When Medicare OTP coverage began, there was no associated drop in the number of dually insured patients with Medicaid with an OTP claim. Of the 1854 OTPs, 1115 (60%) billed Medicare in 2022, with the share billing Medicare ranging from 13% to 100% across states. Conclusions and Relevance: This study showed that since the initiation of Medicare OTP coverage in 2020, there has been a rapid increase in the number of Medicare beneficiaries with claims for OTP services for MOUD, and most OTPs have begun billing Medicare. Patients in OTPs were more likely to be urban residents and members of racial or ethnic minority groups than the patients receiving other forms of MOUD.

Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs for Type 2 Diabetes Medications When Aging Into Medicare.

Importance: For people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), out-of-pocket medication costs may influence medication choice, adherence, and overall diabetes management and progression. Little is known about how these costs change as insured people enter Medicare at age 65 years, when coinsurance in the coverage gap and catastrophic phases of Part D coverage can be increased greatly by use of insulin and newer, branded medications (eg, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors). Objective: To identify whether reaching age 65 years is associated with T2D medication out-of-pocket costs and utilization. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study (2012-2020) featuring 7 years of follow-up used prescription drug claims data from the TriNetX Diamond Network. Participants included people in the US with diagnosed T2D, and claims for T2D medications were observed both before and after age 65 years. Data analysis was performed from October 2022 to September 2023. Exposure: Reaching age 65 years, according to participants' year of birth. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was patient out-of-pocket costs for T2D drugs per quarter (inflation adjusted to 2020 dollars). Utilization, measured as binary utilization of specific classes, and the number of claims for mutually exclusive classes and combinations of classes were also examined. All outcomes were examined using regression discontinuity design. Results: In claims data for 129 997 individuals with T2D diagnosed at ages 58 to 72 years (mean [SD] age, 65.50 [2.95] years; 801 235 female [50.9%]), reaching age 65 years was associated with an increase of $23.04 (95% CI, $19.86-$26.22) in mean quarterly out-of-pocket costs for T2D drugs, and an increase of $56.36 (95% CI, $51.48-$61.23) at the 95th percentile of spending, after utilization adjustment. Utilization decreased by 5.3% at age 65 years, from 3.40 claims per quarter (95% CI, 3.38-3.42 claims per quarter) to 3.22 claims per quarter (95% CI, 3.21-3.24 claims per quarter), but a shift in composition of utilization, including increased insulin use, was associated with additional increases in patient costs. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of individuals with T2D, the increase in spending upon reaching age 65 years (when most people enroll in Medicare) was associated with patient coinsurance in the coverage gap and catastrophic coverage phases of Medicare Part D. The increased patient cost burden at age 65 years and a modest reduction in overall T2D drug utilization suggest that as people with T2D age into Medicare, there is potentially an increase in nonadherence and diabetes complications.

Trends in Medicare Costs of Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy, 2013 through 2022.

Objective: To analyze Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy Registry (HBOTR) data to estimate the Medicare costs of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBO2) based on standard treatment protocols and the annual mean number of treatments per patient reported by the registry. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of deidentified data for all payers from 53 centers registered in the HBOTR from 2013 to 2022. We estimated the mean annual per-patient costs of HBO2 based on Medicare (outpatient facility + physician) reimbursement fees adjusted to 2022 inflation using the Medicare Economic Index. Costs were calculated for the annual average number of treatments patients received each year and for a standard 40-treatment series. We estimated the 2022 costs of standard treatment protocols for HBO2 indications treated in the outpatient setting. Results: Generally, all costs decreased from 2013 to 2022. The facility cost per patient per 40 HBO2 treatments decreased by 10.7% from $21,568.58 in 2013 to $19,488.00 in 2022. The physician cost per patient per 40 treatments substantially decreased by -37.8%, from $5,993.16 to $4,346.40. The total cost per patient per 40 treatments decreased by 15.6% from $27,561.74 to $23,834.40. In 2022, a single HBO2 session cost $595.86. For different indications, estimated costs ranged from $2,383.4-$8,342.04 for crush injuries to $17,875.80-$35,751.60 for diabetic foot ulcers and delayed radiation injuries. Conclusions: This real-world analysis of registry data demonstrates that the actual cost of HBO2 is not nearly as costly as the literature has insinuated, and the per-patient cost to Medicare is decreasing, largely due to decreased physician costs.

Controlled CMS Data Demonstrates a Cost and Clinical Advantage for Hyperbaric Oxygen for Radiation Cystitis.

Introduction: Increasing cancer survivorship, in part due to new radiation treatments, has created a larger population at risk for delayed complications of treatment. Radiation cystitis continues to occur despite targeted radiation techniques. Materials and Methods: To investigate value-based care applying hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2) to treat delayed radiation cystitis, we reviewed public-access Medicare data from 3,309 patients from Oct 1, 2014, through Dec 31, 2019. Using novel statistical modeling, we compared cost and clinical effectiveness in a hyperbaric oxygen group to a control group receiving conventional therapies. Results: Treatment in the hyperbaric group provided a 36% reduction in urinary bleeding, a 78% reduced frequency of blood transfusion for hematuria, a 31% reduction in endoscopic procedures, and fewer hospitalizations when study patients were compared to control. There was a 53% reduction in mortality and reduced unadjusted Medicare costs of $5,059 per patient within the first year after completion of HBO2 treatment per patient. When at least 40 treatments were provided, cost savings per patient increased to $11,548 for the HBO2 study group compared to the control group. This represents a 37% reduction in Medicare spending for the HBO2-treated group. We also validate a dose-response curve effect with a complete course of 40 or more HBO2 treatments having better clinical outcomes than those treated with fewer treatments. Conclusion: These data support previous studies that demonstrate clinical benefits now with cost- effectiveness when adjunctive HBO2 treatments are added to routine interventions. The methodology provides a comparative group selected without bias. It also provides validation of statistical modeling techniques that may be valuable in future analysis, complementary to more traditional methods.

Medicare Eligibility and Changes in Coverage, Access to Care, and Health by Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.

Importance: Medicare provides nearly universal insurance coverage at age 65 years. However, how Medicare eligibility affects disparities in health insurance coverage, access to care, and health status among individuals by sexual orientation and gender identity is poorly understood. Objective: To assess the association of Medicare eligibility with disparities in health insurance coverage, access to care, and self-reported health status among individuals by sexual orientation and by gender identity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used the age discontinuity for Medicare eligibility at age 65 years to isolate the association of Medicare with health insurance coverage, access to care, and self-reported health status, by their sexual orientation and by their gender identity. Data were collected from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System for respondents from 51 to 79 years old from 2014 to 2021. Data analysis was performed from September 2022 to April 2023. Exposures: Medicare eligibility at age 65 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportions of respondents with health insurance coverage, usual source of care, cost barriers to care, influenza vaccination, and self-reported health status. Results: The study population included 927 952 individuals (mean [SD] age, 64.4 [7.7] years; 524 972 [56.6%] females and 402 670 [43.4%] males), of whom 28 077 (3.03%) identified as a sexual minority-lesbian, gay, bisexual, or another sexual minority identity (LGB+) and 3286 (0.35%) as transgender or gender diverse. Respondents who identified as heterosexual had greater improvements at age 65 years in insurance coverage (4.2 percentage points [pp]; 95% CI, 4.0-4.4 pp) than those who identified as LGB+ (3.6 pp; 95% CI, 2.3-4.8 pp), except when the analysis was limited to a subsample of married respondents. For access to care, improvements in usual source of care, cost barriers to care, and influenza vaccination were larger at age 65 years for heterosexual respondents compared with LGB+ respondents, although confidence intervals were overlapping and less precise for LGB+ individuals. For self-reported health status, the analyses found larger improvements at age 65 years for LGB+ respondents compared with heterosexual respondents. There was considerable heterogeneity by state in disparities by sexual orientation among individuals who were nearly eligible for Medicare (close to 65 years old), with the US South and Central states demonstrating the highest disparities. Among the top-10 highest-disparities states, Medicare eligibility was associated with greater increases in coverage (6.7 pp vs 5.0 pp) and access to a usual source of care (1.4 pp vs 0.6 pp) for LGB+ respondents compared with heterosexual respondents. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study indicate that Medicare eligibility was not associated with consistently greater improvements in health insurance coverage and access to care among LGBTQI+ individuals compared with heterosexual and/or cisgender individuals. However, among sexual minority individuals, Medicare may be associated with closing gaps in self-reported health status, and among states with the highest disparities, it may improve health insurance coverage, access to care, and self-reported health status.

Healthcare spending for non-fatal falls among older adults, USA.

BACKGROUND: The older adult (65+) population in the USA is increasing and with it the number of medically treated falls. In 2015, healthcare spending attributable to older adult falls was approximately US$50 billion. We aim to update the estimated medical expenditures attributable to older adult non-fatal falls. METHODS: Generalised linear models using 2017, 2019 and 2021 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey and cost supplement files were used to estimate the association of falls with healthcare expenditures while adjusting for demographic characteristics and health conditions in the model. To portion out the share of total healthcare spending attributable to falls versus not, we adjusted for demographic characteristics and health conditions, including self-reported health status and certain comorbidities associated with increased risk of falling or higher healthcare expenditure. We calculated a fall-attributable fraction of expenditure as total expenditures minus total expenditures with no falls divided by total expenditures. We applied the fall-attributable fraction of expenditure from the regression model to the 2020 total expenditures from the National Health Expenditure Data to calculate total healthcare spending attributable to older adult falls. RESULTS: In 2020, healthcare expenditure for non-fatal falls was US$80.0 billion, with the majority paid by Medicare. CONCLUSION: Healthcare spending for non-fatal older adult falls was substantially higher than previously reported estimates. This highlights the growing economic burden attributable to older adult falls and these findings can be used to inform policies on fall prevention efforts in the USA.

Tiny patients, huge impact: a call to action.

The continuation of high-quality care is under threat for the over 70 million children in the United States. Inequities between Medicaid and Medicare payments and the current procedural-based reimbursement model have resulted in the undervaluing of pediatric medical care and lack of prioritization of children's health by institutions. The number of pediatricians, including pediatric subspecialists, and pediatric healthcare centers are declining due to mounting financial obstacles and this crucial healthcare supply is no longer able to keep up with demand. The reasons contributing to these inequities are clear and rational: Medicaid has significantly lower rates of reimbursement compared to Medicare, yet Medicaid covers almost half of children in the United States and creates the natural incentive for medical institutions to prioritize the care of adults. Additionally, certain aspects of children's healthcare are unique from adults and are not adequately covered in the current payment model. The result of decades of devaluing children's healthcare has led to a substantial decrease in the availability of services, medications, and equipment needed to provide healthcare to children across the nation. Fortunately, the solution is just as clear as the problem: we must value the healthcare of children as much as that of adults by increasing Medicaid funding to be on par with Medicare and appreciate the complexities of care beyond procedures. If these changes are not made, the high-quality care for children in the US will continue to decline and increase strain on the overall healthcare system as these children age into adulthood.

The Road To Value Can't Be Paved With A Broken Medicare Physician Fee Schedule.

Value-based payment has been promoted for increasing quality, controlling spending, and improving patient and practitioner experience. Meanwhile, needed reforms to fee-for-service payment (the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule) have been ignored as policy makers seek to move payment toward alternatives, even though the fee schedule is an intrinsic part of Alternative Payment Models. In this article, we show how value-based payment and the fee schedule should be viewed as complementary, rather than as separate silos. We trace the origins of embedded flaws in the fee schedule that must be fixed if value-based payment is to succeed. These include payment distortions that directly compromise value by overpaying for certain procedures and imaging services while underpaying for services that add value for beneficiaries. We also show how the fee schedule can accommodate bundled payments and population-based payments that are central to Alternative Payment Models. We draw two conclusions. First, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services should correct misvalued services and establish a hybrid payment for primary care that blends fee-for-service and population-based payment. Second, Congress should alter the thirty-five-year-old statutory basis for setting Medicare fees to allow CMS to explicitly consider policy priorities such as workforce shortages in refining fee levels.

The Effect Of Next Generation Accountable Care Organizations On Medicare Expenditures.

The Next Generation Accountable Care Organization (NGACO) model (active during 2016-21) tested the effects of high financial risk, payment mechanisms, and flexible care delivery on health care spending and value for fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries. We used quasi-experimental methods to examine the model's effects on Medicare Parts A and B spending. Sixty-two ACOs with more than 4.2 million beneficiaries and more than 91,000 practitioners participated in the model. The model was associated with a $270 per beneficiary per year, or approximately $1.7 billion, decline in Medicare spending. After shared savings payments to ACOs were included, the model increased net Medicare spending by $56 per beneficiary per year, or $96.7 million. Annual declines in spending for the model grew over time, reflecting exit by poorer-performing NGACOs, improvement among the remaining NGACOs, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Larger declines in spending occurred among physician practice ACOs and ACOs that elected population-based payments and risk caps greater than 5 percent.

An innovative business model using established Medicare items for delivery of cardiac rehabilitation: A value proposition for primary care.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 70% of Australians do not attend cardiac rehabilitation (CR). A potential solution is integrating CR into primary care OBJECTIVE: To propose a business model for primary care providers to implement CR using current Medicare items. DISCUSSION: Using the chronic disease management plan, general practitioners (GPs) complete four clinical assessments at 1-2 weeks, 8-12 weeks, and 6 and 12 months after discharge. The net benefit of applying this model, compared with claiming the most used standard consultation Item 23, in Phase II CR is up to $505 per patient and $543 in Phase III CR. The number of rural GPs providing CR in partnership with the Country Access To Cardiac Health (CATCH) through the GP hybrid model has increased from 28 in 2021 to 32 in 2022. This increase might be attributed to this value proposition. The biggest limitation is access to allied health services in the rural areas.

Chronic kidney disease and transvenous cardiac implantable electronic device infection-is there an impact on healthcare utilization, costs, disease progression, and mortality?

AIMS: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections are a burden to hospitals and costly for healthcare systems. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) increases the risk of CIED infections, but its differential impact on healthcare utilization, costs, and outcomes is not known. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective analysis used de-identified Medicare Fee-for-Service claims to identify patients implanted with a CIED from July 2016 to December 2020. Outcomes were defined as hospital days and costs within 12 months post-implant, post-infection CKD progression, and mortality. Generalized linear models were used to calculate results by CKD and infection status while controlling for other comorbidities, with differences between cohorts representing the incremental effect associated with CKD. A total of 584 543 patients had a CIED implant, of which 26% had CKD and 1.4% had a device infection. The average total days in hospital for infected patients was 23.5 days with CKD vs. 14.5 days (P < 0.001) without. The average cost of infection was $121 756 with CKD vs. $55 366 without (P < 0.001), leading to an incremental cost associated with CKD of $66 390. Infected patients with CKD were more likely to have septicaemia or severe sepsis than those without CKD (11.0 vs. 4.6%, P < 0.001). After infection, CKD patients were more likely to experience CKD progression (hazard ratio 1.26, P < 0.001) and mortality (hazard ratio 1.89, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Cardiac implantable electronic device infection in patients with CKD was associated with more healthcare utilization, higher cost, greater disease progression, and greater mortality compared to patients without CKD.

Adverse event costs of systemic therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapy and biologics in the US.

Aim: The objective of this study was to compare adverse event (AE) management costs for fruquintinib, regorafenib, trifluridine/tipiracil (T/T) and trifluridine/tipiracil+bevacizumab (T/T+bev) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with at least two prior lines of therapy from the US commercial and Medicare payer perspectives. Materials & methods: A cost-consequence model was developed to calculate the per-patient and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) AE costs using rates of grade 3/4 AEs with incidence ≥5% in clinical trials, event-specific management costs and duration treatment. Anchored comparisons of AE costs were calculated using a difference-in-differences approach with best supportive care (BSC) as a common reference. AE rates and treatment duration were obtained from clinical trials: FRESCO and FRESCO-2 (fruquintinib), RECOURSE (T/T), CORRECT (regorafenib) and SUNLIGHT (T/T, T/T+bev). AE management costs for the commercial and Medicare perspectives were obtained from publicly available sources. Results: From the commercial perspective, the AE costs (presented as per-patient, PPPM) were: $4015, $1091 for fruquintinib (FRESCO); $4253, $1390 for fruquintinib (FRESCO-2); $17,110, $11,104 for T/T (RECOURSE); $9851, $4691 for T/T (SUNLIGHT); $8199, $4823 for regorafenib; and $11,620, $2324 for T/T+bev. These results were consistent in anchored comparisons: the difference-in-difference for fruquintinib based on FRESCO was -$1929 versus regorafenib and -$11,427 versus T/T; for fruquintinib based on FRESCO-2 was -$2257 versus regorafenib and -$11,756 versus T/T. Across all analyses, results were consistent from the Medicare perspective. Conclusion: Fruquintinib was associated with lower AE management costs compared with regorafenib, T/T and T/T+bev for patients with previously treated mCRC. This evidence has direct implications for treatment, formulary and pathways decision-making in this patient population.

Financial crossroads of care: physicians' struggle and patient outcomes.

In 2024, physicians face significant financial challenges due to declining Medicare reimbursement rates and high student loan interest rates, which will impact health care delivery and access.

Patient Perception of Physician Reimbursement by Medicare for Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement.

INTRODUCTION: Patient perceptions of physician reimbursement commonly differ from actual reimbursement. This study aims to improve health care cost transparency and trust between patients, physicians, and the health care system by evaluating patient perceptions of Medicare reimbursement for artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement. METHODS: We identified patients who underwent AUS placement at a single institution from 2014 to 2023. After obtaining informed consent, we administered a telephone survey to ask patients about their perceptions of Medicare reimbursement for AUS surgery and the amount they felt the physician should be compensated. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients were enrolled and completed the survey. On average, patients estimated Medicare physician reimbursement to be $18,920, 25 times the actual average procedure reimbursement. Once informed that the actual amount was $757.52, 97% of respondents felt that the reimbursement was "somewhat lower" (13%) or "much lower" (84%) than what they considered fair. The average amount that patients felt the physician should be paid was $8,844, 12 times the actual average procedure reimbursement. Fifty-four percent of patients estimated their physician's reimbursement to be higher than what they later reported as being "fair," representing a presurvey belief that their physician was overpaid. CONCLUSIONS: Patient perceptions of physician reimbursement for AUS are vastly different than the actual amount paid. The discordance between patient perception and actual reimbursement could impact how patients view health care costs and the relationship with their provider.

Health Care Expenses and Financial Hardship Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Functional Disability.

Importance: Medicare beneficiaries with functional disabilities often require more medical care, leading to substantial financial hardship. However, the precise magnitude and sources of this hardship remain unknown. Objectives: To quantify the financial burden from health care expenses by functional disability levels among Medicare beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data, including demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, health status, and health care use, from a nationally representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries from the 2013 to 2021 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Functional disability was measured using 6 questions and categorized into 3 levels: none (no difficulties), moderate (1-2 difficulties), and severe (≥3 difficulties). Data were analyzed from December 2023 to March 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Financial hardship from health care expenses was assessed using objective measures (annual out-of-pocket spending, high financial burden [out-of-pocket spending exceeding 20% of income], and catastrophic financial burden [out-of-pocket spending exceeding 40% of income]) and subjective measures (difficulty paying medical bills and paying medical bills over time). We applied weights to produce results representative of national estimates. Results: The sample included 31 952 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 71.1 [9.7] years; 54.6% female). In weighted analyses, severe functional disability was associated with a significantly higher financial burden from health care expenses, with out-of-pocket spending reaching $2137 (95% CI, $1943-$2330) annually. This exceeded out-of-pocket spending for those without functional disability by nearly $700 per year ($1468 [95% CI, $1311-$1625]) and for those with moderate functional disability by almost $500 per year ($1673 [95% CI, $1620-$1725]). The primary factors that played a role in this difference were home health care ($399 [95% CI, $145-$651]) and equipment and supplies ($304 [95% CI, $278-$330]). Beneficiaries with severe functional disability experienced significantly higher rates of both high and catastrophic financial burden than those without disability and those with moderate disability (13.2% [12.2%-14.1%] vs 9.1% [95% CI, 8.6%-9.5%] and 9.4% [95% CI, 9.1%-9.7%] for high financial burden, respectively, and 8.9% [95% CI, 7.8%-10.1%] vs 6.4% [95% CI, 6.1%-6.8%] and 6.0% [95% CI, 5.6%-6.4%] for catastrophic financial burden, respectively). Similar associations were observed in subjective financial hardship. For example, 11.8% (95% CI, 10.3%-13.3%) of those with severe functional disability experienced problems paying medical bills, compared with 7.7% (95% CI, 7.6%-7.9%) and 9.3% (95% CI, 9.0%-9.6%) of those without functional disability and those with moderate functional disability, respectively. Notably, there were no significant differences in financial hardship among those with Medicaid based on functional disability levels. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries, those with severe functional disability levels experienced a disproportionate burden from health care costs. However, Medicaid played a pivotal role in reducing the financial strain. Policymakers should explore interventions that effectively relieve the financial burden of health care in this vulnerable population.