Prevalence of lifestyle-related behavioral information in claims data in the U.S.

OBJECTIVE: Given their association with varying health risks, lifestyle-related behaviors are essential to consider in population-level disease prevention. Health insurance claims are a key source of information for population health analytics, but the availability of lifestyle information within claims data is unknown. Our goal was to assess the availability and prevalence of data items that describe lifestyle behaviors across several domains within a large U.S. claims database. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, descriptive analysis to determine the availability of the following claims-derived lifestyle domains: nutrition, eating habits, physical activity, weight status, emotional wellness, sleep, tobacco use, and substance use. To define these domains, we applied a serial review process with three physicians to identify relevant diagnosis and procedure codes within claims for each domain. We used enrollment files and medical claims from a large national U.S. health plan to identify lifestyle relevant codes filed between 2016 and 2020. We calculated the annual prevalence of each claims-derived lifestyle domain and the proportion of patients by count within each domain. RESULTS: Approximately half of all members within the sample had claims information that identified at least one lifestyle domain (2016 = 41.9%; 2017 = 46.1%; 2018 = 49.6%; 2019 = 52.5%; 2020 = 50.6% of patients). Most commonly identified domains were weight status (19.9-30.7% across years), nutrition (13.3-17.8%), and tobacco use (7.9-9.8%). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates the feasibility of using claims data to identify key lifestyle behaviors. Additional research is needed to confirm the accuracy and validity of our approach and determine its use in population-level disease prevention.

Society of General Internal Medicine Position Statement on Social Risk and Equity in Medicare's Mandatory Value-Based Payment Programs.

The Affordable Care Act (2010) and Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (2015) ushered in a new era of Medicare value-based payment programs. Five major mandatory pay-for-performance programs have been implemented since 2012 with increasing positive and negative payment adjustments over time. A growing body of evidence indicates that these programs are inequitable and financially penalize safety-net systems and systems that care for a higher proportion of racial and ethnic minority patients. Payments from penalized systems are often redistributed to those with higher performance scores, which are predominantly better-financed, large, urban systems that serve less vulnerable patient populations - a "Reverse Robin Hood" effect. This inequity may be diminished by adjusting for social risk factors in payment policy. In this position statement, we review the literature evaluating equity across Medicare value-based payment programs, major policy reports evaluating the use of social risk data, and provide recommendations on behalf of the Society of General Internal Medicine regarding how to address social risk and unmet health-related social needs in these programs. Immediate recommendations include implementing peer grouping (stratification of healthcare systems by proportion of dual eligible Medicare/Medicaid patients served, and evaluation of performance and subsequent payment adjustments within strata) until optimal methods for accounting for social risk are defined. Short-term recommendations include using census-based, area-level indices to account for neighborhood-level social risk, and developing standardized approaches to collecting individual socioeconomic data in a robust but sensitive way. Long-term recommendations include implementing a research agenda to evaluate best practices for accounting for social risk, developing validated health equity specific measures of care, and creating policies to better integrate healthcare and social services.

Racial disparities in patient activation: Evaluating the mediating role of health literacy with path analyses.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to use path analysis methods to determine if health literacy mediates the relationship between race and patient activation. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial in elderly, urban, minority patients using path analysis. Path analysis was used to evaluate the mediation of race on patient activation through different variables. Several models were tested for best fit for their effects on patient activation. RESULTS: Across all models, significant mediation paths were identified from race to lower patient activation through health literacy. This relationship remained significant throughout alternative model testing for covariate combinations. The best-fit model included an indirect effect of sex on patient activation through health literacy indicating that the mediation effect of health literacy on patient activation was most profound for African American males. Health literacy had a bigger influence on patient activation for participants with a greater comorbidity than for those with fewer conditions. No significant direct effect was shown between race and patient activation in any of the models. CONCLUSION: Racial disparities in patient activation were fully mediated by health literacy skills. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Future interventions to improve racial disparities in patient activation need to be targeted at improving health literacy.