Do Medicaid Expenditures Increase After Adults Exit Permanent Supportive Housing?

The effects of homelessness and permanent supportive housing (PSH) on health care utilization have been well documented. Prior research on the association between PSH entry and Medicaid expenditures have indicated that such housing support could result in savings to Medicaid programs; however, whether changes occur in health care use and expenditures after individuals exit PSH is unknown. If efficiency gains from PSH persist after the individual leaves PSH, the savings to payers such as Medicaid may continue even after the costs to provide housing for a PSH recipient have ended. We used linked Medicaid and housing data from Pennsylvania to examine changes in the level and composition of Medicaid expenditures for 580 adult enrollees during the 12 months before and after exit from PSH adjusting for relevant covariates. In adjusted analyses, we estimated that monthly spending declined by $200.32 (95% CI: $323.50, $75.15) in the first quarter post-exit and by $267.63 (95% CI: $406.10, $127.10) in the third quarter. Our findings suggest that PSH may have sustained budgetary benefits to state Medicaid agencies even for beneficiaries exiting the program. However, more research is needed to understand if these reductions in expenditures last beyond 12 months and do not reflect under-use of care that may be important for managing health over the long-term.

Differences in healthcare utilization between enrollees of fully integrated dual eligible special needs plans versus non-fully integrated plans.

BACKGROUND: Policymakers advocate care integration models to enhance Medicare and Medicaid service coordination for dually eligible individuals. One rapidly expanding model is the fully integrated dual eligible (FIDE) plan, a sub-type of the dual eligible special needs plan (D-SNP) in which a parent insurer manages Medicare and Medicaid spending for dually eligible individuals. We examined healthcare utilization differences among dually eligible individuals aged 65 years or older enrolled in D-SNPs by plan type (FIDE vs non-FIDE). METHODS: Using 2018 Medicare Advantage encounters and Medicaid claims of FIDE and non-FIDE enrollees in six states (AZ, CA, FL, NY, TN, WI), we compared healthcare utilization between plan types, adjusting for enrollee characteristics and county indicators. We applied propensity score weighting to address differences between FIDE and non-FIDE plan enrollees. RESULTS: In our main analysis, which included all dually eligible individuals in our sample, we observed no significant difference in healthcare utilization between FIDE and non-FIDE plan enrollees. However, we identified some differences in healthcare utilization between FIDE and non-FIDE plan enrollees in subgroup analyses. For example, among home and community-based service (HCBS) users, FIDE plan enrollees had 6.0 fewer hospitalizations per 1000 person-months (95% CI: -7.9, -4.0) and were 7.0 percentage points more likely to be discharged to home (95% CI: 2.6, 11.5) after hospitalization, compared to non-FIDE plan enrollees. CONCLUSION: While we found no differences in healthcare utilization between FIDE and non-FIDE plan enrollees when considering all dually eligible individuals in our sample, some differences emerged when focusing on subgroups. For example, HCBS users with FIDE plans had fewer hospitalizations and were more likely to be discharged to their home following hospitalization, compared to HCBS users with non-FIDE plans. These findings suggest that FIDE plans may improve care coordination for specific subsets of dually eligible individuals.

Medicaid Eligibility Loss Among Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries Before and During COVID-19 Public Health Emergency.

Importance: Medicaid coverage loss can substantially compromise access to and affordability of health care for dual-eligible beneficiaries. The extent to which this population lost Medicaid coverage before and during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) and the characteristics of beneficiaries more at risk for coverage loss are currently not well known. Objective: To assess the loss of Medicaid coverage among dual-eligible beneficiaries before and during the first year of the PHE, and to examine beneficiary-level and plan-level factors associated with heightened likelihood of losing Medicaid. Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated cross-sectional study used national Medicare data to estimate annual rates of Medicaid loss among dual-eligible beneficiaries before (2015 to 2019) and during the PHE (2020). Individuals who were dual eligible for Medicare and Medicaid at the beginning of a given year and who continuously received low-income subsidies for Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage were included in the sample. Multivariable regression models were used to examine beneficiary-level and plan-level factors associated with Medicaid loss. Data analyses were conducted between March 2023 and October 2023. Exposure: Onset of PHE. Main Outcomes and Measures: Loss of Medicaid for at least 1 month within a year. Results: Sample included 56 172 736 dual-eligible beneficiary-years between 2015 and 2020. In 2020, most dual-eligible beneficiaries were aged over 65 years (5 984 420 [61.1%]), female (5 868 866 [59.9%]), non-Hispanic White (4 928 035 [50.3%]), full-benefit eligible (6 837 815 [69.8%]), and enrolled in traditional Medicare (5 343 537 [54.6%]). The adjusted proportion of dual-eligible beneficiaries losing Medicaid for at least 1 month increased from 6.6% in 2015 to 7.3% in 2019 and then dropped to 2.3% in 2020. Between 2015 and 2019, dual-eligible beneficiaries who were older (ages 55-64 years: -1.4%; 95% CI, -1.8% to -1.0%; ages 65-74 years: -2.0%; 95% CI, -2.5% to -1.5%; ages 75 and older: -4.5%; 95% CI, -5.0% to -4.0%), disabled (-0.8%; 95% CI, -1.1% to -0.6%), and in integrated care programs were less likely to lose Medicaid. In 2020, the disparities within each of these demographic groups narrowed significantly. Notably, while Black (0.6%; 95% CI, 0.2% to 0.9%) and Hispanic (0.7%; 95% CI, 0.3% to 1.2%) dual-eligible beneficiaries were more likely to lose Medicaid than their non-Hispanic White counterparts between 2015 and 2019, such gap was eliminated for Black beneficiaries and narrowed for Hispanic beneficiaries in 2020. Conclusions and Relevance: During the PHE, Medicaid coverage loss declined significantly among dual-eligible beneficiaries, and disparities were mitigated across subgroups. As the PHE unwinds, it is crucial for policymakers to implement strategies to minimize Medicaid coverage disruptions and racial and ethnic disparities, especially given that loss of Medicaid was slightly increasing over time before the PHE.

Association of Medicare eligibility with access to and affordability of care among older cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Older cancer survivors have substantial needs for ongoing care, but they may encounter difficulties accessing care due to cost concerns. We examined whether near-universal insurance coverage through Medicare-a key source of health insurance coverage in this population-is associated with improvements in care access and affordability among older cancer survivors around age 65. METHODS: In a nationally representative sample of cancer survivors (aged 50-80) from 2006-2018 National Health Interview Survey, we employed a quasi-experimental, regression discontinuity design to estimate changes in insurance coverage, delayed/skipped care due to cost, and worries about or problems paying medical bills at age 65. RESULTS: Medicare coverage sharply increased from 8.3% at age 64 to 98.2% at age 65, ensuring near-universal insurance coverage (99.5%). Medicare eligibility at age 65 was associated with reductions in delayed/skipped care due to cost (discontinuity, - 5.7 percentage points or pp; 95% CI, - 8.1, - 3.3; P < .001), worries about paying for medical bills (- 7.7 pp; 95% CI, - 12.0, - 3.2; P = .001), and problems paying medical bills (- 3.2 pp; 95% CI, - 6.1, - 0.2; P = .036). However, a sizable proportion reported any access or affordability problems (29.7%) between ages 66 and 80. CONCLUSIONS: Near-universal Medicare coverage at age 65 was associated with a reduction-but not elimination-of access and affordability problems among cancer survivors. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: These findings reaffirm the role of Medicare in improving access and affordability for older cancer survivor and highlight opportunities for reforms to further alleviate financial burden of care in this population.

Latent Tuberculosis Screening Among New Users of a Biologic or Targeted Synthetic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug: Gaps in Screening Overall and Among Janus Kinase Inhibitors.

OBJECTIVE: We combined claims and electronic health record (EHR) data to provide contemporary and accurate estimates of latent tuberculosis (TB) screening among new users of a biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) and assess potential gaps in testing by drug type, patient characteristics, and practice. METHODS: Our denominator population was patients in the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) registry and Medicare using a b/tsDMARD in 2018 without a claim or prescription in the year prior. TB screening was assessed in both Medicare and RISE 1 and 3 years before the medication start date. We calculated the proportion screened overall, by medication class, and by practice. We tested for demographic differences in screening using logistic regression. RESULTS: In the year before drug starts, 65.6% of patients had any TB screening; in a 3-year window, 72.9% had any TB screening. Rates of screening within 1 year by drug type were greater or equal to the overall screening rate for most drugs except for JAK inhibitors (JAKis) (46%) and interleukin-17 inhibitors (IL-17is) (11.5%). A lower proportion of Hispanic and Asian patients were screened compared with White patients. Practice screening rates ranged from 20.0% to 92.9% of patients within 1 year. CONCLUSION: We report higher screening rates than have previously been published because of combining claims and EHR data. However, important safety gaps remain, namely, reduced screening among new users of a JAKi or IL-17i and among Asian and Hispanic patients, as well as low-performing practices. Educational initiatives, team-based care delivery, task shifting, and technological interventions to address observed gaps in patient safety procedures are needed.

Early impacts of the Pennsylvania Rural Health Model on potentially avoidable utilization.

The Pennsylvania Rural Health Model (PARHM) is a novel alternative payment model for rural hospitals that aims to test whether hospital-based global budgets, coupled with delivery transformation plans, improve the quality of health care and health outcomes in rural communities. Eighteen hospitals joined PARHM in 3 cohorts between 2019 and 2021. This study assessed PARHM's impact on changes in potentially avoidable utilization (PAU)-a measure of admission rates policymakers explicitly targeted for improvement in PARHM. Using a difference-in-differences analysis and all-payer hospital discharge data for Pennsylvania hospitals from 2016 through 2022, we found no significant overall reduction in community-level PAU rates up to 4 years post-PARHM implementation, relative to changes in rural Pennsylvania communities whose hospitals did not join PARHM. However, heterogeneous treatment effects were observed across cohorts that joined PARHM in different years, and between critical access vs prospective payment system hospitals. These findings offer insight into how alternative payment models in rural health care settings may have heterogeneous impacts based on contextual factors and highlight the importance of accounting for these factors in proposed expansions of alternative payment models for rural health systems.

Changes in Care Associated With Integrating Medicare and Medicaid for Dual-Eligible Individuals.

Importance: There is growing interest in expanding integrated models, in which 1 insurer manages Medicare and Medicaid spending for dually eligible individuals. Fully integrated dual-eligible special needs plans (FIDE-SNPs) are one of the largest integrated models, but evidence about their performance is limited. Objective: To evaluate changes in care associated with integrating Medicare and Medicaid coverage in a FIDE-SNP in Pennsylvania. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study using a difference-in-differences analysis compared changes in care between 2 cohorts of dual-eligible individuals: (1) an integration cohort composed of Medicare Dual Eligible Special Needs Plan enrollees who joined a companion Medicaid plan following a 2018 state reform mandating Medicaid managed care (leading to integration), and (2) a comparison cohort with nonintegrated coverage before and after the start of Medicaid managed care. Analyses were conducted between February 2022 and June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Analyses examined outcomes in 4 domains: use of home- and community-based services (HCBS), care management and coordination, hospital stays and postacute care, and long-term nursing home stays. Results: The study included 7967 individuals in the integration cohort and 3832 individuals in the comparison cohort. In the integration cohort, the mean (SD) age at baseline was 63.3 (14.7) years, and 5268 individuals (66.1%) were female and 2699 (33.9%) were male. In the comparison cohort, the mean (SD) age at baseline was 64.8 (18.6) years, and 2341 individuals (61.1%) were female and 1491 (38.9%) were male. At baseline, integration cohort members received a mean (SD) of 2.83 (8.70) days of HCBS per month and 3.34 (3.56) medications for chronic conditions per month, and the proportion with a follow-up outpatient visit after a hospital stay was 0.47. From baseline through 3 years after integration, HCBS use increased differentially in the integration vs comparison cohorts by 0.61 days/person-month (95% CI, 0.28-0.94; P < .001). However, integration was not associated with changes in care management and coordination, including medication use for chronic conditions (-0.02 fills/person-month; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.06; P = .65) or follow-up outpatient care after a hospital stay (-0.01 visits/hospital stay; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.03; P = .61). Hospital stays did not change differentially between the cohorts. Unmeasured factors contributing to differential mortality limited the ability to identify changes in long-term nursing home stays associated with integration. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study with a difference-in-differences analysis of 2 cohorts of individuals dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, integration was associated with greater HCBS use but not with other changes in care patterns. The findings highlight opportunities to strengthen how integrated programs manage care and a need to further evaluate their performance.

Medicare and Medicaid Dual-Eligible Special Needs Plan Enrollment and Beneficiary-Reported Experiences With Care.

This cross-sectional study analyzes Medicare Advantage surveys to compare Medicare and Medicaid dual-eligible individuals' experiences with care across 3 established categories of plans.

Integrating Medicare and Medicaid Coverage for Dual Eligibles-Recommendations for Reform.

This Viewpoint highlights costly inefficiencies in delivery of care to patients who qualify to receive both Medicare and Medicaid and proposes more effective care models.

Rapid Enrollment Growth In 'Look-Alike' Dual-Eligible Special Needs Plans: A Threat To Integrated Care.

Policy makers are increasingly investing in efforts to better integrate Medicare and Medicaid services for people who are eligible for both programs, including expanding Dual-Eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs). In recent years, however, a potential threat to integration has emerged in the form of D-SNP "look-alike" plans, which are conventional Medicare Advantage plans that are marketed toward and primarily enroll dual eligibles but are not subject to federal regulations requiring integrated Medicaid services. To date, limited evidence exists documenting national enrollment trends in look-alike plans or the characteristics of dual eligibles in these plans. We found that look-alike plans experienced rapid enrollment growth among dual eligibles during the period 2013-20, increasing from 20,900 dual eligibles across four states to 220,860 dual eligibles across seventeen states, for an elevenfold increase. Nearly one-third of dual eligibles in look-alike plans were previously in integrated care programs. Compared with D-SNPs, look-alike plans were more likely to enroll dual eligibles who were older, Hispanic, and from disadvantaged communities. Our findings suggest that look-alike plans have the potential to compromise national efforts to integrate care delivery for dual eligibles, including vulnerable subgroups who may benefit the most from integrated coverage.

Disparities in Guideline-Recommended Statin Use for Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease by Race, Ethnicity, and Gender : A Nationally Representative Cross-Sectional Analysis of Adults in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Although statins are a class I recommendation for prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and its complications, their use is suboptimal. Differential underuse may mediate disparities in cardiovascular health for systematically marginalized persons. OBJECTIVE: To estimate disparities in statin use by race-ethnicity-gender and to determine whether these potential disparities are explained by medical appropriateness of therapy and structural factors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2015 to 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Persons eligible for statin therapy based on 2013 and 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood cholesterol guidelines. MEASUREMENTS: The independent variable was race-ethnicity-gender. The outcome of interest was use of a statin. Using the Institute of Medicine framework for examining unequal treatment, we calculated adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) to estimate disparities in statin use adjusted for age, disease severity, access to health care, and socioeconomic status relative to non-Hispanic White men. RESULTS: For primary prevention, we identified a lower prevalence of statin use that was not explained by measurable differences in disease severity or structural factors among non-Hispanic Black men (aPR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.88]) and non-Mexican Hispanic women (aPR, 0.74 [CI, 0.53 to 0.95]). For secondary prevention, we identified a lower prevalence of statin use that was not explained by measurable differences in disease severity or structural factors for non-Hispanic Black men (aPR, 0.81 [CI, 0.64 to 0.97]), other/multiracial men (aPR, 0.58 [CI, 0.20 to 0.97]), Mexican American women (aPR, 0.36 [CI, 0.10 to 0.61]), non-Mexican Hispanic women (aPR, 0.57 [CI, 0.33 to 0.82), non-Hispanic White women (aPR, 0.69 [CI, 0.56 to 0.83]), and non-Hispanic Black women (aPR, 0.75 [CI, 0.57 to 0.92]). LIMITATION: Cross-sectional data; lack of geographic, language, or statin-dose data. CONCLUSION: Statin use disparities for several race-ethnicity-gender groups are not explained by measurable differences in medical appropriateness of therapy, access to health care, and socioeconomic status. These residual disparities may be partially mediated by unobserved processes that contribute to health inequity, including bias, stereotyping, and mistrust. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care Use and Access Associated With Loss of Medicaid Supplemental Insurance Eligibility Above the Federal Poverty Level.

Importance: Medicaid supplemental insurance covers most cost sharing in Medicare. Among low-income Medicare beneficiaries, the loss of Medicaid eligibility above this program's income eligibility threshold (100% of federal poverty level [FPL]) may exacerbate racial and ethnic disparities in Medicare beneficiaries' ability to afford care. Objective: To examine whether exceeding the income threshold for Medicaid, which results in an abrupt loss of Medicaid eligibility, is associated with greater racial and ethnic disparities in access to and use of care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used a regression discontinuity design to assess differences in access to and use of care associated with exceeding the income threshold for Medicaid eligibility. We analyzed Medicare beneficiaries with incomes 0% to 200% of FPL from the 2008 to 2018 biennial waves of the Health and Retirement Study linked to Medicare administrative data. To identify racial and ethnic disparities associated with the loss of Medicaid eligibility, we compared discontinuities in outcomes among Black and Hispanic beneficiaries (n = 2885) and White beneficiaries (n = 5259). Analyses were conducted between January 1, 2022, and October 1, 2022. Main outcome measures: Patient-reported difficulty accessing care due to cost and outpatient service use, medication fills, and hospitalizations measured from Medicare administrative data. Results: This cross-sectional study included 8144 participants (38 805 person-years), who when weighted represented 151 282 957 person-years in the community-dwelling population of Medicare beneficiaries aged 50 years and older and incomes less than 200% FPL. In the weighted sample, the mean (SD) age was 75.4 (9.4) years, 66.1% of beneficiaries were women, 14.8% were non-Hispanic Black, 13.6% were Hispanic, and 71.6% were White. Findings suggest that exceeding the Medicaid eligibility threshold was associated with a 43.8 percentage point (pp) (95% CI, 37.8-49.8) lower probability of Medicaid enrollment among Black and Hispanic Medicare beneficiaries and a 31.0 pp (95% CI, 25.4-36.6) lower probability of Medicaid enrollment among White beneficiaries. Among Black and Hispanic beneficiaries, exceeding the threshold was associated with increased cost-related barriers to care (discontinuity: 5.7 pp; 95% CI, 2.0-9.4), lower outpatient use (-6.3 services per person-year; 95% CI, -10.4 to -2.2), and fewer medication fills (-6.9 fills per person-year; 95% CI, -11.4 to -2.5), but it was not associated with a statistically significant discontinuity in hospitalizations. Discontinuities in these outcomes were smaller or nonsignificant among White beneficiaries. Consequently, exceeding the threshold was associated with widened disparities, including greater reductions in outpatient service use (disparity: -6.2 services per person-year; 95% CI, -11.7 to -0.6; P = .03) and medication fills (disparity: -7.2 fills per person-year; 95% CI, -13.4 to -1.0; P = .02) among Black and Hispanic vs White beneficiaries. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that loss of eligibility for Medicaid supplemental insurance above the federal poverty level, which increases cost sharing in Medicare, was associated with increased racial and ethnic health care disparities among low-income Medicare beneficiaries. Expanding eligibility for Medicaid supplemental insurance may narrow these disparities.

Healthcare Utilization Among Children Receiving Permanent Supportive Housing.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Permanent supportive housing (PSH) integrates long-term housing and supports for families and individuals experiencing homelessness. Although PSH is frequently provided to families with children, little is known about the impacts of PSH among children. We examined changes in health care visits among children receiving PSH compared with similar children who did not receive PSH. METHODS: We analyzed Pennsylvania Medicaid administrative data for children entering PSH between 2011 and 2016, matching to a comparison cohort with similar demographic and clinical characteristics who received non-PSH housing services. We conducted propensity score-weighted difference-in-differences (DID) analyses to compare changes in health care visits 3 years before and after children entered PSH versus changes in the comparison cohort. RESULTS: We matched 705 children receiving PSH to 3141 in the comparison cohort. Over 3 years following PSH entry, dental visits among children entering PSH increased differentially relative to the comparison cohort (DID: 12.70 visits per 1000 person-months, 95% confidence interval: 3.72 to 21.67). We did not find differential changes in preventive medicine visits, hospitalizations, or emergency department (ED) visits overall. When stratified by age, children ≤5 years old at PSH entry experienced a greater decrease in ED visits relative to the comparison cohort (DID: -13.16 visits per 1000 person-months, 95% confidence interval: -26.23 to -0.10). However, emergency visit trends before PSH entry differed between the cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Children in PSH had relatively greater increases in dental visits, and younger children entering PSH may have experienced relative reductions in ED visits. Policymakers should consider benefits to children when evaluating the overall value of PSH.

Social risk adjustment in the hospital readmission reduction program: Pitfalls of peer grouping, measurement challenges, and potential solutions.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the limitations of peer grouping and associated challenges measuring social risk in Medicare's Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP). Under peer grouping, hospitals are divided into quintiles based on the proportion of a hospital's Medicare inpatients with Medicaid ("dual share"). This approach was implemented to address concerns that the HRRP unfairly penalized hospitals that disproportionately serve disadvantaged patients. DATA: Public data on hospitals in the HRRP. DESIGN: We examined the relationship between hospital dual share and readmission rates within peer groups; changes in hospitals' peer group assignments, readmission rates, and penalties; and the relationship between state Medicaid eligibility rules and peer groups. DATA COLLECTION: Public data on hospital characteristics and readmission rates for 3119 hospitals from 2019 to 2020. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The proportion of dual inpatients among hospitals of the same peer group varied by as much as 69 percentage points (ppt). Within peer groups, a one ppt increase in dual share was associated with a 0.01 ppt increase in the difference from the median readmission rate (p < 0.001). From 2019 to 2020, 8.8% of hospitals switched peer groups. Compared to hospitals that did not switch, those moving to a lower peer group had a higher mean penalty in 2020 (0.096 ppt; p = 0.006); those moving to a higher group had a lower mean penalty (-0.06 ppt; p = 0.079). However, changes in penalties did not correspond to changes in readmission rates. Hospitals in states with higher Medicaid income eligibility limits were more likely to be in higher peer groups. CONCLUSIONS: Peer grouping is limited in the extent to which it accounts for differences in hospitals' patient populations, and it may not fully insulate hospitals from penalties linked to changes in patient mix. These problems arise from the construction of peer groups and the measure of social risk used to define them.

Effects of a Medicaid dental coverage "cliff" on dental care access among low-income Medicare beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how an abrupt drop-off, or "cliff," in Medicaid dental coverage affects access to dental care among low-income Medicare beneficiaries. Medicaid is an important source of dental insurance for low-income Medicare beneficiaries, but beneficiaries whose incomes slightly exceed eligibility thresholds for Medicaid have fewer affordable options for dental coverage, resulting in a dental coverage cliff above these thresholds. DATA SOURCE: Medicare Current Beneficiary Surveys (MCBS) from 2016 to 2019. STUDY DESIGN: We used a regression discontinuity design to evaluate effects of this dental coverage cliff. This study design exploited an abrupt difference in Medicaid coverage above income eligibility thresholds in the Medicaid program for elderly and disabled populations. DATA COLLECTION: The study included low-income community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries surveyed in the MCBS whose incomes, measured in percentage points of the federal poverty level, were within ±75 percentage points of state-specific Medicaid income eligibility thresholds (n = 7508 respondent-years, which when weighted represented 26,776,719 beneficiary-years). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Medicare beneficiaries whose income exceeded Medicaid eligibility thresholds were 5.0 percentage points more likely to report difficulty accessing dental care due to cost concerns or a lack of insurance than beneficiaries below the thresholds (95% CI: 0.2, 9.8; p = 0.04)-a one-third increase over the proportion reporting difficulty below the thresholds (15.0%). CONCLUSIONS: A Medicaid dental coverage cliff exacerbates barriers to dental care access among low-income Medicare beneficiaries. Expanding dental coverage for Medicare beneficiaries, particularly those who are ineligible for Medicaid, could alleviate barriers to dental care access that result from the lack of comprehensive dental coverage in Medicare.

Examination of Differences in Nonmedical Supplemental Benefit Coverage for Dual-Eligible Enrollees in Medicare Advantage Plans in 2021.

This cross-sectional study uses Medicare Advantage benefit package data for 2021 to examine differences in the coverage of nonmedical supplemental benefits­such as transportation services and food and meal assistance­for dual-eligible enrollees with health-related social needs.

The US Medicaid Program: Coverage, Financing, Reforms, and Implications for Health Equity.

Importance: Medicaid is the largest health insurance program by enrollment in the US and has an important role in financing care for eligible low-income adults, children, pregnant persons, older adults, people with disabilities, and people from racial and ethnic minority groups. Medicaid has evolved with policy reform and expansion under the Affordable Care Act and is at a crossroads in balancing its role in addressing health disparities and health inequities against fiscal and political pressures to limit spending. Objective: To describe Medicaid eligibility, enrollment, and spending and to examine areas of Medicaid policy, including managed care, payment, and delivery system reforms; Medicaid expansion; racial and ethnic health disparities; and the potential to achieve health equity. Evidence Review: Analyses of publicly available data reported from 2010 to 2022 on Medicaid enrollment and program expenditures were performed to describe the structure and financing of Medicaid and characteristics of Medicaid enrollees. A search of PubMed for peer-reviewed literature and online reports from nonprofit and government organizations was conducted between August 1, 2021, and February 1, 2022, to review evidence on Medicaid managed care, delivery system reforms, expansion, and health disparities. Peer-reviewed articles and reports published between January 2003 and February 2022 were included. Findings: Medicaid covered approximately 80.6 million people (mean per month) in 2022 (24.2% of the US population) and accounted for an estimated $671.2 billion in health spending in 2020, representing 16.3% of US health spending. Medicaid accounted for an estimated 27.2% of total state spending and 7.6% of total federal expenditures in 2021. States enrolled 69.5% of Medicaid beneficiaries in managed care plans in 2019 and adopted 139 delivery system reforms from 2003 to 2019. The 38 states (and Washington, DC) that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act experienced gains in coverage, increased federal revenues, and improvements in health care access and some health outcomes. Approximately 56.4% of Medicaid beneficiaries were from racial and ethnic minority groups in 2019, and disparities in access, quality, and outcomes are common among these groups within Medicaid. Expanding Medicaid, addressing disparities within Medicaid, and having an explicit focus on equity in managed care and delivery system reforms may represent opportunities for Medicaid to advance health equity. Conclusions and Relevance: Medicaid insures a substantial portion of the US population, accounts for a significant amount of total health spending and state expenditures, and has evolved with delivery system reforms, increased managed care enrollment, and state expansions. Additional Medicaid policy reforms are needed to reduce health disparities by race and ethnicity and to help achieve equity in access, quality, and outcomes.

Social Risk Adjustment In The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program: A Systematic Review And Implications For Policy.

Value-based payment programs adjust payments to providers based on spending, quality, or health outcomes. Concern that these programs penalize providers disproportionately serving vulnerable patients prompted calls to adjust performance measures for social risk factors. We reviewed fourteen studies of social risk adjustment in Medicare's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP), a value-based payment model that initially did not adjust for social risk factors but subsequently began to do so. Seven studies found that adding social risk factors to the program's base risk-adjustment model (which adjusts only for age, sex, and comorbidities) reduced differences in risk-adjusted readmissions and penalties between safety-net hospitals and other hospitals. Three studies found that peer grouping, the HRRP's current approach to social risk adjustment, reduced penalties among safety-net hospitals. Two studies found that differences in risk-adjusted readmissions and penalties were further narrowed when augmentation of the base model was combined with peer grouping. Two studies showed that it is possible to adjust for social risk factors without obscuring quality differences between hospitals. These findings support the use of social risk adjustment to improve provider payment equity and highlight opportunities to enhance social risk adjustment in value-based payment programs.