Dataset Information

Implementation of resource use measures in Medicare Advantage.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To complement the previously illustrated method to measure resource use in Medicare Advantage (MA) using Encounter data and provide technical details and SAS code to validate Encounter data and implement resource use measures in MA.

Data sources

2015-2018 MA Encounter, Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MedPAR), Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information System (HEDIS), and Traditional Medicare (TM) claims data.

Study design

Secondary data analysis.

Data collection/extraction methods

We select MA contracts with high data completeness (≤10% missing hospital stays in Encounter data and ≤±10% difference in ambulatory and emergency department visits between Encounter and HEDIS data). We randomly sample TM beneficiaries with a similar geographic distribution as MA enrollees in the selected contracts. We develop standardized prices of services using TM payments, and we measure MA resource use for inpatient, outpatient, Part D, and hospice services.

Principal findings

We report identifiers/names of contracts with high data completeness. We provide SAS code to manage Encounter data, develop standardized prices, and measure MA resource use.

Conclusions

Greater use and validation of Encounter data can help improve data quality. Our results can be used to inform studies using Encounter data to learn about MA performance.

SUBMITTER: Jung J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10501335 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementation of resource use measures in Medicare Advantage.

Jung Jeah J Carlin Caroline C Feldman Roger R Tran Linh L

Health services research 20220411 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To complement the previously illustrated method to measure resource use in Medicare Advantage (MA) using Encounter data and provide technical details and SAS code to validate Encounter data and implement resource use measures in MA.<h4>Data sources</h4>2015-2018 MA Encounter, Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MedPAR), Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information System (HEDIS), and Traditional Medicare (TM) claims data.<h4>Study design</h4>Secondary data analysis.<h4>Data ...[more]

PMID: 35411550

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceBetter evidence is needed on whether Medicare Advantage (MA) plans can control the use of postacute care services while achieving excellent outcomes.ObjectiveTo compare self-reported use of postacute care services and outcomes among traditional Medicare (TM) beneficiaries and MA enrollees.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) with linked Medicare enrollment data from 2015 to 2017. Participants were community-dwelling MA or TM beneficiaries 70 years and older; those with dual Medicare and Medicaid eligibility were also identified. Analyses were conducted from May 2022 to February 2023 and were weighted to account for the complex survey design.ExposuresEnrollment in MA and dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid.Main outcomes and measuresPostacute care service use including site of use, duration, primary indication, and whether participants met their goals or experienced improved functional status during or after services.ResultsIncluded in the analysis were 2357 Medicare beneficiaries who used postacute care. Of these beneficiaries, 815 (32.6%; 62.0% were females [weighted percentages]) had MA and 1542 (67.4%; 59.5% were females [weighted percentages]) had TM. Enrollees in MA reported using postacute care services across all NHATS survey rounds: between 16.2% (95% CI, 14.3%-18.4%) and 17.7% (95% CI, 15.4%-20.4%) of MA enrollees reported using postacute care services each round, vs 22.4% (95% CI, 20.9%-24.1%) to 24.1% (95% CI, 21.8%-26.6%) of TM beneficiaries (P for all rounds <.002). Enrollees in MA reported less functional improvement during postacute care use (63.1% [95% CI, 59.2%-66.8%] vs 71.7% [95% CI, 68.9%-74.3%], P < .001). Among beneficiaries who ended postacute service use, fewer MA enrollees than TM enrollees reported that they met their goals (70.5% [95% CI, 65.1%-75.3%] vs 76.2% [95% CI, 73.1%-79.1%]; P = .053) or had improved functional status (43.9% [95% CI, 38.9%-49.1%] vs 46.0% [95% CI, 42.5%-49.5%]; P = .42), but differences were not statistically significant. Differences in postacute care use and functional improvement were not statistically significant between MA and TM enrollees with dual eligibility.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries, we found that MA enrollees overall used less postacute care services than their TM counterparts. Among users of postacute care services, MA enrollees reported less favorable outcomes compared with TM enrollees. These findings highlight the importance of assessing patient-reported outcomes, especially as MA and other payment models seek to reduce inefficient use of postacute care services.

Project description:ImportanceQuality of care varies substantially across Medicare Advantage plans. The price information that Medicare Advantage enrollees are most likely to consider when selecting a Medicare Advantage plan is the monthly premium. Enrollees may select plans to minimize premium or, alternatively, use premium as a proxy for quality and select plans with higher premiums; however, quality implications of these choices are unknown.ObjectiveTo determine the extent to which the quality of care offered by Medicare Advantage plans varies within vs across premium levels.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a retrospective cross-sectional study of the population enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans in 2016 to 2017 using clinical quality measures from the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS), patient experience measures from the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) surveys, and administrative data. Data were analyzed from March 2021 to March 2022.ExposuresMedicare Advantage monthly premium.Main outcomes and measuresTen publicly reported 2017 HEDIS measures and 5 publicly reported 2017 CAHPS measures linearly transformed to a 0 to 100 scale.ResultsThe 168 968 Medicare Advantage CAHPS respondents were representative of the enrollee population (14% were <65 years old and eligible through disability; 24% ≥80 years old; sex and race/ethnicity data were not considered); 40% were in 591 plans with no monthly premiums and less than 6% were in 144 plans with monthly premiums of $120 or more. There were from 77 054 to 2 139 422 enrollees by HEDIS measure. Among all Medicare Advantage enrollees, 79% were in plans with either a $0 premium or a low monthly premium (≤$60); patient experience and clinical quality were generally similar in these 2 categories of plans. To a small extent, enrollees in moderately high ($60-$120) and high (≥$120) premium plans reported better patient experience (+1.4 [95% CI, 0.7-2.1] and 2.2 [95% CI, 1.5-2.9] points) and received better clinical care (1.4 [95% CI, 0.3-2.5] to 3.3 [5% CI, 2.1-4.5] percentage points on most measures than those with $0 and low-premium plans. Quality differences within each premium level category were substantial; the within-premium category plan-level SDs were 6.5 points and 7.2 percentage points for patient experience and clinical quality, respectively. A plan at the 50th percentile of clinical quality and patient experience in the high premium category would fall in the 65th and 62nd percentile within the $0-premium category, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceThis population-based cross-sectional study found that although quality of care and patient experience were slightly higher with higher-premium plans, quality varied widely within each premium category. High-quality care and patient experience were found in each price category. Thus, paying higher premiums is not necessary for higher quality care in Medicare Advantage plans. Greater engagement of enrollees and advocates with quality of care and patient experience information for Medicare Advantage plan selection is recommended.

Dataset Information

Implementation of resource use measures in Medicare Advantage.

Objective

Data sources

Study design

Data collection/extraction methods

Principal findings

Conclusions

Publications

Implementation of resource use measures in Medicare Advantage.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets