The Care Span: Lower Hispanic participation in Medicare Part D may reflect program barriers.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: McGarry BE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4104518 | biostudies-literature | 2014 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The Care Span: Lower Hispanic participation in Medicare Part D may reflect program barriers.
McGarry Brian E BE Strawderman Robert L RL Li Yue Y
Health affairs (Project Hope) 20140501 5
Despite the successes of Medicare's Part D prescription drug program, an estimated 12.5 percent of Americans ages sixty-five and older do not have prescription drug coverage. It is possible that some who remain without coverage do so for rational economic reasons. However, barriers to insurance uptake, such as the program's complexity, may exist for certain elderly people. Racial and ethnic minorities may be particularly susceptible to these barriers. To investigate the role that race and ethnic ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo understand the current role of urologists in Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) and the organizational characteristics of ACOs with participating urologists.Materials and methodsUsing 2012-2013 Medicare data and the National Provider Identifier Database, we classified each urologist in the U.S. and Puerto Rico as either an MSSP ACO participant or nonparticipating provider. We then examined the distribution of ACO-participating urologists across the U.S. and among the first 220 MSSP ACOs. We also compared the characteristics of ACOs with and without participating urologists.ResultsAmong 11,084 identified urologists, 1118 (10%) were MSSP ACO participants. ACO-participating urologists practiced more frequently in the Northeast and Midwest (P < .001), and were more commonly female (10% vs 8%, P = .003). At an organizational level, only 110 (50%) of the initial MSSP ACOs included at least one urologist; among this group, the number of participating urologists ranged from 1 to 55. ACOs with one or more participating urologist were larger organizations, with respect to both the number of assigned beneficiaries and the number of providers per 1000 beneficiaries (P < .001 for each comparison). The patient populations served by ACOs with and without urologists were similar (P > .05 for each comparison).ConclusionA modest percentage of urologists participate in MSSP ACOs, although many of these organizations still lack any formal involvement by urological surgeons. Without such participation, improving the coordination, quality, and cost of urologic care for Medicare beneficiaries may be more challenging.
| S-EPMC4818669 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceAdvanced primary care is a team-based approach to providing higher-quality primary care. The association of advanced primary care and COVID-19 outcomes is unknown.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of advanced primary care with COVID-19 outcomes, including vaccination, case, hospitalization, and death rates during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study used Medicare claims data from January 1, 2020, through January 31, 2022, and Maryland state vaccination data. All Part A and B Medicare claims for Maryland Medicare beneficiaries were included. The study population was divided into beneficiaries attributed to Maryland Primary Care Program (MDPCP) practices and a matched cohort of beneficiaries not attributed to MDPCP practices but who met the eligibility criteria for study participation from January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021. Eligibility criteria for both groups included fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries who were eligible for attribution to the MDPCP. A forced-match design was used to match both groups in the study population by age category, sex, race and ethnicity, Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility status, COVID-19 Vulnerability Index score, Maryland county of residence, and primary care practice participation.ExposuresPrimary care practice participation in the MDPCP.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome variables included rate of vaccination, monoclonal antibody infusion uptake, and telehealth claims. Secondary outcomes included rates of COVID-19 diagnosis, COVID-19 inpatient claims, COVID-19 emergency department claims, COVID-19 deaths, and median COVID-19 inpatient admission length of stay. Claims measures were assessed from January 1, 2020, through October 31, 2021. Vaccination measures were assessed from January 1, 2020, through March 31, 2022.ResultsAfter matching, a total of 208 146 beneficiaries in the MDPCP group and 37 203 beneficiaries in the non-MDPCP group were included in this study, comprising 60.10% women and 39.90% men with a median age of 76 (IQR, 71-82) years. Most participants (78.40% and 78.38%, respectively) were White. There were no significant demographic nor risk measure baseline differences between the 2 groups. The MDPCP beneficiaries had more favorable primary COVID-related outcomes than non-MDPCP beneficiaries: 84.47% of MDPCP beneficiaries were fully vaccinated, compared with 77.93% of nonparticipating beneficiaries (P < .001). COVID-19-positive beneficiaries in MDPCP also received monoclonal antibody treatment more often (8.45% vs 6.11%; P < .001) and received more care via telehealth (62.95% vs 54.53%; P < .001) compared with nonparticipating counterparts. In terms of secondary outcomes, beneficiaries in the MDPCP had lower rates of COVID-19 cases (6.55% vs 7.09%; P < .001), lower rates of COVID-19 inpatient admissions (1.81% vs 2.06%; P = .001), and lower rates of death due to COVID-19 (0.56% vs 0.77%; P < .001) compared with nonparticipating beneficiaries.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that participation in the MDPCP was associated with lower COVID-19 case, hospitalization, and death rates, and advanced primary care and COVID-19 response strategies within the MDPCP were associated with improved COVID-19 outcomes for attributed beneficiaries.
| S-EPMC9856987 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effect of Medicare Shared Savings Program accountable care organizations (ACOs) on hospital readmission after common surgical procedures. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA:Hospital readmissions following surgery lead to worse patient outcomes and wasteful spending. ACOs, and their associated hospitals, have strong incentives to reduce readmissions from 2 distinct Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services policies. METHODS:We performed a retrospective cohort study using a 20% national Medicare sample to identify beneficiaries undergoing 1 of 7 common surgical procedures-abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, colectomy, cystectomy, prostatectomy, lung resection, total knee arthroplasty, and total hip arthroplasty-between 2010 and 2014. The primary outcome was 30-day risk-adjusted readmission rate. We performed difference-in-differences analyses using multilevel logistic regression models to quantify the effect of hospital ACO affiliation on readmissions following these procedures. RESULTS:Patients underwent a procedure at one of 2974 hospitals, of which 389 were ACO affiliated. The 30-day risk-adjusted readmission rate decreased from 8.4% (95% CI, 8.1-8.7%) to 7.0% (95% CI, 6.7-7.3%) for ACO affiliated hospitals (P < 0.001) and from 7.9% (95% CI, 7.8-8.0%) to 7.1% (95% CI, 6.9-7.2%) for non-ACO hospitals (P < 0.001). The difference-in-differences of the 2 trends demonstrated an additional 0.52% (95% CI, 0.97-0.078%) absolute reduction in readmissions at ACO hospitals (P = 0.021), which would translate to 4410 hospitalizations avoided. CONCLUSION:Readmissions following common procedures decreased significantly from 2010 to 2014. Hospital affiliation with Shared Savings ACOs was associated with significant additional reductions in readmissions. This emphasis on readmission reduction is 1 mechanism through which ACOs improve value in a surgical population.
| S-EPMC6146076 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHispanics are under-represented in Parkinson's disease (PD) research despite the importance of diversity for results to apply to a wide range of patients.ObjectiveTo investigate the perspective of Hispanic persons with Parkinson disease (PWP) regarding awareness, interest, and barriers to participation in research.MethodsWe developed and administered a survey and qualitative interview in English and Spanish. For the survey, 62 Hispanic and 38 non-Hispanic PWP linked to a tertiary center were recruited in Arizona. For interviews, 20 Hispanic PWP, 20 caregivers, and six physicians providing service to Hispanic PWP in the community were recruited in California. Survey responses of Hispanic and non-Hispanic PWP were compared. Major survey themes were identified by applying grounded theory and open coding.ResultsThe survey found roughly half (Q1 54%, Q2 55%) of Hispanic PWP linked to a tertiary center knew about research; there was unawareness among community Hispanic PWP. Most preferred having physician recommendations for research participation and were willing to participate. Hispanics preferred teams who speak their native language and include family. Research engagement, PD knowledge, role of family, living with PD, PD care, pre-diagnosis/diagnosis emerged as themes from the interview.ConclusionBarriers exist for participation of Hispanic PWP in research, primarily lack of awareness of PD research opportunities. Educating physicians of the need to encourage research participation of Hispanic PWP can address this. Physicians need to be aware of ongoing research and should not assume PWP disinterest. Including family members and providing research opportunities in their native language can increase research recruitment.
| S-EPMC8203231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This paper describes facilitators, barriers, and potential strategies to promote participation in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) by family child care homes (FCCHs). This descriptive study occurred from January-May 2022 in Arizona and New York, two states with varying levels of CACFP participation. Stakeholders from three state-level CACFP-administering agencies, representatives of six sponsor organizations, and 23 FCCH providers (70% CACFP, 30% non-CACFP) participated in interviews. Facilitators of CACFP participation included the simple enrollment, technical assistance from sponsors, software provided by sponsors, and incentives from state agencies. Barriers included perceptions that CACFP paperwork would be burdensome, lack of access to sponsors, and challenges with meal pattern requirements. Recommended strategies to promote CACFP uptake included educating providers about CACFP, expanding outreach, and additional funding. Efforts to address state-level disparities in FCCH participation in CACFP are needed. This study provides some insight into policy and systems changes that could be beneficial.
| S-EPMC9593702 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceMedicare's Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative for lower extremity joint replacement (LEJR) surgery has been associated with a reduction in episode spending and stable-to-improved quality. However, BPCI may create unintended effects by prompting participating hospitals to increase the overall volume of episodes paid for by Medicare, which could potentially eliminate program-related savings or prompt them to shift case mix to lower-risk patients.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether hospital BPCI participation for LEJR was associated with changes in overall volume and case mix.Design, setting, and participantsObservational study using Medicare claims data and a difference-in-differences method to compare 131 markets (hospital referral regions) with at least 1 BPCI participant hospital (n = 322) and 175 markets with no participating hospitals (n = 1340), accounting for 580 043 Medicare beneficiaries treated before (January 2011-September 2013) and 462 161 after (October 2013-December 2015) establishing the BPCI initiative. Hospital-level case-mix changes were assessed by comparing 265 participating hospitals with a 1:1 propensity-matched set of nonparticipating hospitals from non-BPCI markets.ExposuresHospital BPCI participation.Main outcomes and measuresChanges in market-level LEJR volume in the before vs after BPCI periods and changes in hospital-level case mix based on demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, and utilization factors.ResultsAmong the 1 717 243 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent LEJR (mean age, 75 years; 64% women; and 95% nonblack race/ethnicity), BPCI participation was not significantly associated with a change in overall market-level volume. The mean quarterly market volume in non-BPCI markets increased 3.8% from 3.8 episodes per 1000 beneficiaries before BPCI to 3.9 episodes per 1000 beneficiaries after BPCI was launched. For BPCI markets, the mean quarterly market volume increased 4.4% from 3.6 episodes per 1000 beneficiaries before BPCI to 3.8 episodes per 1000 beneficiaries after BPCI was launched. The adjusted difference-in-differences estimate between the market types was 0.32% (95% CI, -0.06% to 0.69%; P = .10). Among 20 demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, and utilization factors, BPCI participation was associated with differential changes in hospital-level case mix for only 1 factor, prior skilled nursing facility use (adjusted difference-in-differences estimate, -0.53%; 95% CI, -0.96% to -0.10%; P = .01) in BPCI vs non-BPCI markets.Conclusions and relevanceIn this observational study of Medicare beneficiaries who underwent LEJR, hospital participation in Bundled Payments for Care Improvement was not associated with changes in market-level lower extremity joint replacement volume and largely was not associated with changes in hospital case mix. These findings may provide reassurance regarding 2 potential unintended effects associated with bundled payments for LEJR.
| S-EPMC6142996 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Successive interventions designed to curb the spread of COVID-19 have all served to exacerbate the demands placed upon informal carers, a population indispensable to health care systems. The need for breaks from caring has never been so pronounced. This paper adopts, and extends, the theory of hierarchical leisure constraints to better understand barriers to tourism respite participation. Lived experiences are collected via story-telling techniques (n = 157) from carers taking trips of one night or more away during times of palliative and end-of-life care. Three cross-cutting constraints are emergent in the data: awareness (knowing); access (doing); and anxiety (feeling). Negotiation strategies are suggested, hierarchical implications questioned and the opportunity to explore a temporal dimension to tourism constraints in future research signalled. Graphical abstract An extension to constraints negotiation theory: respite care.Unlabelled Image
| S-EPMC9699796 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Affordable Care Act (ACA) provisions, especially Medicaid expansion, are believed to have "spillover effects," such as boosting participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) among eligible individuals in the United States (US). However, little empirical evidence exists about the impact of the ACA, with its focus on the dual eligible population, on SNAP participation. The current study investigates whether the ACA, under an explicit policy aim of enhancing the interface between Medicare and Medicaid, has improved participation in the SNAP among low-income older Medicare beneficiaries.MethodsWe extracted 2009 through 2018 data from the US Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) for low-income (≤ %138 Federal Poverty Level [FPL]) older Medicare beneficiaries (n = 50,466; aged ≥ 65), and low-income (≤ %138 FPL) younger adults (aged 20 to < 65 years, n = 190,443). MEPS respondents of > %138 FPL incomes, younger Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, and older adults without Medicare were excluded from this study. Using a quasi-experimental comparative interrupted time-series design, we examined (1) whether ACA's support for the Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligible program, through facilitating the online Medicaid application process, was associated with an increase in SNAP uptake among low-income older Medicare beneficiaries, and (2) in the instance of an association, to assess the magnitude of SNAP uptake that can be explicitly attributed to the policy's implementation. The outcome, SNAP participation, was measured annually from 2009 through 2018. The year 2014 was set as the intervention point when the Medicare-Medicaid Coordination Office started facilitating Medicaid applications online for eligible Medicare beneficiaries.ResultsOverall, the change in the probability of SNAP enrollment from the pre- to post-intervention period was 17.4 percentage points higher among low-income older Medicare enrollees, compared to similarly low-income, SNAP-eligible, younger adults (β = 0.174, P < .001). This boost in SNAP uptake was significant and more apparent among older White (β = 0.137, P = .049), Asians (β = 0.408, P = .047), and all non-Hispanic adults (β = 0.030, P < .001).ConclusionsThe ACA had a positive, measurable effect on SNAP participation among older Medicare beneficiaries. Policymakers should consider additional approaches that link enrollment to multiple programs to increase SNAP participation. Further, there may be a need for additional, targeted efforts to address structural barriers to uptake among African Americans and Hispanics.
| S-EPMC10199570 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe benefits of public payment policy may extend to private populations through "spillover" effects. If cost-saving efforts in Medicare also reduce costs among commercially insured patients, Medicare payment systems could be a versatile policy tool in future reform efforts.ObjectivesTo determine whether physicians who participated in a Medicare Accountable Care Organization (ACO) reduced spending among their commercial patients.DesignThis was a retrospective, longitudinal study which was conducted using Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) claims data from 2010 to 2015. We compared patients seen by physicians who participated in a Medicare ACO to patients whose physicians were not part of an ACO. We used a difference-in-differences (DIDs) design to test whether physician participation in an ACO was associated with reduced spending among their commercially insured patients. We also tested for heterogeneous effects: we assessed whether spillovers were larger among patients with clinical conditions (acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, congestive heart failure) that have previously been targeted by Medicare payment programs.SettingThis was a population-based study of commercially insured patients in Michigan.ParticipantsPatients who experienced a significant clinical episode (eg, labor and delivery, acute myocardial infarction) between 2010 and 2015.ExposureOur patient-level exposure is treatment by a Medicare ACO-affiliated physician.Main outcomes and measuresMedical spending of 0-90 days and 91-365 days after a clinical episode.ResultsPatients in the exposure group (n=54,750) and in the control group (n=137,883) were similar in demographic characteristics of age, sex, and type of clinical episodes. Adjusted mean 90-day spending in the preexposure period was $21,292 among the exposure group and $21,157 among the comparison group; these means declined to $21,250 and $20,995 in the postperiod, yielding a DIDs estimate of $119 [95% confidence interval (CI), -$170 to $408]. Adjusted means for 91-365 days spending in the preperiod were $4258 among the exposure group and $4251 among the comparison group; these means rose to $4338 and $4421 in the postperiod, yielding a DIDs estimate of -$90 (95% CI, -$312 to $132). We also separately examined patients with conditions that have been targeted by other Medicare payment programs. Among these patients, 90-day spending did not differ between exposure and comparison groups (DIDs, -$223; 95% CI, -$2037 to $1591), although 91-365 days spending decreased among the exposure group with marginal statistical significance (DIDs, -$1160; 95% CI, -$2459 to $140).Conclusions and relevancePhysicians who participated in Medicare ACOs did not reduce spending among most of their commercially insured patients. Medicare policy is unlikely to confer significant spillover benefits to the commercially insured population.
| S-EPMC6417956 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Postacute care is thought to be a major source of wasteful spending. The extent to which accountable care organizations (ACOs) can limit postacute care spending has implications for the importance and design of other payment models that include postacute care. Objective:To assess changes in postacute care spending and use of postacute care associated with provider participation as ACOs in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) and the pathways by which they occurred. Design, Setting, and Participants:With the use of fee-for-service Medicare claims from a random 20% sample of beneficiaries with 25?544?650 patient-years, 8?395?426 hospital admissions, and 1?595?352 stays in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2014, difference-in-difference comparisons of beneficiaries served by ACOs with beneficiaries served by local non-ACO health care professionals (control group) were performed before vs after entry into the MSSP. Differential changes were estimated separately for cohorts of ACOs entering the MSSP in 2012, 2013, and 2014. Exposures:Patient attribution to an ACO in the MSSP. Main Outcomes and Measures:Postacute spending, discharge to a facility, length of SNF stays, readmissions, use of highly rated SNFs, and mortality, adjusted for patient characteristics. Results:For the 2012 cohort of 114 ACOs, participation in the MSSP was associated with an overall reduction in postacute spending (differential change in 2014 for ACOs vs control group, -$106 per beneficiary [95% CI, -$176 to -$35], or -9.0% of the precontract unadjusted mean of $1172; P?=?.003) that was driven by differential reductions in acute inpatient care, discharges to facilities rather than home (-0.6 percentage points [95% CI, -1.1 to 0.0], or -2.7% of the unadjusted precontract mean of 22.6%; P?=?.03), and length of SNF stays (-0.60 days per stay [95% CI, -0.99 to -0.22], or -2.2% of the precontract unadjusted mean of 27.07 days; P?=?.002). Reductions in use of SNFs and length of stay were largely due to within-hospital or within-SNF changes in care specifically for ACO patients. Participation in the MSSP was associated with smaller significant reductions in SNF spending in 2014 for the 2013 ACO cohort (-$27 per beneficiary [95% CI, -$49 to -$6], or -3.3% of the precontract unadjusted mean of $813; P?=?.01) but not in the 2013 or 2014 cohort's first year of participation (-$13 per beneficiary [95% CI, -$33 to $6]; P?=?.19; and $4 per beneficiary [95% CI, -$15 to $24]; P?=?.66). Estimates were similar for ACOs with and without financial ties to hospitals. Participation in the MSSP was not associated with significant changes in 30-day readmissions, use of highly rated SNFs, or mortality. Conclusions and Relevance:Participation in the MSSP has been associated with significant reductions in postacute spending without ostensible deterioration in quality of care. Spending reductions were more consistent with clinicians working within hospitals and SNFs to influence care for ACO patients than with hospital-wide initiatives by ACOs or use of preferred SNFs.
| S-EPMC5415671 | biostudies-literature