Part D Plan Switching Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Schizophrenia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Zhang Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4591078 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Part D Plan Switching Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Schizophrenia.
Zhang Yuting Y Talisa Victor V Baik Seo Hyon SH
Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) 20150615 10
<h4>Objective</h4>Most Medicare schizophrenia patients were randomly assigned in 2006 to one of 409 benchmark plans. This study examined plan switching and factors affecting switching among beneficiaries with schizophrenia.<h4>Methods</h4>The data were 2006 Medicare pharmacy data for three groups of schizophrenia patients: those with Medicaid coverage ("dual eligibles"; N=93,705), Medicare beneficiaries with a low-income subsidy (N=56,148), and Medicare beneficiaries without the subsidy (N=36,10 ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Approximately 34% of all Medicare beneficiaries were enrolled in a Medicare Advantage (MA) plan in 2019. Quantitative evidence suggests that MA beneficiaries have low rates of switching plans, but that beneficiaries who are hospitalized or use postacute nursing home care are disproportionately more likely to exit their plan. This research sought to explore how MA enrollees choose plans and the factors involved in their decision to keep their current plan or switch plans. We conducted 25 semistructured interviews focusing on expectations and experiences preenrollment and postenrollment among MA beneficiaries. Overall, the beneficiaries interviewed reported being highly satisfied with their plans. After selecting a plan, there was little incentive to revisit their choice since they viewed their plan as "good enough." Confusion, health status, cost and benefits also contributed to many seniors keeping or switching their plans. These seniors were reluctant to switch plans unless they experienced a major health event.
| S-EPMC7903586 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPatients with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) face substantial challenges in selecting, and remaining enrolled in, health insurance. Little is known about how patients with ADRD experience the Medicare Advantage (MA) program.MethodsWe used, hospital, outpatient, and post-acute care data to identify MA beneficiaries with and without ADRD in 2014. Multinomial logit models estimated the percentage of people who disenrolled to traditional Medicare (TM) or switched to a different MA plan in 2015.ResultsAmong non-dually eligible beneficiaries, 9.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.0, 9.1) with ADRD disenrolled while 19.7% (95% CI: 19.6, 19.9) switched plans within MA compared to a disenrollment rate of 4.2% (95% CI: 4.2, 4.2) and switching rate of 22.8% (95% CI: 22.9, 22.8) for persons without ADRD.DiscussionMA enrollees with ADRD tend to disenroll at substantially higher rates than those without ADRD. This may be indicative of their care needs not being met in the program.
| S-EPMC7987817 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHow often enrollees with complex care needs leave the Medicare Advantage (MA) program and what might drive their decisions remain unknown.ObjectiveTo characterize trends in switching to and from MA among high-need beneficiaries and to evaluate the drivers of disenrollment decisions.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study of MA and traditional Medicare (TM) enrollees from January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2015, used a multinomial logit regression stratified by Medicare-Medicaid eligibility status. All 14 589 645 non-high-need MA enrollees and 1 302 470 high-need enrollees in the United States who survived until the end of 2014 were eligible for the analysis. Data were analyzed from November 1, 2017, through August 1, 2018.ExposuresEnrollee dual eligibility and high-need status (based on complex chronic conditions, multiple morbidities, use of health care services, functional impairment, and frailty indicators), MA plan star rating, and cost sharing.Main outcomes and measuresThe proportion of enrollees who disenrolled into TM, remained in the same MA plan, or who switched plans within the MA program.ResultsA total of 13 901 816 enrollees were included in the analysis (56.2% women; mean [SD] age, 70.9 [9.9] years). Among the 1 302 470 high-need enrollees, an adjusted 4.6% (95% CI, 4.5%-4.6%) of Medicare-only and 14.8% (95% CI, 14.5%-15.0%) of Medicare-Medicaid members switched from MA to TM compared with 3.3% (95% CI, 3.3%-3.3%) and 4.6% (95% CI, 4.5%-4.7%), respectively, among non-high-need enrollees. Among enrollees in low-quality plans, 23.0% (95% CI, 22.3%-23.9%) of Medicare and 42.8% (95% CI, 40.5%-45.1%) of dual-eligible high-need enrollees left MA. Even in high-quality plans, high-need members disenrolled at higher rates than non-high-need members (4.9% [95% CI, 4.6%-5.2%] vs 1.8% [95% CI, 1.8%-1.9%] for Medicare-only enrollees and 11.3% vs 2.4% dual eligible enrollees). Enrollment in a 5.0-star rated plan was associated with a 30.1-percentage point reduction (95% CI, -31.7 to -28.4 percentage points) in the probability of disenrollment among high-need individuals. A $100 increase in monthly premiums was associated with a 33.9-percentage point increase (95% CI, -34.9 to -33.0 percentage points) in the likelihood of switching plans, and a small reduction in the likelihood of disenrolling (-2.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.2 to -2.2 percentage points). Among Medicare-Medicaid eligible participants, 14.1% (95% CI, 14.0%-14.2%) of high-need and 16.7% (95% CI, 16.6%-16.7%) of non-high-need enrollees switched from TM to MA.Conclusions and relevanceResults of this study suggest that substantially higher disenrollment from MA plans occurs among high-need and Medicare-Medicaid eligible enrollees. This study's findings suggest that star ratings have the strongest association with disenrollment trends, whereas increases in monthly premiums are associated with greater likelihood of switching plans.
| S-EPMC6450306 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare drug costs and adherence among Medicare beneficiaries with the standard Part D coverage gap versus supplemental gap coverage in 2006.Data sourcesPharmacy data from Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MAPD) plans.Study designParallel analyses comparing beneficiaries aged 65+ with diabetes in an integrated MAPD with a gap versus no gap (n=28,780); and in a network-model MAPD with a gap versus generic-only coverage during the gap (n=14,984).Principal findingsDrug spending was 3 percent (95 percent confidence interval [CI]: 1-4 percent) and 4 percent (CI: 1-6 percent) lower among beneficiaries with a gap versus full or generic-only gap coverage, respectively. Out-of-pocket expenditures were 189 percent higher (CI: 185-193 percent) and adherence to three chronic drug classes was lower among those with a gap versus no gap (e.g., odds ratio=0.83, CI: 0.79-0.88, for oral diabetes drugs). Annual out-of-pocket spending was 14 percent higher (CI: 10-17 percent) for beneficiaries with a gap versus generic-only gap coverage, but levels of adherence were similar.ConclusionsAmong Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes, having the Part D coverage gap resulted in lower total drug costs, but higher out-of-pocket spending and worse adherence compared with having no gap. Having generic-only coverage during the gap appeared to confer limited benefits compared with having no gap coverage.
| S-EPMC2838150 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the effect of Part D on 65-78-year-old noninstitutionalized dual eligibles' prescription utilization and expenditures.Data sourceRandom sample of unique pharmacy customers of a national retail pharmacy chain who filled at least one prescription during both 2005 and 2006. For each subject, we obtained claims data for every prescription filled between January 1, 2005, and April 31, 2007.Study designGeneralized estimating equations were used to examine the experience of a "treatment" group (dual eligibles between 65 and 78 years on January 1, 2005) with that of a "control" group (near-elderly patients with Medicaid coverage between 60 and 63 years on January 1, 2005) during the first 18 months after Part D implementation.Principal findingsExpenditures for the treatment and control groups tracked each other closely in the pre-Part D period. Immediately following the implementation of Part D, expenditures for both groups decreased and then leveled off. There were no significant changes in trends in the dual eligibles' out-of-pocket expenditures, total monthly expenditures, pill-days, or total number of prescriptions due to Part D.ConclusionsWe find no evidence that Part D adversely affected pharmaceutical utilization or out-of-pocket expenditures of dual eligibles during the transition period, nor during the 16 months subsequent to Part D implementation.
| S-EPMC2813441 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportancePrices for newer analogue insulin products have increased. Lower-cost human insulin may be effective for many patients with type 2 diabetes.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between implementation of a health plan-based intervention of switching patients from analogue to human insulin and glycemic control.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study using population-level interrupted times series analysis of members participating in a Medicare Advantage and prescription drug plan operating in 4 US states. Participants were prescribed insulin between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2016 (median follow-up, 729 days). The intervention began in February 2015 and was expanded to the entire health plan system by June 2015.ExposuresImplementation of a health plan program to switch patients from analogue to human insulin.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the change in mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels estimated over three 12-month periods: preintervention (baseline) in 2014, intervention in 2015, and postintervention in 2016. Secondary outcomes included rates of serious hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia using ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM diagnostic codes.ResultsOver 3 years, 14 635 members (mean [SD] age: 72.5 [9.8] years; 51% women; 93% with type 2 diabetes) filled 221 866 insulin prescriptions. The mean HbA1c was 8.46% (95% CI, 8.40%-8.52%) at baseline and decreased at a rate of -0.02% (95% CI, -0.03% to -0.01%; P <.001) per month before the intervention. There was an association between the start of the intervention and an overall HbA1c level increase of 0.14% (95% CI, 0.05%-0.23%; P = .003) and slope change of 0.02% (95% CI, 0.01%-0.03%; P < .001). After the completion of the intervention, there were no significant differences in changes in the level (0.08% [95% CI, -0.01% to 0.17%]) or slope (<0.001% [95% CI, -0.008% to 0.010%]) of mean HbA1c compared with the intervention period (P = .09 and P = 0.81, respectively). For serious hypoglycemic events, there was no significant association between the start of the intervention and a level (2.66/1000 person-years [95% CI, -3.82 to 9.13]; P = .41) or slope change (-0.66/1000 person-years [95% CI, -1.59 to 0.27]; P = .16). The level (1.64/1000 person-years [95% CI, -4.83 to 8.11]; P = .61) and slope (-0.23/1000 person-years [95% CI, -1.17 to 0.70]; P = .61) changes in the postintervention period were not significantly different compared with the intervention period. The baseline rate of serious hyperglycemia was 22.33 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 12.70-31.97). For the rate of serious hyperglycemic events, there was no significant association between the start of the intervention and a level (4.23/1000 person-years [95% CI, -8.62 to 17.08]; P = .51) or slope (-0.51/1000 person-years [95% CI, -2.37 to 1.34]; P = .58) change.Conclusions and relevanceAmong Medicare beneficiaries with type 2 diabetes, implementation of a health plan program that involved switching patients from analogue to human insulin was associated with a small increase in population-level HbA1c.
| S-EPMC6439763 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Low adherence to bisphosphonate therapy is associated with increased fracture risk. Factors associated with discontinuation of osteoporosis medications have not been studied in-depth. This study assessed medication discontinuation and switching patterns among Medicare beneficiaries who were new users of bisphosphonates and evaluated factors possibly associated with discontinuation.We identified patients initiating bisphosphonate treatment using a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries with at least 24 months of traditional fee-for-service and part D drug coverage from 2006 through 2009. We classified medication status at the end of follow-up as: continued original bisphosphonate, discontinued without switching or restarting, restarted the same drug after a treatment gap (? 90 days), or switched to another anti-osteoporosis medication. We conducted logistic regression analyses to identify baseline characteristics associated with discontinuation and a case-crossover analysis to identify factors that precipitate discontinuation.Of 21,452 new users followed respectively for 12 months, 44% continued their original therapy, 36% discontinued without switching or restarting, 8% restarted the same drug after a gap greater than 90 days, and 11% switched to another anti-osteoporosis medication. Factors assessed during the 12-month period before initiation were weakly associated with discontinuation. Several Factors measured during follow-up were associated with discontinuation, including more physician visits, hospitalization, having a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry test, higher Charlson comorbidity index scores, higher out-of-pocket drug payments, and upper gastrointestinal problems. Patterns were similar for 4,738 new users followed for 30 months.Among new bisphosphonates users, switching within and across drug classes and extended treatment gaps are common. Robust definitions and time-varying considerations should be considered to characterize medication discontinuation more accurately.
| S-EPMC4022369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceA growing proportion of the population is enrolling in Medicare Advantage (MA), which typically offers additional benefits compared with traditional Medicare (TM).ObjectiveTo determine whether frailty and frailty trajectories differ between MA enrollees and TM enrollees.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study used data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (2015-2016). Analyses were conducted from August 2023 to March 2024. Participants were community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older.ExposureEnrollment in MA vs TM.Main outcomes and measuresFrailty was calculated by a frailty index (FI) (range, 0-1, with higher values indicating greater frailty) and the Fried Frailty Phenotype (FFP) score (range, 0-5, with higher values indicating greater frailty). Physical performance, including Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) score (range, 0-12, with higher values indicating better performance), and gait speed (meters per second) were measured. The primary outcome was the difference in FI and FFP scores from the 2015 baseline assessment to the 2016 follow-up assessment. Secondary outcomes include the 1-year changes in SPPB and gait speed.ResultsThe final cohort consisted of 7063 participants (2775 [23.1%] aged >80 years; 4040 [54.7%] female), representing a sample of the 38.8 million beneficiaries. There were 2583 (35.0%) MA enrollees (13.6 million) and 4480 (65.0%) TM enrollees (25.2 million). At baseline, the FI score was similar between MA and TM enrollees (mean [SD], 0.22 [0.15] vs 0.21 [0.14]), although MA enrollees had worse phenotypic frailty (496 participants [15.2%] vs 811 participants [13.7%] considered frail by FFP score), SPPB scores (mean [SD], 6.91 [3.34] vs 7.21 [3.27]), and gait speed (0.79 [0.24] m/s vs 0.82 [0.23] m/s) than TM enrollees. One year later, there were no differences between MA and TM enrollees in the 1-year change in FI score (mean [SD], 0.016 [0.071] vs 0.014 [0.066]; adjusted mean difference, 0.001 [95% CI, -0.004 to 0.005]), FFP score (mean [SD], 0.017 [1.004] vs 0.007 [0.958]; adjusted mean difference, -0.009 [95% CI, -0.067 to 0.049]), SPPB score (mean [SD], -0.144 [2.064] vs -0.211 [1.968]; adjusted mean difference, 0.068 [95% CI, -0.076 to 0.212]), and gait speed (mean [SD], -0.0160 [0.148] m/s vs -0.007 [0.148] m/s; adjusted mean difference, -0.010 m/s [95% CI, -0.067 to 0.049 m/s]).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries from 2015, MA enrollees experienced similar declines in frailty over 1 year compared with TM enrollees. Future work should examine whether the specific types of services covered by health insurance can impact frailty and health trajectories for older adults.
| S-EPMC11365002 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Little is known about how Medicare Part D plan features influence choice of generic versus brand drugs.To examine the association between Part D plan features and generic medication use.Data from a 2009 random sample of 1.6 million fee-for-service, Part D enrollees aged 65 years and above, who were not dually eligible or receiving low-income subsidies, were used to examine the association between plan features (generic cost-sharing, difference in brand and generic copay, prior authorization, step therapy) and choice of generic antidepressants, antidiabetics, and statins. Logistic regression models accounting for plan-level clustering were adjusted for sociodemographic and health status.Generic cost-sharing ranged from $0 to $9 for antidepressants and statins, and from $0 to $8 for antidiabetics (across 5th-95th percentiles). Brand-generic cost-sharing differences were smallest for statins (5th-95th percentiles: $16-$37) and largest for antidepressants ($16-$64) across plans. Beneficiaries with higher generic cost-sharing had lower generic use [adjusted odds ratio (OR)=0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.95-0.98 for antidepressants; OR=0.97, 95% CI, 0.96-0.98 for antidiabetics; OR=0.94, 95% CI, 0.92-0.95 for statins]. Larger brand-generic cost-sharing differences and prior authorization were significantly associated with greater generic use in all categories. Plans could increase generic use by 5-12 percentage points by reducing generic cost-sharing from the 75th ($7) to 25th percentiles ($4-$5), increasing brand-generic cost-sharing differences from the 25th ($25-$26) to 75th ($32-$33) percentiles, and using prior authorization and step therapy.Cost-sharing features and utilization management tools were significantly associated with generic use in 3 commonly used medication categories.
| S-EPMC4142208 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite the rollout of Medicare Part D, cost-related nonadherence (CRN) among older adults remains a problem. OBJECTIVES:To examine the rate and correlates of self-reported CRN among a population of older persons with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN:Cross-sectional. SUBJECTS:A total of 1264 Part D patients with diabetes, who entered the coverage gap in 2006. MEASURES:Initial administrative medication lists were verified in computer-assisted telephone interviews, in which participants brought their medication bottles to the phone. Medications were classified into cardiometabolic (diabetes, hypertension, cholesterol-lowering), symptom relief, and "other." Participants were asked if they had any CRN during 2006, and if so to which medication/s. We used the person-medication dyad as the unit of analysis, and tested a multivariate random effects logistic regression model to analyze the correlates of CRN. RESULTS:Approximately 16% of participants reported CRN. CRN was more frequent for cholesterol-lowering medications (relative risk, 1.54; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-2.32) compared with medications taken for symptom relief. CRN was reported less frequently with increasing age above 75 years, compared with patients between 65 and 69. In addition, compared with those with incomes of ?$40,000, CRN risk for those with incomes of <$25,000 was markedly higher (relative risk, 3.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.99-4.65). CONCLUSIONS:In summary, we found high rates of CRN among Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes, particularly those with lower incomes. We observed more frequent CRN for cholesterol-lowering medications as compared with medications for symptom relief. Efforts to ensure medication affordability for this population will be important in boosting adherence to key medications.
| S-EPMC3780603 | biostudies-literature