Dataset Information

Care experiences among dually enrolled older adults with cancer: SEER-CAHPS, 2005-2013.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:Given the associations between poverty and poorer outcomes among older adults with cancer, we sought to understand the effects of dual enrollment in Medicare and Medicaid-as a marker of poverty-on self-reported care experiences among seniors diagnosed with cancer. METHODS:Retrospective, observational study using cancer registry, Medicare claims, and care experience survey data (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER]-Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems [CAHPS®]) for a national sample of fee-for-service (FFS) and Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees aged 65 or older. We included people with one incident primary, malignant cancer diagnosed between 2005 and 2011, surveyed within 2 years after diagnosis (n?=?9,800; 995 dual enrollees). Medicare CAHPS measures included 5 global ratings and 3 composite scores. RESULTS:After adjustment for potential confounders, people with cancer histories who were dually enrolled were significantly more likely to report better experiences than non-duals on 2 measures (Medicare/their health plan: adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.87; prescription drug plan [PDP]: aOR: 0.54, 95% CI 0.40-0.73). CONCLUSIONS:Dual enrollees with cancer reported better experiences than Medicare-only enrollees in terms of their health plan (Medicare FFS or Medicare Advantage) and their PDP. Better ratings among dually enrolled beneficiaries suggest possible divergence between health outcomes and care experiences, warranting additional investigation.

SUBMITTER: Lines LM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6786484 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Care experiences among dually enrolled older adults with cancer: SEER-CAHPS, 2005-2013.

Lines Lisa M LM Cohen Julia J Halpern Michael T MT Smith Ashley Wilder AW Kent Erin E EE

Cancer causes & control : CCC 20190817 10

<h4>Purpose</h4>Given the associations between poverty and poorer outcomes among older adults with cancer, we sought to understand the effects of dual enrollment in Medicare and Medicaid-as a marker of poverty-on self-reported care experiences among seniors diagnosed with cancer.<h4>Methods</h4>Retrospective, observational study using cancer registry, Medicare claims, and care experience survey data (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER]-Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers a ...[more]

PMID: 31422490

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Medicare beneficiaries who are also enrolled in Medicaid (dually enrolled beneficiaries) have drawn the attention of policy makers because they comprise the poorest subset of the Medicare population; however, it is unclear how their outcomes have changed over time compared with those only enrolled in Medicare (nondually enrolled beneficiaries). Objective:To evaluate annual changes in all-cause mortality, hospitalization rates, and hospitalization-related mortality among dually enrolled beneficiaries and nondually enrolled beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants:Serial cross-sectional study of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older between January 2004 and December 2017. The final date of follow-up was September 30, 2018. Exposures:Dual vs nondual enrollment status. Main Outcomes and Measures:Annual all-cause mortality rates; all-cause hospitalization rates; and in-hospital, 30-day, 1-year hospitalization-related mortality rates. Results:There were 71?017?608 unique Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older (mean age, 75.6 [SD, 9.2] years; 54.9% female) enrolled in Medicare for at least 1 month from 2004 through 2017. Of these beneficiaries, 11?697?900 (16.5%) were dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid for at least 1 month. After adjusting for age, sex, and race, annual all-cause mortality rates declined from 8.5% (95% CI, 8.45%-8.56%) in 2004 to 8.1% (95% CI, 8.05%-8.13%) in 2017 among dually enrolled beneficiaries and from 4.1% (95% CI, 4.08%-4.13%) in 2004 to 3.8% (95% CI, 3.76%-3.79%) in 2017 among nondually enrolled beneficiaries. The difference in annual all-cause mortality between dually and nondually enrolled beneficiaries increased between 2004 (adjusted odds ratio, 2.09 [95% CI, 2.08-2.10]) and 2017 (adjusted odds ratio, 2.22 [95% CI, 2.21-2.23]) (P?<?.001 for interaction between dual enrollment status and time). All-cause hospitalizations per 100?000 beneficiary-years declined from 49?888 in 2004 to 41?121 in 2017 among dually enrolled beneficiaries (P?<?.001) and from 29?000 in 2004 to 22?601 in 2017 among nondually enrolled beneficiaries (P?<?.001); however, the difference between these groups widened between 2004 (adjusted risk ratio, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.71-1.73]) and 2017 (adjusted risk ratio, 1.83 [95% CI, 1.82-1.83]) (P?<?.001 for interaction). Among hospitalized beneficiaries, the risk-adjusted 30-day mortality rates declined from 10.3% (95% CI, 10.22%-10.33%) in 2004 to 10.1% (95% CI, 10.02%-10.20%) in 2017 among dually enrolled beneficiaries and from 8.5% (95% CI, 8.50%-8.56%) in 2004 to 8.1% (95% CI, 8.06%-8.13%) in 2017 among nondually enrolled beneficiaries. In contrast, 1-year mortality increased among hospitalized beneficiaries from 23.1% (95% CI, 23.05%-23.20%) in 2004 to 26.7% (95% CI, 26.58%-26.84%) in 2017 among dually enrolled beneficiaries and from 18.1% (95% CI, 18.11%-18.17%) in 2004 to 20.3% (95% CI, 20.21%-20.31%) in 2017 among nondually enrolled beneficiaries. The difference in hospitalization-related outcomes between dually and nondually enrolled beneficiaries persisted during the study period. Conclusions and Relevance:Among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older, dually enrolled beneficiaries had higher annual all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalizations, and hospitalization-related mortality compared with nondually enrolled beneficiaries. Between 2004 and 2017, these differences did not decrease.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the relationship between federally qualified health center (FQHC) use and hospital-based care among individuals dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid.Data sourcesData were obtained from 2012 to 2018 Medicare claims.Study designWe modeled hospital-based care as a function of FQHC use, person-level factors, a Medicare prospective payment system (PPS) indicator, and ZIP code fixed effects. Outcomes included emergency department (ED) visits (overall and nonemergent), observation stays, hospitalizations (overall and for ambulatory care sensitive conditions), and 30-day unplanned returns. We stratified all models on the basis of eligibility and rurality.Data extraction methodsOur sample included individuals dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid for at least two full consecutive years, residing in a primary care service area with an FQHC. We excluded individuals without primary care visits, who died, or had end-stage renal disease.Principal findingsAfter the Medicare PPS was introduced, FQHC use in rural counties was associated with fewer ED and nonemergent ED visits per 100 person-years among both age-eligible (-14.8 [-17.5, -12.1]; -6.6 [-7.5, -5.6]) and disability-eligible duals (-11.3 [-14.4, -8.3]; -6 [-7.4, -4.6]) as well as a lower probability of observation stays (-0.8 pp age-eligible; -0.4 pp disability-eligible) and unplanned returns (-2.1 pp age-eligible; -1.9 pp disability-eligible). In urban counties, FQHC use was associated with more ED and nonemergent ED visits per 100 person-years (10.6 [8.4, 12.8]; 4.0 [2.6, 5.4]) among disability-eligible duals (a decrease of more than 60% compared with the pre-PPS period) and increases in the probability of hospitalization (1.1 pp age-eligible; 0.8 pp disability-eligible) and ACS hospitalization (0.5 pp age-eligible; 0.3 pp disability-eligible) (a decrease of roughly 50% compared with the pre-PPS period).ConclusionsFQHC use is associated with reductions in hospital-based care among dual enrollees after introduction of the Medicare PPS. Further research is needed to understand how FQHCs can tailor care to best serve this complex population.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To investigate the relationships between depressive symptoms and opioid potency among adults aged 50 years and older reporting use of one or more prescription opioids in the past 30 days. MATERIALS/DESIGN:Adjusted multiple linear regression models were conducted with 2005-2013 files from a secondary cross-sectional dataset, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Respondents were community-dwelling, noninstitutionalized adults 50 years or older (n = 1036). Predictor variables included a positive screen for minor depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9] score greater than or equal to 5 and less than or equal to 9), moderate depression symptoms (PHQ-9 greater than or equal to 10 and less than or equal to 14), and severe depression symptoms (PHQ-9 greater than or equal to 15). Criterion variables included weaker-than-morphine analgesics (eg, codeine and tramadol) and morphine-equivalent opioids (eg, morphine and hydrocodone), which served as the reference category, as well as stronger-than-morphine opioid analgesics (eg, fentanyl and oxycodone). RESULTS:Prevalence rates for symptoms of minor depression, moderate depression, and severe depression were n = 236 (22.8%), n = 135 (13.0%), and n = 122 (11.8%), respectively. Severe depression was significantly associated with high-potency opioid use (odds ratio [OR]: 2.27; confidence interval [CI], 1.16-4.46). In post hoc tests, severe depression remained significantly associated with high-potency opioid use only among respondents without arthritis (OR: 5.80; CI, 1.59-21.13). CONCLUSIONS:Compared with older adults without depressive symptoms, older adults with severe depressive symptoms are more likely to be taking high-potency opioid medications. Future prescription opioid medication research should prioritize investigations among older adults with pain-related diagnoses, other than arthritis, reporting preexisting or new symptoms of severe depression.

Project description:OBJECTIVE: Improving health care of multimorbid older adults is a critical public health challenge. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of a pilot intervention to enhance the quality of primary care experiences for chronically ill older persons (Guided Care). DESIGN: Nonrandomized prospective clinical trial. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Older, chronically ill, community-dwelling patients (N = 150) of 4 General Internists in 1 urban community practice setting who were members of a capitated health plan and identified as being at high risk of heavy use of health services in the coming year by claims-based predictive modeling. INTERVENTIONS: Guided Care, an enhancement to primary care that incorporates the operative principles of chronic care innovations, was delivered by a specially trained, practice-based registered nurse working closely with 2 primary care physicians. Each patient received a geriatric assessment, a comprehensive care plan, evidence-based primary care with proactive follow-up of chronic conditions, coordination of the efforts of health professionals across all health care settings, and facilitated access to community resources. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Quality of primary care experiences (physician-patient communication, interpersonal treatment, knowledge of patient, integration of care, and trust in physician) was assessed using the Primary Care Assessment Survey (PCAS) at baseline and 6 months later. At baseline, the patients assigned to receive Guided Care were similar to those assigned to receive usual care in their demographics and disability levels, but they had higher risk scores and were less likely to be married. Thirty-one of the 75 subjects assigned to the Guided Care group received the intervention. At 6 months, intention-to-treat analyses adjusting for age, gender, and risk score suggest that Guided Care may improve the quality of physician-patient communication. In per-protocol analyses, receipt of Guided Care was associated with more favorable change than usual care from baseline to follow-up in all 5 PCAS domains, but only physician-patient communication showed a statistically significant improvement. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, Guided Care appeared to improve the quality of primary care experiences for high-risk, chronically ill older adults. A larger cluster-randomized controlled trial of Guided Care is underway.

Dataset Information

Care experiences among dually enrolled older adults with cancer: SEER-CAHPS, 2005-2013.

Publications

Care experiences among dually enrolled older adults with cancer: SEER-CAHPS, 2005-2013.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets