Project description:IntroductionSuicidality is higher for gender minorities than the general population, yet little is known about suicidality in disabled or older adult gender minorities.MethodsThis study used 2009-2014 Medicare claims to identify people with gender identity-related diagnosis codes (disabled, n=6,678; older adult, n=2,018) and compared their prevalence of suicidality with a 5% random non-gender minority beneficiary sample (disabled, n=535,801; older adult, n=1,700,008). Correlates of suicidality were assessed (via chi-square) for each of the 4 participant groups separately, and then disparities within eligibility status (disabled or older adult) were assessed using logistic regression models, adjusting first for age and mental health chronic conditions and then additionally for Medicaid eligibility, race/ethnicity, or U.S. region (each separately). The primary hypotheses were that gender minority beneficiaries would have higher suicidality but that suicidality disparities would persist after adjusting for covariates. Data were analyzed between 2017 and 2019.ResultsGender minority beneficiaries had higher unadjusted suicidality than non-gender minority beneficiaries in the disabled cohort (18.5% vs 7.1%, p<0.001). Significant suicidality predictors in all 4 groups included the following: age (except in older adult gender minorities), Medicaid eligibility, depression or behavioral health conditions, avoidable hospitalizations, and violence victimization. In age- and mental health-adjusted logistic regression models, gender minorities had higher odds of suicidality than non-gender minority beneficiaries (disabled, OR=1.95, p<0.0001; older adult, OR=2.10, p<0.0001). Disparities were not attenuated after adjusting for Medicaid eligibility, race/ethnicity, or region.ConclusionsHeightened suicidality among identified gender minority Medicare beneficiaries highlights a pressing need to identify and reduce barriers to wellness in this population.
Project description:ImportanceClinicians are increasingly adopting telemedicine in an effort to expand patient access and efficiently deliver care. However, the extent to which otolaryngologists provide telemedicine services is unclear.ObjectiveTo characterize recent trends in the use of telemedicine by otolaryngologists to deliver care to Medicare beneficiaries.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cross-sectional analysis was conducted between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2018, using publicly available Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary data on physicians practicing in the field of otolaryngology and benchmark specialties (dermatology and psychiatry) that provided telemedicine services to Medicare beneficiaries.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were the mean annual number of telemedicine services delivered per active physician and mean annual payment per active physician for these services. Secondary outcomes included the number, setting, and complexity of telemedicine services.ResultsBetween 2010 and 2018, otolaryngologists provided 2127 total telemedicine services (7 unique service types) to Medicare beneficiaries and received $88 574 in total payment for these services. During this period, the mean number of telemedicine services increased at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11.0%, and the mean Medicare payment per otolaryngologist increased at a CAGR of 21.8%. In comparison, telemedicine use during this period generally increased at a higher rate in the fields of dermatology (mean number of services per active physician at CAGR of 13.0%; mean Medicare payment per active physician at CAGR of 12.5%) and psychiatry (mean number of services per active physician at CAGR of 25.8%; mean Medicare payment per active physician at CAGR of 26.6%). In 2018, outpatient evaluation and management visits accounted for most telemedicine services provided (337 of 353 [95.5%]) and the payments received ($17 542.13 of $18 470.47 [95.0%]) by otolaryngologists. In contrast, physicians in other specialties also provided substantial portions of telemedicine services in the inpatient (psychiatry, 18 403 of 198 478 [9.3%]; dermatology, 231 of 1034 [22.3%]) and skilled nursing facility settings (psychiatry, 14 690 of 198 478 [7.4%]; dermatology, 46 of 1034 [4.4%]).Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that the extent to which otolaryngologists used telemedicine to deliver care to Medicare beneficiaries between 2010 and 2018 was rare. Although there was relative growth in the use of telemedicine by otolaryngologists during this period, absolute growth remained low. Policy makers and provider organizations should support otolaryngologists in the adoption of telemedicine technologies, especially while coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) viral suppression efforts necessitate prolonged restriction of physical clinic throughput.
Project description:ImportanceLittle is known about how telemedicine use was evolving before the broad changes that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Understanding prepandemic patterns of telemedicine use can inform ongoing debates on the future of telemedicine policy.ObjectiveTo describe trends in telemedicine utilization among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries before the COVID-19 pandemic and the specialties of clinicians providing telemedicine.Design setting and participantsThis was a cross-sectional study and descriptive analysis of telemedicine utilization by 10.4 million fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries from 2010 to 2019. Data analysis was performed from June 6, 2019, to July 30, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresRates of telemedicine utilization, characteristics of beneficiaries who received telemedicine in 2010 to 2019, and specialties of clinicians delivering telemedicine.ResultsOf 10.4 million rural Medicare beneficiaries, telemedicine was used by 91 483 individuals (age ≥65 years, 47 135 [51.5%]; women, 51 476 [56.3%]; and White, 76 467 [83.6%] individuals) in 2019. In 2010 to 2019, telemedicine visits grew by 23.1% annually. A total of 0.9% of all fee-for-service rural beneficiaries had a telemedicine visit in 2019 compared with 0.2% in 2010. In 2019, there were 257 979 telemedicine visits or 34.8 visits per 1000 rural beneficiaries and most (75.9%) of these visits were for mental health conditions. Patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia (3.0% of rural beneficiaries) received 40% of all telemedicine visits in 2019. Some traditionally disadvantaged and underserved groups comprised a larger share of telemedicine users than nonusers in 2019, such as those dually insured with Medicaid (56.9% of users vs 18.6% of nonusers; adjusted odd ratio, 3.83; 95% CI, 3.77-3.89). In 2010 to 2019, telemedicine for mental health conditions shifted away from psychiatrists (71.2% to 35.8% of all telemedicine visits) to nonphysician clinicians, eg, nurse practitioners, psychologists, and social workers (21.4% to 57.2%). There was wide variation in telemedicine utilization in 2019 across counties: median (IQR), 16.0 (2.5-51.4) telemedicine users per 1000 beneficiaries). In 891 counties (29% of all US counties), at least 10% of beneficiaries with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia used a telemedicine service in 2019.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of telemedicine utilization before the COVID-19 pandemic, there was sustained growth in telemedicine visits among rural beneficiaries covered by the Medicare program, especially care delivered by nurse practitioners and other nonphysician clinicians. The prepandemic model of telemedicine provided in local health care settings may be a viable modality to maintain in rural communities.
Project description:While the rapid expansion of telemedicine in response to the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the impressive ability of health systems to adapt quickly to new complexities, it also raises important concerns about how to implement these novel modalities equitably. As the healthcare system becomes increasingly virtual, it risks widening disparities among marginalized populations who have worse health outcomes at baseline and limited access to the resources necessary for the effective use of telemedicine. In this article, we review recent policy changes and outline important recommendations that governments and health care systems can adopt to improve access to telemedicine and to tailor the use of these technologies to best meet the needs of underserved patients. We suggest that by making health equity integral to the implementation of telemedicine now, it will help to ensure that all can benefit from its use going forward and that this will be increasingly integral to care delivery.
Project description:Higher mortality in Blacks than Whites has been consistently reported in the US, but previous investigations have not accounted for poverty at the individual level. The health of its population is an important part of the capital of a nation. We examined the association between individual level poverty and disability and racial mortality differences in a 5% Medicare beneficiary random sample from 2004 to 2010. Cox regression models examined associations of race with all-cause mortality, adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, disability, neighborhood income, and Medicare "Buy-in" status (a proxy for individual level poverty) in 1,190,510 Black and White beneficiaries between 65 and 99 years old as of January 1, 2014, who had full and primary Medicare Part A and B coverage in 2004, and lived in one of the 50 states or Washington DC. Overall, black beneficiaries had higher sex-and-age adjusted mortality than Whites (hazard ratio [HR] 1.18). Controlling for health-related measures and disability reduced the HR for Black beneficiaries to 1.03. Adding "Buy-in" as an individual level covariate lowered the HR for Black beneficiaries to 0.92. Neither of the residential measures added to the predictive model. We conclude that poorer health status, excess disability, and most importantly, greater poverty among Black beneficiaries accounts for racial mortality differences in the aged US Medicare population. Poverty fosters social and health inequalities, including mortality disparities, notwithstanding national health insurance for the US elderly. Controlling for individual level poverty, in contrast to the common use of area level poverty in previous analyses, accounts for the White survival advantage in Medicare beneficiaries, and should be a covariate in analyses of administrative databases.
Project description:To evaluate whether aligning the Part D low-income subsidy and Medicaid program enrollment pathways in 2010 increased Medicaid participation among new Medicare beneficiaries.Medicare enrollment records for years 2007-2011.We used a multinomial logistic model with state fixed effects to examine the annual change in limited and full Medicaid enrollment among new Medicare beneficiaries for 2 years before and after the reforms (2008-2011).We identified new Medicare beneficiaries in the years 2008-2011 and their participation in Medicaid based on Medicare enrollment records.The percentage of beneficiaries enrolling in limited Medicaid at the start of Medicare coverage increased in 2010 by 0.3 percentage points for individuals aging into Medicare and by 1.3 percentage points for those qualifying due to disability (p < .001). There was no significant difference in the size of enrollment increases between states with and without concurrent limited Medicaid eligibility expansions.Our findings suggest that streamlining financial assistance programs may improve Medicare beneficiaries' access to benefits.
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.
Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies have identified disparities in readmissions among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program's (HRRP's) priority conditions. Evidence suggests timely follow-up is associated with reduced risk of readmission, but it is unknown whether timely follow-up reduces disparities in readmission.ObjectiveTo assess whether follow-up within 7 days after discharge from a hospitalization reduces risk of readmission and mitigates identified readmission disparities.DesignA retrospective cohort study using Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the associations between sociodemographic characteristics (race and ethnicity, dual-eligibility status, rurality, and area social deprivation), follow-up, and readmission. Mediation analysis was used to examine if disparities in readmission were mitigated by follow-up.ParticipantsWe analyzed data from 749,402 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, or pneumonia, and discharged home between January 1 and December 1, 2018.Main measureAll-cause unplanned readmission within 30 days after discharge.Key resultsPost-discharge follow-up within 7 days of discharge was associated with a substantially lower risk of readmission (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.52-0.53). Across all four HRRP conditions, beneficiaries with dual eligibility and beneficiaries living in areas with high social deprivation had a higher risk of readmission. Non-Hispanic Black beneficiaries had higher risk of readmission after hospitalization for pneumonia relative to non-Hispanic Whites. Mediation analysis suggested that 7-day follow-up mediated 21.2% of the disparity in the risk of readmission between dually and non-dually eligible beneficiaries and 50.7% of the disparity in the risk of readmission between beneficiaries living in areas with the highest and lowest social deprivation. Analysis suggested that after hospitalization for pneumonia, 7-day follow-up mediated nearly all (97.5%) of the increased risk of readmission between non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White beneficiaries.ConclusionsImproving rates of follow-up could be a strategy to reduce readmissions for all beneficiaries and reduce disparities in readmission based on sociodemographic characteristics.
Project description:There is growing concern about the health of older US adults who live in rural areas, but little is known about how mortality has changed over time for low-income Medicare beneficiaries residing in rural areas compared with their urban counterparts. We evaluated whether all-cause mortality rates changed for rural and urban low-income Medicare beneficiaries dually enrolled in Medicaid, and we studied disparities between these groups. The study cohort included 11,737,006 unique dually enrolled Medicare beneficiaries. Between 2004 and 2017 all-cause mortality declined from 96.6 to 92.7 per 1,000 rural beneficiaries (relative percentage change: -4.0 percent). Among urban beneficiaries, declines in mortality were more pronounced (from 86.9 to 72.8 per 1,000 beneficiaries, a relative percentage change of -16.2 percent). The gap in mortality between rural and urban beneficiaries increased over time. Rural mortality rates were highest in East North Central states and increased modestly in West North Central states during the study period. Public health and policy efforts are urgently needed to improve the health of low-income older adults living in rural areas.
Project description:ImportanceSatisfaction with care is associated with improved quality of care and health outcomes. Sensory impairment can be a barrier to effective communication and access to care, and this may result in reduced satisfaction with care.ObjectiveThis study examined the association between sensory impairment and health care satisfaction among Medicare beneficiaries.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used data from the 2017 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS), a nationally representative in-person survey of Medicare beneficiaries. Functional sensory impairment was categorized as no sensory impairment, hearing impairment, vision impairment, and dual sensory impairment. Patient dissatisfaction included responses on quality of care, ease to get to a doctor, out-of-pocket costs paid, information given, and doctors' concern with overall health rather than an isolated symptom or disease.ExposuresSelf-reported functional sensory impairment.Main outcomes and measuresMultivariable-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) of the association between dissatisfaction with care and sensory impairment.ResultsA total of 10 783 respondents representing 44 736 889 Medicare beneficiaries (8944 [85.3%] aged ≥65 years, 5733 [52.9%] women, and 8195 [75.5%] non-Hispanic White) were included. Dual sensory impairment compared with no sensory impairment was associated with the highest odds of dissatisfaction across outcomes, including quality of care (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.12-2.08). Compared with no sensory impairment, having dual sensory impairment (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.40-2.37), hearing impairment (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.29-2.17), or vision impairment (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.18-2.08) were associated with dissatisfaction with the information provided about what was wrong. Those with hearing impairment (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.03-1.86) or dual sensory impairment (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.55-2.66) were more likely to be dissatisfied with doctors' concern with overall health compared with those with no sensory impairment. Having dual sensory impairment or vision impairment only was associated with greater odds of dissatisfaction with ease to get to a doctor (dual sensory: OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.24-2.30; vision: OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.14-2.31) and out-of-pocket costs paid (dual sensory: OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.04-1.54; vision: OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.07-1.61).Conclusions and relevanceThese findings contribute to the growing body of literature on sensory impairment and patient satisfaction and have implications for health care system planning and spending to provide patient-centered care for older adults.