Dataset Information

Evaluation of US Hospital Episode Spending for Acute Inpatient Conditions After the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), US hospitals were exposed to a number of reforms intended to reduce spending, many of which, beginning in 2012, targeted acute care hospitals and often focused on specific diagnoses (eg, acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia) for Medicare patients. Other provisions enacted in the ACA and under budget sequestration (beginning in 2013) mandated Medicare fee cuts. Objective:To evaluate the association between the enactment of ACA reforms and 30-day price-standardized hospital episode spending. Design, Setting, and Participants:This policy evaluation included index discharges between January 1, 2008, and August 31, 2015, from a national random 20% sample of Medicare beneficiaries. Data analysis was performed from February 1, 2019 to July 8, 2020. Exposure:Payment reforms after passage of the ACA. Main Outcomes and Measures:30-day price-standardized episode payments. Three alternative estimation approaches were used to evaluate the association between reforms following the ACA and episode spending: (1) a difference-in-difference (DID) analysis among acute care hospitals, comparing spending for diagnoses commonly targeted by ACA programs with nontargeted diagnoses; (2) a DID analysis comparing acute care hospitals and critical access hospitals (not exposed to reforms); and (3) a generalized synthetic control analysis, comparing acute care and critical access hospitals. Supplemental analysis examined the degree to which Medicare fee cuts contributed to spending reductions. Results:A total of 7?634?242 index discharges (4?525?630 [59.2%] female patients; mean [SD] age, 79.31 [8.02] years) were included. All 3 approaches found that reforms following the ACA were associated with a significant reduction in episode spending. The DID estimate comparing targeted and untargeted diagnoses suggested that reforms following the ACA were associated with a -$431 (95% CI, -$492 to -$369; -2.87%) change in total spending, while the generalized synthetic control analysis suggested that reforms were associated with a -$1232 (95% CI, -$1488 to -$965; -10.12%) change in total episode spending, amounting in a total annual savings of $5.68 billion. Cuts to Medicare fees accounted for most of these savings. Conclusions and Relevance:In this policy evaluation, the ACA was associated with large reductions in US hospital episode spending.

SUBMITTER: Ibrahim AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7684450 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of US Hospital Episode Spending for Acute Inpatient Conditions After the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Ibrahim Andrew M AM Nuliyalu Ushapoorna U Lawton Emily J EJ O'Neil Stephen S Dimick Justin B JB Gulseren Baris B Sinha Shashank S SS Hollingsworth John M JM Engler Tedi A TA Ryan Andrew M AM

JAMA network open 20201102 11

<h4>Importance</h4>Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), US hospitals were exposed to a number of reforms intended to reduce spending, many of which, beginning in 2012, targeted acute care hospitals and often focused on specific diagnoses (eg, acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia) for Medicare patients. Other provisions enacted in the ACA and under budget sequestration (beginning in 2013) mandated Medicare fee cuts.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the asso ...[more]

PMID: 33226430

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) individual marketplaces are a source of insurance for millions of residents in the US. However, the association between enrollee risk, health spending, and metal tier selection remains unclear.ObjectivesTo describe individual marketplace enrollees' metal tier selections by risk score and assess enrollees' health spending by metal tier, risk score, and spending type.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective, cross-sectional study analyzed claims data from the Wakely Consulting Group ACA database, a deidentified claims database built on data voluntarily submitted by insurers. Enrollees with continuous, full-year enrollment in on-exchange or off-exchange ACA-qualified health plans during the 2019 contract year were included. Data analysis was conducted from March 2021 to January 2023.Main outcomes and measuresEnrollment totals, total spending, and out-of-pocket cost were calculated, stratified by metal tier and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) risk score for 2019.ResultsEnrollment and claims data were obtained for 1 317 707 enrollees (53.5% female; mean [SD] age, 46.35 [13.43] years) across all census areas, age groups, and sexes. Of these, 34.6% were on plans with cost-sharing reductions (CSRs), 75.5% did not have an assigned HCC, and 84.0% submitted at least 1 claim. Compared with enrollees in bronze plans (17.2%), enrollees were more likely to be classified in the top HHS-HCC risk quartile if they selected platinum (42.0%), gold (34.4%), or silver (29.7%) plans. The highest share of enrollees with $0 total spending was noted with the catastrophic (26.4%) and bronze (22.7%) plans, while gold plans had the lowest share (8.1%). Median total spending was lower among bronze plan enrollees ($593; IQR, $28-$2100) vs platinum ($4111; IQR, $992-$15 821) or gold ($2675; IQR, $728-$9070). Within the top risk score decile, CSR enrollees had less average total spending than any other metal tier by more than 10%.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of the ACA individual marketplace, enrollees who selected plans with higher actuarial value also had greater mean HHS-HCC risk scores and health spending. The findings suggest these differences may be associated with variation in benefit generosity by metal tier, enrollee's perceptions of future health needs, or other barriers to care access.

Project description:ImportanceFluoride varnish reduces children's tooth decay, yet few clinicians provide it. Most state Medicaid programs have covered this service during medical visits for children aged 1 to 5 years, but private insurers began covering it only in 2015 due to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandate that they cover a set of recommended preventive services without cost-sharing. Evidence on clinicians' behavior change postmandate is limited.ObjectiveTo examine monthly changes in fluoride varnish applications among pediatric clinicians following the ACA mandate.Design, setting, and participantsUsing all-payer claims data from Massachusetts, this cohort study applied an interrupted time-series approach with linear regression models comparing changes in monthly clinician-level outcomes before and after the mandate. Participants included clinicians who billed at least 5 well-child visits for patients aged 1 to 5 years and were observed at least once premandate. Adjusted for clinician fixed effects, models were assessed overall and separately for clinicians categorized by their monthly share of well-child visits paid by private insurers before the mandate: mostly private (>66% of visits paid by private insurers), mostly public (<33% of visits paid by private insurers), or mixed (33%-66% of visits paid by private insurers) insurance types. Analysis was performed from June 1, 2022, to July 31, 2023.ExposurePreenactment and postenactment of the ACA mandate for private insurers to cover fluoride varnish applications without cost-sharing.Main outcomes and measuresClinician-month measures of whether fluoride varnish was provided during at least 1 well-child visit and the share of such visits, analyzed separately for clinicians who did and did not apply fluoride varnish premandate.ResultsThe sample included 2405 clinicians, with 107 841 clinician-months. Premandate, 10.48% of the visits included fluoride varnish applications. Two years postmandate, the likelihood of ever applying fluoride varnish was 13.64 (95% CI, 10.97-16.32) percentage points higher. For clinicians providing fluoride varnish premandate, the share of visits with fluoride varnish increased by 9.22 (95% CI, 5.41-13.02) percentage points. This increase was observed in clinicians who treated children with insurance that was mostly mixed and mostly private; no substantial change was observed among those treating children with mostly public insurance.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of pediatric primary care clinicians, an association between the ACA mandate and an increase in fluoride varnish application was observed, especially among clinicians primarily treating privately insured patients and those applying it premandate. However, application remains infrequent, suggesting persistent barriers.

Project description:ImportanceThe Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) expanded Medicaid eligibility at the discretion of states to US individuals earning up to 138% of the federal poverty level (FPL) and made private insurance subsidies available to most individuals earning up to 400% of the FPL. Its national impact remains debated.ObjectiveTo determine the association of the ACA with ambulatory quality, patient experience, utilization, and cost.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used difference-in-differences (DiD) analyses comparing outcomes before (2011-2013) and after (2014-2016) ACA implementation for US adults aged 18 to 64 years with income below and greater than or equal to 400% of the FPL. Participants were respondents to the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a nationally representative annual survey. Data analysis was performed from January 2021 to March 2022.ExposuresACA implementation.Main outcomes and measuresFor quality and experience, this study examined previously published composites based on individual measures, including high-value care composites (eg, preventive testing) and low-value care composites (eg, inappropriate imaging), an overall patient experience rating, a physician communication composite, and an access-to-care composite. For utilization, outpatient, emergency, and inpatient encounters and prescribed medicines were examined. Overall and out-of-pocket expenditures were analyzed for cost.ResultsThe total sample included 123 171 individuals (mean [SD] age, 39.9 [13.4] years; 65 034 women [52.8%]). After ACA implementation, adults with income less than 400% of the FPL received increased high-value care (diagnostic and preventive testing) compared with adults with income 400% or higher of the FPL (change from 70% to 72% vs change from 84% to 84%; adjusted DiD, 1.20%; 95% CI, 0.18% to 2.21%; P = .02) with no difference in any other quality composites. Individuals with income less than 400% of the FPL had larger improvements in experience, communication, and access composites compared with those with income greater than or equal to 400% of the FPL (global rating of health, change from 69% to 73% vs change from 79% to 81%; adjusted DiD, 2.12%; 95% CI, 0.18% to 4.05%; P = .03). There were no differences in utilization or cost, except that receipt of primary care increased for those with lower income vs those with higher income (change from 65% to 66% vs change from 80% to 77%; adjusted DiD, 2.97%; 95% CI, 1.18% to 4.77%; P = .001) and total out-of-pocket expenditures decreased for those with lower income vs those with higher income (change from $504 to $439 vs from $757 to $769; adjusted DiD, -$105.50; 95% CI, -$167.80 to -$43.20; P = .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional national study, the ACA was associated with improved patient experience, communication, and access and decreased out-of-pocket expenditures, but little or no change in quality, utilization, and total cost.

Project description:Importance:The Affordable Care Act (ACA) was associated with a reduced number of Americans who reported being unable to afford medical care, but changes in actual health spending by households are not known. Objectives:To estimate changes in household spending on health care nationwide after implementation of the ACA. Design, Setting, and Participants:Population-based data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2015, and multivariable regression were used to examine changes in out-of-pocket spending, premium contributions, and total health spending (out-of-pocket plus premiums) after the ACA's coverage expansions on January 1, 2014. The study population included a nationally representative sample of US adults aged 18 to 64 years (n = 83 431). In addition, changes were assessed in the likelihood of exceeding affordability thresholds for each outcome and spending changes for income subgroups defined under the ACA to determine program eligibility at 138% or less, 139% to 250%, 251% to 400%, and greater than 400% of the federal poverty level (FPL). Exposure:Implementation of the ACA's major insurance programs on January 1, 2014. Main Outcomes and Measures:Mean individual-level out-of-pocket spending and premium payments and the percentage of persons experiencing high-burden spending, defined as more than 10% of family income for out-of-pocket expenses, more than 9.5% for premium payments, and more than 19.5% for out-of-pocket plus premium payments. Results:In this nationally representative survey of 83 431 adults (weighted frequency, 49.1% men and 50.9% women; median age, 40.3 years; interquartile range, 28.6-52.4 years), ACA implementation was associated with an 11.9% decrease (95% CI, -17.1% to -6.4%; P < .001) in mean out-of-pocket spending in the full sample, a 21.4% decrease (95% CI, -30.1% to -11.5%; P < .001) in the lowest-income group (≤138% of the FPL), an 18.5% decrease (95% CI, -27.0% to -9.0%; P < .001) in the low-income group (139%-250% of the FPL), and a 12.8% decrease (95% CI, -22.1% to -2.4%; P = .02) in the middle-income group (251%-400% of the FPL). Mean premium spending increased in the full sample (12.1%; 95% CI, 1.9%-23.3%) and the higher-income group (22.9%; 95% CI, 5.5%-43.1%). Combined out-of-pocket plus premium spending decreased in the lowest-income group only (-16.0%; 95% CI, -27.6% to -2.6%). The odds of household out-of-pocket spending exceeding 10% of family income decreased in the full sample (odds ratio [OR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.70-0.90) and in the lowest-income group (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67-0.97). The odds of high-burden premium spending increased in the middle-income group (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.03-1.59). Conclusions and Relevance:Implementation of the ACA was associated with reduced out-of-pocket spending, particularly for low-income persons. However, many of these individuals continue to experience high-burden out-of-pocket and premium spending. Repeal or substantial reversal of the ACA would especially harm poor and low-income Americans.

Project description:ImportanceMedicaid expansion is associated with increased access to health services, increased quality of medical care delivered, and reduced mortality, but little is known about its association with use of long-term care.ObjectiveTo examine the association of Medicaid expansion under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) with long-term care use among newly eligible low-income adults and among older adults whose eligibility did not change.Design, setting, and participantsThis difference-in-difference cohort study used data from the Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative longitudinal survey of persons 50 years or older. Long-term care use from 2008 to 2012 was compared with use from 2014 to 2016 among low-income adults aged 50 to 64 years without Medicare coverage residing in states in which Medicaid coverage expanded in 2014 and those living in states without expansion. Low-income adults who were covered by Medicare and were ineligible for expanded Medicaid were also included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from January 15, 2018, to December 31, 2019.ExposuresResidence in a state with Medicaid expansion in 2014.Main outcomes and measuresAny home health care use or any nursing home use in 2014 or 2016. All estimates are weighted to account for the Health and Retirement Study sampling design.ResultsAmong the 891 individuals likely eligible for expanded Medicaid, the mean (SD) age was 55.2 (3.1) years; 534 (53.4%) were women, 482 (49.5%) were married, and 661 (45.9%) were White non-Hispanic. Before the ACA-funded Medicaid expansion, 0.4% (95% CI, -0.3% to 1.1%) in expansion states and 1.0% (95% CI, -0.1% to 2.2%) in nonexpansion states used nursing homes, and 1.9% (95% CI, 0.4%-3.4%) in expansion states and 7.1% (95% CI, 4.7%-9.5%) in nonexpansion states used any formal home care. The ACA-funded Medicaid expansion was associated with an increase of 4.4 percentage points (95% CI, 2.8-6.1 percentage points) in the probability of any long-term care use among low-income, middle-aged adults, with increases in home health use (3.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 2.0-5.6 percentage points) and in any nursing home use (2.1 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.9-3.3 percentage points).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, ACA-funded Medicaid expansion was associated with an increase in any long-term care use among newly eligible low-income, middle-aged adults, suggesting that the population covered by the Medicaid expansion may have had unmet long-term care needs before expansion.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of US Hospital Episode Spending for Acute Inpatient Conditions After the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Publications

Evaluation of US Hospital Episode Spending for Acute Inpatient Conditions After the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets