Dataset Information

Geographical Variation in Health Spending Across the US Among Privately Insured Individuals and Enrollees in Medicaid and Medicare.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Little is known about small-area variations in health care spending and utilization across the 3 major funders of health care in the US: Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers.

Objective

To measure regional health spending and utilization across Medicare, Medicaid, and the privately insured; to observe whether there are regions that are simultaneously low spending for all 3 payers; and to determine what factors are correlated with regional spending and utilization by payer.

Design, setting, and participants

Observational cross-sectional analysis of the US health system in 2016 and 2017 for 241 of 306 hospital referral regions (HRRs) and 2 states. Participants include individuals with employer-sponsored coverage from Aetna, Humana, or UnitedHealth; individuals with Medicaid fee-for-service coverage in 2016 and 2017; and individuals with Medicare coverage. The analysis was carried out from January 2020 to May 2022.

Main outcomes and measures

Spending per beneficiary and inpatient days per beneficiary by payer and overall.

Results

The data include 25 381 167 individuals with employer-sponsored coverage, 69 891 299 with Medicaid coverage in 2016 and 2017, and 26 711 426 individuals with Medicare fee-for-service coverage. The percentage of enrollees who identified as female was 54.1% in the Medicaid program, 56.2% in the Medicare program, and 50.4% in private insurance. The mean (SD) age was 26.9 (21.8) years for Medicaid and 75.0 (7.9) years for Medicare enrollees; for private insurance enrollees, just age brackets were reported: 18 to 24 years (15.9%), 25 to 34 years (24.2%), 35 to 44 years (21.3%), 45 to 54 years (20.8%), and 55 to 64 years (17.8%). In 2017, the mean (SD) HRR-level spending per beneficiary was $4441 ($710) for private insurance, $10 281 ($1294) for Medicare, and $6127 ($1428) for Medicaid. Across HRRs, the correlation coefficients and 95% CIs were 0.020 (-0.106 to 0.146; P = .76) for private insurance and Medicare spending, 0.213 (0.090 to 0.330; P < .001) for private insurance and Medicaid, and 0.162 (0.037 to 0.282; P < .01) for Medicare and Medicaid. Just 3 HRRs (Boulder, Colorado; Bloomington, Illinois; and Olympia, Washington) were in the lowest spending quintile for all 3 insurance programs; 4 HRRs were in the highest (The Bronx, New York; Manhattan, New York; White Plains, New York; and Dallas, Texas). By contrast, the correlation coefficients and 95% CIs for utilization, measured in hospital days, were 0.465 (0.361 to 0.559; P < .001) for private insurance and Medicare, 0.527 (0.429 to 0.612; P < .001) for private insurance and Medicaid, and 0.278 (0.157 to 0.390; P < .001) for Medicare and Medicaid.

Conclusions and relevance

These findings suggest that payer-specific factors are correlated with health spending variation among Medicare beneficiaries, Medicaid beneficiaries, and the commercially insured and that payer-specific policies will be necessary to improve efficiency in the US health sector.

SUBMITTER: Cooper Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9301520 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Geographical Variation in Health Spending Across the US Among Privately Insured Individuals and Enrollees in Medicaid and Medicare.

Cooper Zack Z Stiegman Olivia O Ndumele Chima D CD Staiger Becky B Skinner Jonathan J

JAMA network open 20220701 7

<h4>Importance</h4>Little is known about small-area variations in health care spending and utilization across the 3 major funders of health care in the US: Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers.<h4>Objective</h4>To measure regional health spending and utilization across Medicare, Medicaid, and the privately insured; to observe whether there are regions that are simultaneously low spending for all 3 payers; and to determine what factors are correlated with regional spending and utilization by ...[more]

PMID: 35857326

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine how the rise of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic impacted Medicaid enrollees' access to opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment.Data sources and study settingElectronic health records from Northwestern Medicine, a large midwestern academic health system, from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2021.Study designThe exposure was the expansion of telehealth services during the COVID-19 pandemic. A difference-in-differences design was used to determine the impact of telehealth on the probability of receiving any OUD care, any in-person OUD care, and any telehealth OUD care in a month.Data collection/extraction methodsThe study included Medicaid and privately insured patients older than 18 years of age, diagnosed with OUD, who had any encounter with the Northwestern Medicine system. All outpatient visits with OUD as the primary diagnosis were included in the analysis. There were 486 individuals in the sample and 17,496 person-month observations.Principal findingsAfter the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medicaid enrollees are 4.5 percentage points (percentage change, 43.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.7 to 0.3 percentage points; p = 0.035) less likely to receive any OUD care in a month, relative to privately insured patients. While no statistically significant differences in the likehood of receiving in-person OUD care were detected between the groups after exposure, we did observe that Medicaid enrollees are 3.6 percentage points (percentage change 64.2%; 95% CI 6.0 to 1.1 percentage points; p = 0.004) less likely to receive any telehealth OUD care in a month relative to privately insured patients.ConclusionsWhile those with private insurance were able to maintain OUD treatment during the pandemic by supplementing in-person care with telehealth, Medicaid enrollees experienced a drop in overall OUD treatment rates due to lower telehealth use. The rise of telehealth for OUD treatment might contribute to widening care gaps for Medicaid enrollees.

Project description:ImportanceAdministrative records indicate that more than half of the 80 million Medicaid enrollees identify as belonging to a racial and ethnic minority group. Despite this, disparities within the Medicaid program remain understudied. For example, we know of no studies examining racial differences in Medicaid spending, a potential measure of how equitably state resources are allocated.ObjectivesTo examine whether and to what extent there are differences in health care spending and utilization between Black and White enrollees in Medicaid.Design setting and participantsThis cross-sectional study used calendar year 2016 administrative data from 3 state Medicaid programs and included 1 966 689 Black and White Medicaid enrollees. Analyses were performed between January 28, 2021, and October 18, 2021.ExposuresSelf-reported race.Main outcomes and measuresRates and racial differences in health care spending and utilization (including Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set [HEDIS] access measures).ResultsOf 1 966 689 Medicaid adults and children (mean [SD] age, 20.3 [17.1] years; 1 119 136 [56.9%] female), 867 183 (44.1%) self-identified as non-Hispanic Black and 1 099 506 (55.9%) self-identified as non-Hispanic White. Results were adjusted for age, sex, Medicaid eligibility category, zip code, health status, and usual source of care. On average, annual spending on Black adult (19 years or older) Medicaid enrollees was $317 (95% CI, $259-$375) lower than White enrollees, a 6% difference. Among children (18 years or younger), annual spending on Black enrollees was $256 (14%) lower (95% CI, $222-$290). Adult Black enrollees also had 19.3 (95% CI, 16.78-21.84), or 4%, fewer primary care encounters per 100 enrollees per year compared with White enrollees. Among children, the differences in primary care utilization were larger: Black enrollees had 90.1 (95% CI, 88.2-91.8) fewer primary care encounters per 100 enrollees per year compared with White enrollees, a 23% difference. Black enrollees had lower utilization of most other services, including high-value prescription drugs, but higher emergency department use and rates of HEDIS preventive screenings.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of US Medicaid enrollees in 3 states, Black enrollees generated lower spending and used fewer services, including primary care and recommended care for acute and chronic conditions, but had substantially higher emergency department use. While Black enrollees had higher rates of HEDIS preventive screenings, ensuring equitable access to all services in Medicaid must remain a national priority.

Project description:BackgroundMedicaid expansion among previously uninsured individuals has led to improved healthcare access. However, considerably lower reimbursement rates of Medicaid have raised concerns on the unintended consequence of lower utilization of life-saving therapies and inferior outcomes compared with private insurance. We examined the rates of revascularization and in-hospital mortality among Medicaid beneficiaries versus privately insured individuals hospitalized with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).Methods and resultsWe queried the National Inpatient Sample from 2012 to 2015 for STEMI hospitalizations with Medicaid or private insurance as primary payer. Hospitalizations with the following criteria were excluded: (1) age <18 or ≥65 years, (2) transfer to another acute care facility, and (3) left against medical advice. Outcomes were compared in propensity score-matched cohort based on demographics, socioeconomic status (income based), clinical comorbidities, including drug and alcohol use, STEMI acuity (cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock), and hospital characteristics. A total of 42 645 and 171 545 STEMI hospitalizations were identified as having Medicaid and private insurance, respectively. In unadjusted analyses, Medicaid beneficiaries with STEMI had lower rates of coronary revascularization (88.9% versus 92.3%; odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.65-0.70) and higher rates of in-hospital mortality (4.9% versus 2.8%; odds ratio, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.72-1.91) compared with privately insured individuals ( P<0.001 for both). In propensity-matched cohort of 40 870 hospitalizations per group, similar results for lower rates of revascularization (89.1% versus 91.1%; odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.76-0.84) and higher in-hospital mortality (4.9% versus 3.7%; odds ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.26-1.45) were observed in Medicaid compared with private insurance, despite extensive matching ( P<0.001 for both).ConclusionsMedicaid beneficiaries with STEMI had lower rates of revascularization, although small absolute difference, and higher in-hospital mortality compared with privately insured individuals. Further studies are needed to identify and understand the variation in STEMI outcomes by insurance status.

Dataset Information

Geographical Variation in Health Spending Across the US Among Privately Insured Individuals and Enrollees in Medicaid and Medicare.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Geographical Variation in Health Spending Across the US Among Privately Insured Individuals and Enrollees in Medicaid and Medicare.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets