Abstract

In the Medicare Advantage (MA) program, Medicare enrollees may be steered by their health plan to specific hospitals. Little is known about the quality of hospitals that serve MA enrollees. To compare the quality of hospitals that admit MA enrollees with the quality of those that admit traditional Medicare enrollees. This cross-sectional study used data from the 2012 to 2016 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review to compare quality of care, as measured by the star rating given by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and readmission rates, in hospitals that serve MA enrollees and traditional Medicare enrollees using multinomial logit models. Participants were 7 130 610 Medicare beneficiaries admitted to 2994 acute care hospitals across the United States in 2016. Data were analyzed between August 2018 and August 2019. The exposure was MA enrollment. Adjusters included demographic and clinical characteristics and zip code fixed effects. Hospital Compare star ratings and quintiles of performance in 30-day readmission rates. The sample included 7 130 610 Medicare beneficiaries in 2016 (54.3% female; mean [SD] age, 72.7 [13.2] years). Of 12 190 270 total hospitalizations, 1 211 293 traditional Medicare and 494 352 MA patients were admitted to 718 low-readmission hospitals and 1 205 586 traditional Medicare and 526 955 MA patients were admitted to 597 high-readmission hospitals. Accounting for observed patient characteristics, MA enrollees less often entered either low- or high-quality hospitals and were more often admitted to average-quality hospitals. For nonemergent hospitalizations, MA enrollees were 1.9 percentage points (95% CI, 1.5-2.2 percentage points) less likely to enter a low-readmissions hospital, 5.1 percentage points (95% CI, 4.6-5.6 percentage points) more likely to enter an average-readmissions hospital, and 3.2 percentage points (95% CI, 2.9-3.5 percentage points) less likely to enter a high-readmissions hospital compared with traditional Medicare enrollees. Patients with MA were also 2.6 percentage points (95% CI, 2.2-2.9 percentage points) less likely to enter a 1- to 2-star hospital, 5.5 percentage points (95% CI, 4.9-5.9 percentage points) more likely to enter a 3-star hospital, and 2.8 percentage points (95% CI, 2.5-3.2 percentage points) less likely to enter a 4- to 5-star hospital compared with traditional Medicare enrollees. The differences were less pronounced for emergency admissions. This study found that enrollees in MA plans were more likely to be admitted to average-quality hospitals instead of either high- or low-quality hospitals, suggesting that MA plans may be steering their enrollees to specific hospitals.

Highlights

  • More than one-third of all Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in the Medicare Advantage (MA)[1] program, in which private insurance companies receive capitated payments to finance enrollees’ care needs.[2]

  • MA enrollees were 1.9 percentage points less likely to enter a low-readmissions hospital, 5.1 percentage points more likely to enter an average-readmissions hospital, and 3.2 percentage points less likely to enter a high-readmissions hospital compared with traditional Medicare enrollees

  • Patients with MA were 2.6 percentage points less likely to enter a 1- to 2-star hospital, 5.5 percentage points more likely to enter a 3-star hospital, and 2.8 percentage points less likely to enter a 4- to 5-star hospital compared with traditional Medicare enrollees

Read more

Summary

Introduction

More than one-third of all Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in the Medicare Advantage (MA)[1] program, in which private insurance companies receive capitated payments to finance enrollees’ care needs.[2]. Very little is known about the differences in the quality of hospitals that serve MA enrollees compared with those serving TM enrollees. In MA, the capitated payments that plans receive provide dual incentives to both reduce spending on unnecessary care and improve quality to prevent future expenditures. These incentives, and the flexibility MA plans have to steer their enrollees to specific practitioners, may lead to differences in the quality of care received by MA and TM enrollees. Owing to a general lack of data on MA enrollees, it is not currently known what other differences in quality might exist

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.