Abstract

Considering growing disparities in health outcomes between rural and urban areas of Appalachia, this study compared the incremental Medicaid costs of pediatric concurrent care (implemented by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) versus standard hospice care. Data on 1,788 pediatric hospice patients, from the Appalachian region, collected between 2011 and 2013, were obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Incremental per-patient-per-month (PPM) costs of enrollment in concurrent versus standard hospice care were analyzed using multilevel generalized linear models. Increments for analysis were hospice length of stay (LOS). For rural children enrolled in concurrent hospice care, the mean Medicaid cost of hospice care was $3,954 PPPM (95% CI: $3,223-$4,684) versus $1,933 PPPM (95% CI: $1,357-$2,509) for urban. For rural children enrolled in standard hospice care, the mean Medicaid cost was $2,889 PPPM (95% CI: $2,639-$3,139) versus $1,122 PPPM (95% CI: $980-$1,264) for urban. There were no statistically significant differences in Medicaid costs for LOS of 1 day. However, for LOS between 2 and 14 days, concurrent enrollment decreased total costs for urban children (IC = $-236.9 PPPM, 95% CI: $-421-$-53). For LOS of 15 days or more, concurrent care had higher costs compared to standard care, for both rural (IC = $1,399 PPPM, 95% CI: $92-$2,706) and urban children (IC = $1,867 PPPM, 95% CI: $1,172-$2,363). The findings revealed that Medicaid costs for concurrent hospice care were highest among children in rural Appalachia. Future research on factors of high costs of rural care is needed.

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.