FFS Enrollees Research Articles

Association of enrollment in Medicare Advantage plans versus fee-for-service in patients with a late-stage diagnosis of gynecologic cancer.

11140 Background: In the United States, uterine cancer is the most common gynecologic (GYN) cancer; and ovarian cancer causes more deaths each year than any other GYN cancer. There are currently no recommended population-wide screening tests for ovarian or uterine cancer, which are heavily concentrated in older women. Medicare is the primary health insurer for 97% of Americans aged 65 years and older. This study is the first to examine the association between Medicare enrollment plan – Medicare Advantage (MA) versus fee-for-service (FFS) – and stage at diagnosis among older women newly diagnosed with ovarian or uterine cancer. Methods: Using the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries and Medicare enrollment data, we identified 101,193 women aged 65 years and older with newly diagnosed ovarian or uterine cancer between 2007-2019. We categorized patients into two groups: 1) those continuously enrolled in Medicare MA for six months prior to their diagnosis, through the diagnosis month, and the month following diagnosis; 2) those continuously enrolled in Medicare FFS within the same eight-month window. Late-stage was defined as “Distant” stage (with “Local” and “Regional” stages representing an earlier-stage diagnosis) using the SEER Summary Stage variable. The association between Medicare enrollment plan and stage was examined through multivariable logistic regression modeling that adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics. The influence of each predictor on the difference in the probability of late stage was summarized as an adjusted marginal effect (ME). Results: Among uterine cancer patients, 37% had MA insurance. Compared with Medicare FFS enrollees, the adjusted percentage of late-stage diagnosis was 0.6 percentage points (ppt) lower for MA enrollees (95% CI = -1.1-(-0.1); P<0.05). Notably, patients were more likely to have a late-stage uterine diagnosis if they were: non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic (vs. non-Hispanic White); age 75 and older (vs. between 65 -74); and residing in a lower SES neighborhood. Among ovarian cancer patients, 34% had MA insurance. We found no significant difference between Medicare MA and FFS enrollees in ovarian cancer stage at diagnosis. Of note, Non-Hispanic Black patients were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with late-stage disease compared to Non-Hispanic White, and likewise for patients aged 75 and older (vs. between 65-74). Conclusions: Among Medicare beneficiaries (age 65+) diagnosed with uterine cancer, those enrolled in an MA plan were significantly less likely to be diagnosed at a later stage. In similar analyses for ovarian cancer, there was no such MA - FFS difference in the probability of late-stage. As enrollment in Medicare Advantage plans continues to grow, it becomes increasingly important to identify whether there are significant outcome differences between MA and FFS plans.

Comparison of Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility and Use between Commercial, Medicare, and Medicare Advantage Enrollees

ObjectiveLung cancer screening does not require patient cost-sharing for insured people in the U.S. Little is known about whether other factors associated with patient selection into different insurance plans affect screening rates. We examined screening rates for enrollees in commercial, Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS), and Medicare Advantage plans. MethodSCounty-level smoking rates from the 2017 County Health Rankings were used to estimate the number of enrollees eligible for lung cancer screening in two large retrospective claims databases covering: a 5% national sample of Medicare FFS enrollees; and 100% sample of enrollees associated with large commercial and Medicare Advantage carriers. Screening rates were estimated using observed claims, stratified by payer, before aggregation into national estimates by payer and demographics. Chi-square tests were used to examine differences in screening rates between payers. ResultsThere were 1,077,142 enrollees estimated to be eligible for screening. The overall estimated screening rate for enrollees by payer was 1.75% for commercial plans, 3.37% for Medicare FFS, and 4.56% for Medicare Advantage plans. Screening rates were estimated to be lowest among females (1.55%-4.02%), those aged 75-77 years (0.63%-2.87%), those residing in rural areas (1.88%-3.56%), and those in the West (1.16%-3.65%). Among Medicare FFS enrollees, screening rates by race/ethnicity were non-Hispanic White (3.71%), non-Hispanic Black (2.17%) and Other (1.68%). ConclusionsConsiderable variation exists in lung cancer screening between different payers and across patient characteristics. Efforts targeting historically vulnerable populations could present opportunities to increase screening.

Differences in Telehealth During COVID-19 Between Commercial and Medicaid Enrollees

To compare how in-person evaluation and management (E&M) visits and telehealth use differed during the COVID-19 pandemic between commercially insured and Medicaid enrollees, and to assess how insurance plan type-fee-for-service (FFS) vs managed care (MC)-and enrollee characteristics contributed to these differences. Retrospective cohort analysis of 2019 and 2020 data from the commercially insured California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) and the California Medicaid program (Medi-Cal). We conducted unadjusted comparisons of per capita E&M visits and the share of visits conducted via telehealth by payer (CalPERS vs Medi-Cal) and plan type (FFS vs MC). We estimated linear regressions of telehealth use that adjusted for patient demographics, rurality, and internet access. Among Medi-Cal enrollees, we examined telehealth use differences based on race, language, and citizenship status. Regression-adjusted share of telehealth visits as a proportion of all E&M visits was 22.6% for CalPERS FFS patients (the reference group), 38.2% for Medi-Cal FFS patients, 46.0% for Medi-Cal MC patients, and 53.5% for CalPERS MC patients. Among Medi-Cal enrollees, telehealth use as a share of all E&M visits was higher among Spanish speakers, female enrollees, and rural enrollees. Across most demographic characteristics, Medi-Cal patients enrolled in FFS were less likely to receive telehealth compared with those enrolled in MC. During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, California MC enrollees had higher rates of telehealth use compared with FFS enrollees, regardless of insurer. Among FFS enrollees, those enrolled in Medicaid had higher rates of telehealth use compared with those insured by CalPERS. Telehealth policies should be aware of this heterogeneity, as well as its implications for equity of telehealth access.

The Impact of Nurse Practitioner-Led Primary Care on Quality and Cost for Medicaid-Enrolled Patients in States With Pay Parity.

Studies have established that nurse practitioners (NPs) deliver primary care comparable to physicians in quality and cost, but most focus on Medicare, a program that reimburses NPs less than physicians. In this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated the quality and cost implications of receiving primary care from NPs compared to physicians in 14 states that reimburse NPs at the Medicaid fee-for-service (FFS) physician rate (i.e., pay parity). We linked national provider and practice data with Medicaid data for adults with diabetes and children with asthma (2012-2013). We attributed patients to primary care NPs and physicians based on 2012 evaluation & management claims. Using 2013 data, we constructed claims-based primary care quality measures and condition-specific costs of care for FFS enrollees. We estimated the effect of NP-led care on quality and costs using: (1) weighting to balance observable confounders and (2) an instrumental variable (IV) analysis using differential distance from patients' residences to primary care practices. Adults with diabetes received comparable quality of care from NPs and physicians at similar cost. Weighted results showed no differences between NP- and physician-attributed patients in receipt of recommended care or diabetes-related hospitalizations. For children with asthma, costs of NP-led care were lower but quality findings were mixed: NP-led care was associated with lower use of appropriate medications and higher rates of asthma-related emergency department visits but similar rates of asthma-related hospitalization. IV analyses revealed no evidence of differences in quality between NP- and physician-led care. Our findings suggest that in states with Medicaid pay parity, NP-led care is comparable to physician-led care for adults with diabetes, while associations between NP-led care and quality were mixed for children with asthma. Increased use of NP-led primary care may be cost-neutral or cost-saving, even under pay parity.

Growth of Fee-for-Service Medicare Home-Based Medical Care Within Private Residences and Domiciliary Care Settings in the U.S., 2012-2019.

Home-based medical care (HBMC) delivers physician or advanced practice provider-led medical services for patients in private residences and domiciliary settings (eg, assisted living facilities, group/boarding homes). We aimed to examine the time trends in HBMC utilization by care settings. Analyses of HBMC utilization at the national and state levels during the years 2012-2019. With Medicare public use files, we calculated the state-level utilization rate of HBMC among fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries, measured by visits per 1000 FFS enrollees, in private residences and domiciliary settings, both separately and combined. We assessed the trend of HBMC utilization over time via linear mixed models with random intercept for state, adjusting for the following state-level markers of HBMC supply and demand: number of HBMC providers, state ranking of total assisted living and residential care capacity, and the proportion of FFS beneficiaries with dementia, dual eligibility for Medicaid, receiving home health services, and Medicare Advantage. Total HBMC visits in the United States increased from 3,911,778 in 2012 to 5,524,939 in 2019. The median (interquartile range) state-level HBMC utilization rate per 1000 FFS population was 67.6 (34.1-151.3) visits overall, 17.3 (7.9-41.9) visits in private residences, and 47.7 (23.1-86.6) visits in domiciliary settings. The annual percentage increase of utilization rates was significant for all care settings in crude models (3%-8%), and remained significant for overall visits and visits in domiciliary settings (2%-4%), but not in private residences. The national-level growth in HBMC from 2012-2019 was largely driven by a growth of HBMC occurring in domiciliary settings. To meet the needs of a growing aging population, future studies should focus efforts on policy and payment issues to address inequities in access to HBMC services for homebound older adults, and examine drivers of HBMC growth at regional and local levels.

Comparison of the use of the top-ranked cancer hospitals between Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare.

To compare the use of top-ranked cancer hospitals for complex cancer surgery between Medicare Advantage (MA) and traditional Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) enrollees. Cross-sectional analysis of Medicare claims and enrollment data. The study used Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files to compare differences in use of top-ranked cancer hospitals for complex cancer surgery (lobectomy, esophagectomy, gastrectomy, colectomy, and the Whipple procedure [pancreaticoduodenectomy]) between MA and FFS enrollees 65 years and older who underwent the surgery in 2015 to 2017. After adjusting for demographic characteristics and county fixed effects, MA enrollees were less likely to use top-ranked cancer hospitals than FFS enrollees by 6.0percentage points (95% CI, 4.7-7.2) overall; the difference varied from 3.5 percentage points (95% CI, 2.5-4.6) for colectomy to 14.3 percentage points (95% CI, 10.9-17.8) for the Whipple procedure. The difference in cancer surgery rate at a top-ranked cancer hospital between MA and FFS enrollees was larger for MA plans without out-of-network (OON) benefits (-7.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.1 to -5.9) than for MA plans with OON benefits (-2.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.9 to -1.7). MA enrollees were less likely to use top-ranked cancer hospitals for complex cancer surgery than FFS enrollees. This difference was larger for MA plans with more restrictive OON policies. These findings suggest that MA enrollees, particularly those with lower OON benefits, may have restricted access to top-ranked hospitals for cancer care compared with FFS enrollees.

Medicaid managed care and preventable emergency department visits in the United States.

ObjectivesIn the United States the percentage of Medicaid enrollees in some form of Medicaid managed care has increased more than seven-fold since 1990, e.g., up from 11% in 1991 to 82% in 2017. Yet little is known about whether and how this major change in Medicaid insurance affects how recipients use hospital emergency rooms. This study compares the performance of Medicaid health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and fee-for-service (FFS) Medicaid regarding the occurrence of potentially preventable emergency department (ED) use.MethodsUsing data from the 2003–2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), a nationally representative survey of the non-institutionalized US population, we estimated multivariable logistic regression models to examine the relationship between Medicaid HMO status and potentially preventable ED use. To accommodate the composition of the Medicaid population, we conducted separate repeated cross-sectional analyses for recipients insured through both Medicaid and Medicare (dual eligibles) and for those insured through Medicaid only (non-duals). We explicitly addressed the possibility of selection bias into HMOs in our models using propensity score weighting.ResultsWe found that the type of Medicaid held by a recipient, i.e., whether an HMO or FFS coverage, was unrelated to the probability that an ED visit was potentially preventable. This finding emerged both among dual eligibles and among non-duals, and it occurred irrespective of the adopted analytical strategy.ConclusionsWithin the U.S. Medicaid program, Medicaid HMO and FFS enrollees are indistinguishable in terms of the occurrence of potentially preventable ED use. Policymakers should consider this finding when evaluating the pros and cons of adopting Medicaid managed care.

Random survival forests using linked data to measure illness burden among individuals before or after a cancer diagnosis: Development and internal validation of the SEER-CAHPS illness burden index

PurposeTo develop and internally validate an illness burden index among Medicare beneficiaries before or after a cancer diagnosis. MethodsData source: SEER-CAHPS, linking Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry, Medicare enrollment and claims, and Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (Medicare CAHPS) survey data providing self-reported sociodemographic, health, and functional status information. To generate a score for everyone in the dataset, we tabulated 4 groups within each annual subsample (2007–2013): 1) Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries or 2) Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries, surveyed before cancer diagnosis; 3) MA beneficiaries or 4) Medicare FFS beneficiaries surveyed after diagnosis. Random survival forests (RSFs) predicted 12-month all-cause mortality and drew predictor variables (mean per subsample = 44) from 8 domains: sociodemographic, cancer-specific, health status, chronic conditions, healthcare utilization, activity limitations, proxy, and location-based factors. Roughly two-thirds of the sample was held out for algorithm training. Error rates based on the validation (“out-of-bag,” OOB) samples reflected the correctly classified percentage. Illness burden scores represented predicted cumulative mortality hazard. ResultsThe sample included 116,735 Medicare beneficiaries with cancer, of whom 73 % were surveyed after their cancer diagnosis; overall mean mortality rate in the 12 months after survey response was 6%. SEER-CAHPS Illness Burden Index (SCIBI) scores were positively skewed (median range: 0.29 [MA, pre-diagnosis] to 2.85 [FFS, post-diagnosis]; mean range: 2.08 [MA, pre-diagnosis] to 4.88 [MA, post-diagnosis]). The highest decile of the distribution had a 51 % mortality rate (range: 29–71 %); the bottom decile had a 1% mortality rate (range: 0–2 %). The error rate was 20 % overall (range: 9% [among FFS enrollees surveyed after diagnosis] to 36 % [MA enrollees surveyed before diagnosis]). ConclusionsThis new morbidity measure for Medicare beneficiaries with cancer may be useful to future SEER-CAHPS users who wish to adjust for comorbidity.

Second Primary Malignancy Among Patients with Plasma Cell Myeloma Receiving First-Line Lenalidomide-Based Therapy: A Population-Based Analysis

Introduction: Clinical trials have suggested that patients with plasma cell myeloma treated with lenalidomide may have an increased risk of second primary malignancies (SPM; Dimopoulos MA, et al., Blood. 2012). Whether such risks are of significant relevance in real-world clinical practice, particularly among older patients, remains to be investigated, as evidence thus far has been limited to few retrospective series. Methods: Using the linked SEER-Medicare database covering 35% of the US population (with successful linkage of >95% individuals aged 65 or over), we identified Medicare beneficiaries with plasma cell myeloma diagnosed in2007-2015, who received first-line anti-myeloma therapy. We limited our cohort to patients with complete records of outpatient prescriptions since diagnosis (including beneficiaries covered by fee-for-service [FFS]or health maintenance organization [HMO]Medicare plans), and who received at least one oral anti-myeloma agent (including steroids) within 90 days of diagnosis. We defined first-line lenalidomide-containing therapy as use of lenalidomide within 90 days of diagnosis. SPM was defined as a malignancy reported to a cancer registry >90 days after myeloma diagnosis and was classified as solid tumor or hematologic. We computed cumulative incidence function (CIF) of SPM (with death being a competing event) and compared SPM rates between patients treated with or without first-line lenalidomide using Fine-Gray's model, adjusting for age at diagnosis, sex, race and ethnicity, presence of a cancers before myeloma diagnosis, and plasmacytoma vs myeloma histology. All estimates are provided with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: The analysis included 9,850 Medicare beneficiaries starting their first-line therapy. Median age was 75 years [yr], 52% were men, 67% were white non-Hispanic, 21% had a previous malignancy, and 3% had a histologic designation of plasmacytoma. First-line lenalidomide was prescribed to 4,009 (41%) patients. Patients receiving lenalidomide were on average younger (median age, 74 vs 76 years [yr]; P <.001), and more likely to be white non-Hispanic (69 vs 66%; P=.002). During median follow up of 5.0 years, 423 patients (4.3%) developed SPM, including 361 solid tumors (85%) and 61 hematologic malignancies (14%). The most common SPM histology included cancer of the lung/bronchus (11%), colorectal cancer (11%), melanoma (10%), acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome (9%) and prostate cancer (7%). The cumulative incidence of any SPM at 5 yr was 5.3% (95%CI, 4.5-6.1%) for patients who received first-line lenalidomide, and 4.4% (95%CI, 3.9-5.0%) for those who did not (Fig. 1A). The 5 yr cumulative incidences for solid tumor SPMs were 4.7% (95%CI, 3.9-5.5%) with and 3.6% (95%CI, 3.1-4.2%) without lenalidomide exposure (Fig. 1B). The 5 yr cumulative incidences for hematologic SPMs were 0.6% (95%CI, 0.4-1.0%) with and 0.8% (95%CI, 0.6-1.1%) without lenalidomide exposure (Fig. 1C). In a multivariable competing-risk model, the use of first-line lenalidomide was not associated with a significantly increased risk of SPM (sub-hazard ratio [SHR], 1.06; 95%CI, 0.88-1.29; P=.53). Furthermore, the use of lenalidomide was not associated with increased risk of solid tumor SPM (SHR, 1.13; 95%CI 0.92-1.40; P=.24), or of a hematologic malignancy (SHR, 0.72; 95%CI 0.42-1.23; P=.23). In a sensitivity analysis, the rate of SPM was not significantly different between FFS vs HMO plan enrollees (5 yr CIF 4.7% vs 4.9%; SHR, 1.05; 95%CI 0.86-1.27; P=.65). Conclusions: In this large, population-based study, use of first-line lenalidomide therapy among older patients with myeloma was not associated with a statistically significantly increased risk of any SPM, either solid tumors or hematologic cancers. Additional factors such as dose and duration of lenalidomide therapy or concurrent use of alkylating agents may drive the risk of SPM in patients treated with lenalidomide and should be investigated in future studies. Disclosures Costa: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Fujimoto Pharmaceutical Corporation Japan: Other: Advisor. Olszewski:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.

Social and Health-Related Factors Associated with Enrollment in Medicare Advantage Plans in Older Adults.

We assessed the characteristics of older Mexican American enrollees in traditional fee-for-service (FFS) and Medicare Advantage (MA) plans and the factors associated with disenrollment from FFS and enrollment in MA plans. Longitudinal study linked with Medicare claims data. The Hispanic Established Populations for the Epidemiologic Study of the Elderly. Community-dwelling Mexican American older adults (N = 1455). We examined insurance status using the Medicare Beneficiary Summary File and estimated the association of sociodemographic and clinical factors with insurance plan switching. Among Mexican American older adults, FFS enrollees were more likely to be born in Mexico, speak Spanish, have lower levels of education, and have more disability than MA enrollees. Older adults with a larger number of limitations of instrumental activities of daily living (odds ratio [OR] = .50; 95% confidence interval [CI] = .26-.98) and more social support (OR = .70; 95% CI = .45-.98) were less likely to switch from FFS to MA compared with older adults with no limitations and less social support. Additionally, older adults living in counties with a greater number of MA plans were more likely to switch from FFS to MA (OR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.45-3.16), compared with counties with a lower number of MA plans. In counties with a higher number of MA plans, older adults with more social support had lower odds of switching from FFS to MA (OR = .48; 95% CI = .28-.82) compared with older adults with less social support. Compared with those enrolled in MA, older Mexican American adults enrolled in Medicare FFS are more socioeconomically disadvantaged and more likely to demonstrate poor health status. Stronger social support and increased physical limitations were strongly associated with less frequent switching from FFS to MA plans. Additionally, increased availability of MA plans at the county level is a significant driver of enrollment in MA plans. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:313-320, 2020.

Utilization of and Relationships With Primary Care Providers During the Transition to Medicaid Managed Care

The objective of this study was to determine whether seniors and disabled adults in Illinois’s Medicaid managed care (MMC) were more likely to see, maintain longitudinal relationships with, and have continuity of care with a primary care provider (PCP) compared with fee-for-service (FFS) Medicaid enrollees. Medicaid PCP service claims for 13,221 MMC and 54,625 FFS enrollees were analyzed using an inverse propensity score weighted difference-in-differences design to match the groups by demographic characteristics and historical Medicaid utilization. All data came from Medicaid claims data and corresponding administrative records. Regression analyses showed that enrollment in MMC was significantly related to each of the three outcomes; MMC enrollees were more likely than the FFS group to see a PCP during the 1-year post-period and have high levels of continuity of care with a single PCP. However, FFS enrollees were more likely to maintain a relationship with their PCP providers from the pre-period through the post-period. Therefore, while more people in MMC than FFS visit a PCP each year, for people in MMC, it is often a new provider relationship, which can be problematic for people with disabilities. Additional training for PCPs, to prepare them for working with people with disabilities, and additional efforts to expand the MMC network of providers are needed.

Association of Medicaid enrollee characteristics and primary care utilization with cancer outcomes for the period spanning Medicaid expansion in New Jersey.

Cancer outcomes for Medicaid enrollees may be affected by patients' primary care (PC) utilization and complex Medicaid enrollment dynamics, which have recently changed for many states under the Affordable Care Act. With New Jersey State Cancer Registry and linked Medicaid claims data, a retrospective cohort study was conducted for patients with incident breast, colorectal, or invasive cervical cancer (aged 21-64 years) diagnosed in 2012-2014. Associations of Medicaid enrollment factors and PC utilization with the stage at diagnosis and treatment delays were examined with multivariate logistic regression models. The study included 19,209 total cancer cases and 3253 linked Medicaid cases. Medicaid cases were more likely to be diagnosed at a late stage and to experience treatment delays in comparison with non-Medicaid cases. In adjusted analyses, Medicaid cases with 1 or more PC visits before the diagnosis had lower odds of a late-stage diagnosis (odds ratio, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.67) in comparison with Medicaid cases with no outpatient visits. New enrollees (<6 months) and longer term enrollees in fee-for-service (FFS) Medicaid had greater odds of a late-stage diagnosis and treatment delays in comparison with those in Medicaid managed care. Medicaid patients with cancer diagnosed just before and in the initial year of eligibility expansion had worse outcomes than non-Medicaid cases. Poor outcomes were especially pronounced among new enrollees, those without outpatient visits before their diagnosis, and FFS enrollees. Targeted strategies to enhance care continuity, including access to PC providers before the diagnosis and a better understanding of pathways to cancer care upon Medicaid enrollment, are needed to improve outcomes in this population.

Opioids in Georgia Medicaid: Gender and Insurance Disparities in Utilization and Potential Inappropriate Prescribing Practices.

Medicaid populations have been disproportionately affected by the opioid epidemic. In Georgia, opioid deaths have increased at more than twice the rate of the nation at large. It is unknown if certain populations within the Medicaid unduly receive opioid prescriptions or experience inappropriate prescribing of opioids. Thus, this study examines gender and insurance disparities in the use of opioids and the prevalence of indicators for potential inappropriate prescribing of opioids in the Georgia Medicaid population. Using individual Georgia Medicaid pharmacy claims data from 2012, disparities across gender (male/female) and type of insurance (fee-for-service (FFS)/managed care (MC)) were examined for the general use of opioids and potential inappropriate prescribing practices by providers. These outcome measures were taken from previous clinical guidelines and expert panels. T-tests were conducted to estimate significance in disparities across gender and type of insurance. Average number of opioid prescriptions received and average days of supply of opioids were higher among males than females (p<0.001), and among FFS patients than MC patients (p<0.001). Similarly, average incidences of potential inappropriate prescribing of opioids were higher among males (1.41) than females (0.83) (p<0.001), and among FFS patients (1.60) than MC patients (0.46) (p<0.001). Results indicate statistically significant disparities among male/female patients and FFS/MC patients in the general use of opioids and in potential inappropriate prescribing of opioids. Policies aimed at curbing potential inappropriate prescribing of opioids, especially among male and FFS enrollees are needed to reduce prescription drug abuse within this population.

Internal validation of Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) data capture for comprehensive managed care plan enrollees from 2007 to 2010.

Because of concerns over incomplete medical encounter capture in Medicaid capitated comprehensive managed care (CMC) plans, researchers have traditionally confined analyses to fee-for-service (FFS) enrollees. We aimed to evaluate the usability of data for CMC enrollees in Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) files for 29 states from 2007 to 2010. We applied 7 measures to MAX inpatient, other therapy, and prescription drug files for each state and study year. Four measures were based on "connectivity" criteria where we expected use of a select essential service to be closely connected to another, resulting in "service pairs." Three measures were based on "continuity" criteria where we expected patients to continue chronically used services or treatments when they switched enrollment from FFS to CMC plans. High proportions of continuity and comparable proportions of patients with complete service pairs relative to FFS enrollees may suggest complete data capture for CMC enrollees. Data of states that met preset criteria were considered usable for research and policy analyses. The completeness of CMC enrollees' data in MAX varied by states. Among 22 states having at least 5% CMC plan enrollment, data of 12 states met our quality standard and were considered usable starting in 2007. Four states had usable data starting in 2008 and one in 2009. The completeness of CMC enrollees' data in MAX improved over the study period. In 17 out of 29 states, CMC enrollees' data in selected years were comparable with FFS enrollees and can be considered for use in analysis.

Polypharmacy and Multimorbidity Among Medicaid Enrollees: A Multistate Analysis.

The purpose of this study is to explore the associations between polypharmacy and multimorbidity using conventional and novel measures of polypharmacy. In this cross-sectional study, data on fee-for-service (FFS) Medicaid enrollees with at least 1 chronic condition and aged 18-64 years (N = 38,329) were derived from the 2010 Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) files of Maryland and West Virginia. Polypharmacy, by the authors' novel definition, was determined as simultaneous use of ≥5 drugs for a consecutive period of 60 days. Multimorbidity was defined as having ≥2 chronic conditions based on the US Department of Health and Human Services framework. The association between multimorbidity and polypharmacy was examined with chi-square tests and logistic regression. Polypharmacy prevalence was estimated at 50.9% using the novel definition, as compared to 16.7% and 64.9% for the 2 commonly used conventional measures, respectively. For all 3 definitions, individuals with multimorbidity were more likely to have polypharmacy than those without multimorbidity (P < 0.001). The authors also consistently found, using all definitions, that those who were older, female, white, and eligible for Medicaid because of cash assistance were more likely to have polypharmacy (all P < 0.001). Polypharmacy was highly prevalent and significantly associated with multimorbidity among Medicaid FFS enrollees irrespective of the definitions used. The new measure may provide a more comprehensive and accurate estimation of polypharmacy than the conventional measures. These findings suggest the need for a paradigm shift from disease-specific care to patient-centered collaborative care to manage patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

Medicare modernization and diffusion of endoscopy in FFS medicare

ObjectiveTo examine how FFS Medicare utilization of endoscopy procedures for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening changed after implementation of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act (MMA) in 2006, which provided subsidized drug coverage and expanded the geographic availability of Medicare managed care plans across the US.Data Sources/Study Setting. Using secondary data from 100% FFS Medicare enrollees, we analyzed endoscopy utilization during two intervals, 2001-2005 and 2006-2009.Study designWe examined change in predictors of county-level endoscopy utilization rates based on a conceptual model of market supply and demand with spillovers from managed care practices. The equations for each period were estimated jointly in a spatial lag regression model that properly accounts for both place and time effects, allowing robust assessment of changes over time.Data collection/Extraction methodsAll Medicare FFS enrollees with both Parts A and B coverage who were age 65+, remained alive and living in the same state over the interval were included in the analyses. The later interval used a new cohort defined the same as the earlier interval. 100% Medicare denominator files were also used, providing county of address to use for county-level aggregation. The outcome variable was defined as county-level proportion of enrollees who ever used endoscopy over the interval.Principal findingsEndoscopy utilization by FFS Medicare increased, and became more accessible across the US. Medicare managed care plan spillovers onto FFS Medicare endoscopy utilization changed over time from a significant negative (restraining) effect in the early period to no significant effect by the later period.ConclusionsThe MMA eased budget constraints for seniors, making endoscopic CRC screening more affordable. The MMA policies also strengthened managed care business prospects, and enrollments in Medicare managed care escalated. The change in managed care spillover effects reflects the gradual acceptance of endoscopic CRC screening procedures, as they emerged as the gold standard during the period.

Physician Participation in Meaningful Use and Quality of Care for Medicare Fee-for-Service Enrollees.

The Meaningful Use initiative has made nearly $30 billion available through incentive programs to encourage provider adoption and use of electronic health records. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of outpatient physicians' participation in Meaningful Use on the quality of care provided to Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) enrollees. Retrospective cohort study. One hundred percent inpatient and outpatient Medicare FFS claims covering the period January 2010 through December 2012. 303,110 Medicare FFS enrollees from New York State. Hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs), diabetic retinopathy screening, diabetic nephropathy screening, colorectal cancer screening, and influenza vaccinations. Physician participation in the Meaningful Use initiative was not associated with reductions in ACSC-related hospitalizations (0.0 percentage points, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.0-0.1) or ED visits (0.0 percentage points, 95% CI: 0.0-0.1) relative to the comparison group. Meaningful Use participation was associated with higher odds of colorectal cancer screening (odds ratio (OR): 1.2, 95% CI: 1.1-1.4) relative to the comparison group, but not for diabetic retinopathy screening (OR: 1.1, 95% CI: 1.0-1.2), diabetic nephropathy screening (OR: 1.0, 95% CI: 0.8-1.2), or influenza vaccinations (OR: 1.1, 95% CI: 1.0-1.2). Similar results were found in secondary analyses of dually-eligible beneficiaries participating in both Medicare and Medicaid. Physician participation in Meaningful Use was not associated with substantial improvements on six quality measures.

Socioeconomic Differences in Use of Low-Value Cancer Screenings and Distributional Effects in Medicare.

Consuming low-value health care not only highlights inefficient resource use but also brings an important concern regarding the economics of disparities. We identify the relation of socioeconomic characteristics to the use of low-value cancer screenings in Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) settings, and quantify the amount subsidized from nonusers and taxpayers to users of these screenings. 2007-2013 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, Medicare FFS claims, and the Area Health Resource Files. Our sample included enrollees in FFS Part B for the entire calendar year. We excluded beneficiaries with a claims-documented or self-reported history of targeted cancers, or those enrolled in Medicaid or Medicare Advantage plans. We identified use of low-value Pap smears, mammograms, and prostate-specific antigen tests based on established algorithms, and estimated a logistic model with year dummies separately for each test. Secondary data analyses. We found a statistically significant positive association between privileged socioeconomic characteristics and use of low-value screenings. Having higher income and supplemental private insurance strongly predicted more net subsidies from Medicare. FFS enrollees who are better off in terms of sociodemographic characteristics receive greater subsidies from taxpayers for using low-value cancer screenings.

Differences in Nursing Home Quality Between Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare Patients

BackgroundMedicare Advantage (MA) enrollment is steadily growing, but little is known about the quality of nursing home (NH) care provided to MA enrollees compared to enrollees in traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare. ObjectivesTo compare MA and FFS enrollees' quality of NH care. DesignCross-sectional. SettingUS nursing homes. Participants2.17 million Medicare enrollees receiving care at an NH during 2011. MeasurementsCMS methodology was used to calculate the 18 Nursing Home Compare quality measures as applicable for each enrollee. ResultsAmong Medicare enrollees using NH in 2011, 17% were in MA plans. Most quality scores were similar between MA and FFS. After adjusting for facility, beneficiary age and gender, CMS Hierarchical Condition Category score, and geographic region, short-stay MA enrollees had statistically significantly lower rates of new or worsening pressure ulcers [relative risk (RR) = 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.71–0.82] and new antipsychotic use (RR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.80–0.83) but higher rates of moderate to severe pain (RR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.07–1.12), compared with short-stay FFS enrollees. MA long-stay enrollees had lower rates of antipsychotic use (RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.93–0.96) but had higher rates of incontinence (RR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.06–1.09) and urinary catheterization (RR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.06–1.13), compared with long-stay FFS enrollees. ConclusionOverall, we found few differences in NH quality scores between MA and FFS Medicare enrollees. MA enrollment was associated with better scores for pressure ulcers and antipsychotic use but worse scores for pain control, incontinence, and urinary catheterization. Results may be limited by residual case-mix differences between MA and FFS patients or by the small number of short-stay measures reported.

Comparing the Health Care Experiences of Medicare Beneficiaries with and without Depressive Symptoms in Medicare Managed Care versus Fee-for-Service.

To compare patient experiences and disparities for older adults with depressive symptoms in managed care (Medicare Advantage [MA]) versus Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS). Data came from the 2010 Medicare CAHPS survey, to which 220,040 MA and 135,874 FFS enrollees aged 65 and older responded. Multivariate linear regression was used to test whether case-mix-adjusted associations between depressive symptoms and patient experience differed for beneficiaries in MA versus FFS. Dependent measures included four measures of beneficiaries' experiences with doctors (e.g., reports of doctor communication) and seven measures of beneficiaries' experiences with plans (e.g., customer service). Beneficiaries with depressive symptoms reported worse experiences than those without depressive symptoms regardless of coverage type. For measures assessing interactions with the plan (but not for measures assessing interactions with doctors), the disadvantage for beneficiaries with versus without depressive symptoms was larger in MA than in FFS. Disparities in care experienced by older Medicare beneficiaries with depressive symptoms tend to be more negative in managed care than in FFS. Efforts are needed to identify and address the barriers these beneficiaries encounter to help them better traverse the managed care environment.