Medicaid Spending Research Articles

Dual-Eligible Nursing Home Residents: Enrollment Growth In Managed Care Plans That Coordinate Care, 2013-20.

Dual-eligible beneficiaries have insurance through two distinct and uncoordinated programs: Medicaid, which pays for long-term care; and Medicare, which pays for medical care, including hospital stays. Concern that this system leads to poor quality and inefficient care, particularly for dual-eligible nursing home residents, has led policy makers to test managed care plans that provide incentives for coordinating care across Medicare and Medicaid. We examined enrollment in three such plans among dual-eligible beneficiaries receiving long-term nursing home care. Two of those plans, Medicare-Medicaid plans and Fully Integrated Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans, are integrated care plans that establish a global budget including Medicare and Medicaid spending. The third, Institutional Special Needs Plans, puts insurers and nursing homes at risk for Medicare spending but not Medicaid spending. Among dual-eligible nursing home residents, enrollment in these plans increased from 6.5percent of residents per month in 2013 to 16.9percent in 2020. Enrollment varied across counties but did not vary appreciably with respect to nursing home characteristics, including the share of residents with Medicaid. As policy makers pursue strategies to coordinate medical and long-term care for dual-eligible beneficiaries, it remains critical to evaluate how these plans influence the care of dual-eligible nursing home residents.

Bridging the gaps in pediatric complex healthcare: the case for home nursing care among children with medical complexity

BackgroundChildren with medical complexity (CMC) comprise < 1% of the pediatric population, but account for nearly one-third of healthcare expenditures. Further, while CMC account for up to 80% of pediatric inpatient hospital costs, only 2% of Medicaid spending is attributed to home healthcare. As a result, the current health system heavily relies on family caregivers to fill existing care gaps. This study aimed to: (1) examine factors associated with hospital admissions among CMC and (2) contextualize the potential for home nursing care to improve outcomes among CMC and their families in South Carolina (SC).MethodsThis mixed-methods study was conducted among CMC, their family caregivers, and physicians in SC. Electronic health records data from a primary care clinic within a large health system (7/1/2022-6/30/2023) was analyzed. Logistic regression examined factors associated with hospitalizations among CMC. In-depth interviews (N = 15) were conducted among physicians and caregivers of CMC statewide. Patient-level quantitative data is triangulated with conceptual findings from interviews.ResultsOverall, 39.87% of CMC experienced ≥ 1 hospitalization in the past 12 months. CMC with higher hospitalization risk were dependent on respiratory or neurological/neuromuscular medical devices, not non-Hispanic White, and demonstrated higher healthcare utilization. Interview findings contextualized efforts to reduce hospitalizations, and suggested adaptations related to capacity and willingness to provide complex care for CMC and their families.ConclusionsFindings may inform multi-level solutions for accessible, high-quality home nursing care among CMC and their families. Providers may learn from caregivers’ insight to emphasize family-centered care practices, acknowledging time and financial constraints while optimizing the quality of medical care provided in the home.

Quality, Spending, Utilization, and Outcomes Among Dual-Eligible Medicare-Medicaid Beneficiaries in Integrated Care Programs

Most dual-eligible Medicare-Medicaid beneficiaries are enrolled in bifurcated insurance programs that pay for different components of care. Therefore, policymakers are prioritizing expansion of integrated care plans (ICPs) that manage both Medicare and Medicaid benefits and spending. To review evidence of the association between ICPs and health care spending, quality, utilization, and patient outcomes among dual-eligible beneficiaries. A search was conducted of PubMed/MEDLINE (January 1, 2010, through November 1, 2023) and Google Scholar (January 1, 2010, through October 1, 2023) and augmented with reports from US federal and state government websites. Three categories of ICPs were evaluated: Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE), Medicare-Medicaid Plans (MMPs), and Fully Integrated Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans (FIDE-SNPs) and related models aligning Medicare and Medicaid coverage. The review included studies that evaluated beneficiaries dually eligible for and enrolled in full Medicaid; compared an ICP to a nonintegrated arrangement; and evaluated utilization, spending, care coordination, patient experience, or health for 100 or more beneficiaries. In all, 26 ICP evaluations met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis: 5 of PACE, 13 of MMPs, and 8 of FIDE-SNPs and other aligned models. Evidence generally showed associated reductions in long-term nursing home stays in PACE (3 of 4 studies) and FIDE-SNPs and related aligned models (3 of 5 studies) but was mixed in evaluations of MMPs. Four of 9 studies of MMPs and 2 of 3 studies of FIDE-SNPs found higher outpatient use, although other studies showed no difference. Evidence on Medicaid spending was limited, whereas 8 of 10 studies of MMPs showed an association between these plans and higher Medicare spending. Evidence was mixed or inconclusive regarding care coordination and hospitalizations, and it was insufficient to evaluate patient satisfaction, health, and outcomes in beneficiary subgroups (eg, those with serious mental illness). Furthermore, studies had limited ability to control for bias from unmeasured differences between enrollees of ICPs compared with nonintegrated models. This systematic review found variability and gaps in evidence regarding ICPs and spending, quality, utilization, and outcomes. Studies found some ICPs were associated with reductions in long-term nursing home admissions, and several identified increases in outpatient care. However, MMPs were primarily associated with higher Medicare spending. Evidence for other outcomes was limited or inconclusive. Research addressing these evidence gaps is needed to guide ongoing efforts to integrate coverage and care for dual-eligible beneficiaries.

Association of Medicaid coverage with emergency department utilization after self-harm in Korea: A nationwide registry-based study.

Self-harm presents an important public health challenge. It imposes a notable burden on the utilization of emergency department (ED) services and medical expenses from patients and family. The Medicaid system is vital in providing financial support for individuals who struggle with medical expenses. This study explored the association of Medicaid coverage with ED visits following incidents of self-harm, utilizing nationwide ED surveillance data in Korea. Data of all patients older than 14 years who presented to EDs following incidents of self-harm irrespective of intention to end their life, including cases of self-poisoning, were gathered from the National ED Information System (NEDIS). The annual self-harm visit rate (SHVR) per 100,000 people was calculated for each province and a generalized linear model analysis was conducted, with SHVR as a dependent variable and factors related to Medicaid coverage as independent variables. A 1% increase in Medicaid enrollment rate was linked to a significant decrease of 14% in SHVR. Each additional 1,000 Korean Won of Medicaid spending per enrollee was correlated with a 1% reduction in SHVR. However, an increase in Medicaid visits per enrollee and an extension of Medicaid coverage days were associated with an increase in SHVR. SHVR exhibited a stronger associated with parameters of Medicaid coverage in adolescents and young adults than in older adult population. Expansion of Medicaid coverage coupled with careful monitoring of shifts in Medicaid utilization patterns can mitigate ED overloading by reducing visits related to self-harm.

The impact of Medicaid expansion on state expenditures through the COVID-19 era.

To investigate the impact of Medicaid expansion on state expenditures through the end of 2022. We used data from the National Association of State Budget Officers (NASBO)'s State Expenditure Report, Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF)'s Medicaid expansion tracker, US Bureau of Labor Statistics data (BLS), US Bureau of Economic Analysis data (BEA), and Pandemic Response Accountability Committee Oversight (PRAC). We investigated spending per capita (by state population) across seven budget categories, including Medicaid spending, and four spending sources. We performed a difference-in-differences (DiD) analysis that compared within-state changes in spending over time in expansion and nonexpansion states to estimate the effect of Medicaid expansion on state budgets. We adjusted for annual state unemployment rate, annual state per capita personal income, and state spending of Coronavirus Relief Funds (CRF) from 2020 to 2022 and included state and year fixed effects. We linked annual state-level data on state-reported fiscal year expenditures from NASBO with state-level characteristics from BLS and BEA data and with CRF state spending from PRAC. Medicaid expansion was associated with an average increase of 21% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 16%-25%) in per capita Medicaid spending after Medicaid expansion among states that expanded prior to 2020. After inclusion of an interaction term to separate between the coronavirus disease (COVID) era (2020-2022) and the prior period following expansion (2015-2019), we found that although Medicaid expansion led to an average increase of 33% (95% CI: 21%-45%) in federal funding of state expenditures in the post-COVID years, it was not significantly associated with increased state spending. There was no evidence of crowding out of other state expenditure categories or a substantial impact on total state spending, even in the COVID-19 era. Increased federal expenditures may have shielded states from substantial budgetary impacts.

Medical care services interplay between individual and Medicaid managed care markets in expansion versus non‐expansion states

AbstractWe study enrollment, medical service utilization, and incurred expenses of individual comprehensive and Medicaid managed care plans in states with or without Medicaid expansion adopted at the Affordable Care Act (ACA) early stage 2014–2016. To make healthcare services more accessible, 27 states expanded Medicaid eligibility to cover nearly‐poor non‐elderly adults who have had incomes between 100% and 138% of federal poverty level in 2014. In non‐expansion states, early enrollees in this income cohort had to choose individual market plans rather than Medicaid. Early enrollees' enrollment choices and their health status have had a great impact on the individual market premiums and Medicaid spending. We examined health insurers' annual regulatory filings with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners for 2013–2016 and found that: First, individual comprehensive insurance enrollment grew much faster in states not expanding Medicaid eligibility. Second, after incorporating early enrollees, per member per month (PMPM) medical service utilization and expenses of individual comprehensive insurance grew much faster in non‐expansion states. Third, among major types of medical utilization and expense measures, PMPM hospital inpatient days and PMPM prescription drug expenses increased substantially since 2014. Finally, Medicaid beneficiaries generated more PMPM medical utilization and expenses in expansion states.

Medicaid spending and utilization of gene and RNA therapies for rare inherited conditions.

Gene and RNA therapies are promising treatments for many rare diseases. Pediatric populations that could benefit from these drugs are overrepresented among state Medicaid programs. Using Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data, we examined Medicaid spending and utilization of rare disease gene and RNA therapies. Between 2017 and 2022, the number of available gene and RNA therapies increased from 3 to 13, yearly Medicaid spending increased from $148.3 million to $879.7 million, and the number of yearly treatments (a proxy for number of patients) increased from 327 to 1638. Nearly all spending was attributed to spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) and Duchenne muscular dystrophy drugs. States participating in Medicaid pooled purchasing initiatives had 39% higher treatments per 100 000 enrollees with no differences in spending. Compared to states without a carve-out, states that carved SMA drugs out of managed Medicaid contracts had higher utilization (54%). Spending among carve-out states varied according to managed care enrollment, being higher for those with <80% of enrollees in managed care as compared with those with ≥80% of enrollees in managed care. This suggests that multi-state purchasing initiatives and managed care carve-outs can help increase access to gene and RNA therapies among Medicaid beneficiaries, but it is unclear if these strategies are effective at managing spending.

Differences in healthcare utilization between enrollees of fully integrated dual eligible special needs plans versus non-fully integrated plans.

Policymakers advocate care integration models to enhance Medicare and Medicaid service coordination for dually eligible individuals. One rapidly expanding model is the fully integrated dual eligible (FIDE) plan, a sub-type of the dual eligible special needs plan (D-SNP) in which a parent insurer manages Medicare and Medicaid spending for dually eligible individuals. We examined healthcare utilization differences among dually eligible individuals aged 65 years or older enrolled in D-SNPs by plan type (FIDE vs non-FIDE). Using 2018 Medicare Advantage encounters and Medicaid claims of FIDE and non-FIDE enrollees in six states (AZ, CA, FL, NY, TN, WI), we compared healthcare utilization between plan types, adjusting for enrollee characteristics and county indicators. We applied propensity score weighting to address differences between FIDE and non-FIDE plan enrollees. In our main analysis, which included all dually eligible individuals in our sample, we observed no significant difference in healthcare utilization between FIDE and non-FIDE plan enrollees. However, we identified some differences in healthcare utilization between FIDE and non-FIDE plan enrollees in subgroup analyses. For example, among home and community-based service (HCBS) users, FIDE plan enrollees had 6.0 fewer hospitalizations per 1000 person-months (95% CI: -7.9, -4.0) and were 7.0 percentage points more likely to be discharged to home (95% CI: 2.6, 11.5) after hospitalization, compared to non-FIDE plan enrollees. While we found no differences in healthcare utilization between FIDE and non-FIDE plan enrollees when considering all dually eligible individuals in our sample, some differences emerged when focusing on subgroups. For example, HCBS users with FIDE plans had fewer hospitalizations and were more likely to be discharged to their home following hospitalization, compared to HCBS users with non-FIDE plans. These findings suggest that FIDE plans may improve care coordination for specific subsets of dually eligible individuals.

A101 TRENDS IN MEDICAID SPENDING FOR HEPATITIS C TREATMENT FROM 2012-2021

Abstract Background Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a pervasive disease that reduces quality and quantity of life. Medicaid is the largest health insurance program in the United States that provides coverage to individuals with low income including children, pregnant individuals, and people with disabilities. Due to the impact of HCV on individuals and the world goal for elimination of HCV by 2030, an analysis of healthcare costs attributed to hepatitis C medications is imperative to guide further policy and coverage changes. Aims To analyze Medicaid spending and utilization for hepatitis C treatment from 2012 to 2021 and provide a reflection on the impact it has on healthcare costs in the USA. Methods The Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services public database was accessed to obtain Medicaid spending on Hepatitis C medications from 2012-2021. Data extracted included brand and generic drugs to treat HCV, total annual spending, total dosage units prescribed, total number of claims, and average spending per dosage unit and claim. Microsoft Excel was used for data analysis and creation of graphs. Results A total of 20 oral medications were included in this study. Total spending on all medications per year increased from $184 million in 2012 and peaked in 2016 at $3.3 billion. In 2021, the highest amount of Medicaid spending was on Mavyret ($658 million) followed by generic sofosbuvir-velpatasvir ($389 million) and Epclusa ($262 million). The total number of claims decreased from 135,542 in 2012 to 121,101 in 2021 with a peak in 2016 at 159,826. During the same time, the average spending per claim increased from 2012 ($6,518) to 2021 ($146,792). In 2021, the highest average spending per claim was seen with Harvoni ($30,941) followed by Sovaldi ($27,247), Vosevi ($23,877), and Epclusa ($22,917). In the same year, Mavyret had the greatest number of claims at 51,500 followed by generic sofosbuvir-velpatasvir (50,115), Epclusa (11,437), and Vosevi (2,177). Conclusions Despite the number of claims declining from 2012 to 2021, the average spending has increased due to the significant cost of HCV medications on Medicaid spending. The highest spending was noted to be with originator medications while generic formulations had the highest number of claims. Understanding the trends in spending on HCV medications can help guide insurance coverage changes for those depending on Medicaid. Lastly, shifting policies towards increased use of generic medications can help with increasing access and reducing costs to the population. Figure 1. Total annual spending per year in billions ($ USD, blue bars) and total number of claims (orange line) per year from 2012 to 2021. Funding Agencies None

Higher levels of state funding for Home- and Community-Based Services linked to better state performances in Long-Term Services and Supports.

To examine the relationship between the level of state funding for Home- and Community-Based Services (HCBS) and state overall and dimension-specific performances in Long-Term Services and Supports (LTSS). We employed state-level secondary data from the Medicaid LTSS Annual Expenditures Reports, the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) State Scorecards, the U.S. Census, and Federal Reserve Economic data, spanning the timeframe of 2010-2020. Overall state LTSS rankings, along with dimension-specific rankings, were modeled separately against state Medicaid spending on HCBS relative to total Medicaid spending on LTSS. All models were adjusted for state covariates, secular trend, and state fixed effects. The study sample included all 50 states and the District of Columbia. However, California, Delaware, Illinois, and Virginia were excluded from FY2019 due to missing data on Medicaid HCBS expenditures. Every 10 percentage-point increase in the proportion of Medicaid LTSS spending to HCBS demonstrated 2.05 points improvement (95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.88 to 0.22, p = 0.03) in rankings for state overall LTSS system performance, 2.92 points improvement (95% CI: -4.87 to 0.98, p < 0.01) in rankings for the Choice of Setting and Provider dimension, as well as 1.73 points (95% CI: -3.14 to 0.32, p = 0.02) ranking improvement in the dimension of Effective Transitions. Our study suggested promising effects of increased state funding for HCBS on LTSS performance.

Association between vaccination rates and COVID-19 health outcomes in the United States: a population-level statistical analysis

BackgroundPopulation-level vaccine efficacy is a critical component of understanding COVID-19 risk, informing public health policy, and mitigating disease impacts. Unlike individual-level clinical trials, population-level analysis characterizes how well vaccines worked in the face of real-world challenges like emerging variants, differing mobility patterns, and policy changes.MethodsIn this study, we analyze the association between time-dependent vaccination rates and COVID-19 health outcomes for 48 U.S. states. We primarily focus on case-hospitalization risk (CHR) as the outcome of interest, using it as a population-level proxy for disease burden on healthcare systems. Performing the analysis using Generalized Additive Models (GAMs) allowed us to incorporate real-world nonlinearities and control for critical dynamic (time-changing) and static (temporally constant) factors. Dynamic factors include testing rates, activity-related engagement levels in the population, underlying population immunity, and policy. Static factors incorporate comorbidities, social vulnerability, race, and state healthcare expenditures. We used SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance data to model the different COVID-19 variant-driven waves separately, and evaluate if there is a changing role of the potential drivers of health outcomes across waves.ResultsOur study revealed a strong and statistically significant negative association between vaccine uptake and COVID-19 CHR across each variant wave, with boosters providing additional protection during the Omicron wave. Higher underlying population immunity is shown to be associated with reduced COVID-19 CHR. Additionally, more stringent government policies are generally associated with decreased CHR. However, the impact of activity-related engagement levels on COVID-19 health outcomes varied across different waves. Regarding static variables, the social vulnerability index consistently exhibits positive associations with CHR, while Medicaid spending per person consistently shows a negative association. However, the impacts of other static factors vary in magnitude and significance across different waves.ConclusionsThis study concludes that despite the emergence of new variants, vaccines remain highly correlated with reduced COVID-19 harm. Therefore, given the ongoing threat posed by COVID-19, vaccines remain a critical line of defense for protecting the public and reducing the burden on healthcare systems.

PROJECTION OF MEDICAID SPENDING ON PEOPLE WITH ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE AND OTHER RELATED DEMENTIAS

Abstract As the US population is aging, the number of people with Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Related Dementias (ADRD) is increasing. People with ADRD have high expenditures on medical care and long-term services and supports (LTSS). Medicaid is the largest single payor for LTSS, however, the literature on the demographic trends and epidemiology of people with ADRD does not offer projections of Medicaid spending. The goal of this study was to develop an estimate for future Medicaid spending for people with ADRD for the state of Pennsylvania. The approach taken was to develop a demographic projection of the size of the older population, then estimate the fraction of people with ADRD who are eligible for Medicaid. Next, we used estimates of current spending trends to project future spending through 2025. Nearly all Medicaid participants with ADRD are dually eligible for both Medicaid and Medicare, however, Medicare managed care encounter data were not available for analysis. Thus, the prevalence of ADRD was constructed using Medicaid and Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) claims data. Two alternate estimates of the prevalence of ADRD among Medicare managed care enrollees were used (same as Medicare FFS, or slightly lower). Estimates were generated under several growth rates in per person spending on home and community-based services (HCBS). The results shows that growth in HCBS spending is the largest factor in predicting spending, leading to estimates ranging from $2.8 billion to $3.5 billion. Future research will extend the model to additional years.

Changes in Care Associated With Integrating Medicare and Medicaid for Dual-Eligible Individuals

There is growing interest in expanding integrated models, in which 1 insurer manages Medicare and Medicaid spending for dually eligible individuals. Fully integrated dual-eligible special needs plans (FIDE-SNPs) are one of the largest integrated models, but evidence about their performance is limited. To evaluate changes in care associated with integrating Medicare and Medicaid coverage in a FIDE-SNP in Pennsylvania. This cohort study using a difference-in-differences analysis compared changes in care between 2 cohorts of dual-eligible individuals: (1) an integration cohort composed of Medicare Dual Eligible Special Needs Plan enrollees who joined a companion Medicaid plan following a 2018 state reform mandating Medicaid managed care (leading to integration), and (2) a comparison cohort with nonintegrated coverage before and after the start of Medicaid managed care. Analyses were conducted between February 2022 and June 2023. Analyses examined outcomes in 4 domains: use of home- and community-based services (HCBS), care management and coordination, hospital stays and postacute care, and long-term nursing home stays. The study included 7967 individuals in the integration cohort and 3832 individuals in the comparison cohort. In the integration cohort, the mean (SD) age at baseline was 63.3 (14.7) years, and 5268 individuals (66.1%) were female and 2699 (33.9%) were male. In the comparison cohort, the mean (SD) age at baseline was 64.8 (18.6) years, and 2341 individuals (61.1%) were female and 1491 (38.9%) were male. At baseline, integration cohort members received a mean (SD) of 2.83 (8.70) days of HCBS per month and 3.34 (3.56) medications for chronic conditions per month, and the proportion with a follow-up outpatient visit after a hospital stay was 0.47. From baseline through 3 years after integration, HCBS use increased differentially in the integration vs comparison cohorts by 0.61 days/person-month (95% CI, 0.28-0.94; P < .001). However, integration was not associated with changes in care management and coordination, including medication use for chronic conditions (-0.02 fills/person-month; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.06; P = .65) or follow-up outpatient care after a hospital stay (-0.01 visits/hospital stay; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.03; P = .61). Hospital stays did not change differentially between the cohorts. Unmeasured factors contributing to differential mortality limited the ability to identify changes in long-term nursing home stays associated with integration. In this cohort study with a difference-in-differences analysis of 2 cohorts of individuals dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, integration was associated with greater HCBS use but not with other changes in care patterns. The findings highlight opportunities to strengthen how integrated programs manage care and a need to further evaluate their performance.

US Medicaid program: An analysis of the spending and utilization patterns for antidepressants from 2017 to 2021

BackgroundMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is a serious mental health condition that contributes to health complications, financial burden and death. In 2020, about one in five US adults had a lifetime diagnosis of MDD. With Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) being a common mental health concern, it is important to understand treatment patterns within public health systems like Medicaid, as they play a crucial role in providing care to diverse populations. ObjectiveThe study investigated antidepressant usage and market distribution in the Medicaid Program. By doing so, the study aimed to provide insights into how these trends reflect broader changes in mental health treatment practices and policy implications within the Medicaid system during the study period. MethodsPublic Medicaid data from 2017 to 2021 were analyzed, focusing on 30 FDA-approved antidepressants. Spending and prescription data were aggregated using Excel and Python. ResultsThe total US Medicaid expenditure on antidepressants increased from about $1 billion dollars in 2017 to $1.12 billion dollars in 2021, an increase of about 10%. Consistently, SSRIs were the class of antidepressants that Medicaid spent the most on. The highest Medicaid spending on a single antidepressant in 2017 and 2018 was bupropion. During the remaining years of the study (2019, 2020, 2021) Medicaid appropriated most funds toward Vortioxetine. The total number of antidepressant prescriptions increased from 52 million scripts to 59 million scripts (an increase of about 14%). ConclusionsThe increase in Medicaid spending on antidepressants during the study period can be explained by an increase in utilization (a 14% increase in antidepressant prescriptions from 2017 to 2021), and a shift toward prescribing newer more costly antidepressants (like SSRIs and others) and away from prescribing older, less costly antidepressants like monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs).”

Primer: MIND at Home Alzheimer’s and Dementia Care Coordination Program

AbstractBackgroundPeople living with dementia (PLWD) represent some of the highest‐need and highest‐cost individuals living in the community. The complexity and range of needs (including medical, behavioral, and social needs) make dementia one of the most expensive chronic conditions in the U.S., and a strong candidate for improving care and reducing costs through care management support.MethodThe Maximizing Independence (MIND) at Home dementia care program, developed and implemented in a variety of settings and contexts over the last 15 years, is an advanced care coordination program for community‐living persons with dementia and cognitive impairment and their informal caregiver. The program is delivered through an interdisciplinary, dementia capable collaborative team. Developed by researchers at Johns Hopkins University, the MIND program consists of a comprehensive set of assessments, tools and staff trainings designed to increase individual longevity in the home/community; reduce unmet care needs and improve quality of care; improve person‐centered outcomes; reduce costly acute health care utilization; and reduce caregiver burden.ResultThe MIND at Home program model builds on three prior trials (two RCTs, one quasi‐experimental design) of the MIND at Home dementia care coordination model. These have included a philanthropically‐funded parallel group randomized controlled single blind trial (RCT) (MIND‐RCT‐1 n = 303; 2007‐2012), an NIA‐funded RCT (MIND‐RCT‐2; n = 302; 2014‐2020), and a CMS Health Care Innovation Award Round 2 demonstration project (MIND‐HCIA; n = 342; 2014‐2018). The program has been embedded into 3 types of real world practice settings to date: managed care health plans, primary care, home health care.ConclusionThe research findings to date for in development of the MIND model show that community‐living older persons with dementia and cognitive impairment experience substantial unmet, yet modifiable care needs among community‐living PWD and caregivers, and that MIND at Home can benefit persons living with dementia and their family caregivers. Benefits include delay in transition from home and nursing home placement; reductions in use of acute and institutional care and total Medicaid spending; and improvement in care quality, behavior, and high program satisfaction. Individuals with lower income may benefit more.

Can long-term care partnership programmes increase insurance coverage and reduce Medicaid costs?

ABSTRACT Although long-term care is a substantial financial risk for elderly Americans, only about 10% purchase insurance, with many of the remainder relying on Medicaid. Faced with rising Medicaid expenditure on long-term care, states introduced long-term care partnership programmes in the hope of reducing Medicaid spending by encouraging the purchase of private insurance. Using numerical optimization techniques, we show theoretically that partnership programmes will only modestly increase long-term care insurance coverage. Most of the benefits will go to those who would have purchased non-partnership policies. Thus, the potential costs to Medicaid will exceed the savings.

Categorization of a Universal Coding System to Distinguish Use of Durable Medical Equipment and Supplies in Pediatric Patients

Although durable medical equipment and supplies (DMES) are commonly used to optimize the health and function in pediatric patients, little is known about the prevalence of use and spending on DMES. To categorize the Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) for distinguishing DMES types, and to measure the prevalence and related spending of DMES in pediatric patients using Medicaid. This study is a cross-sectional analysis of the 2018 Merative Medicaid Database and included 4 569 473 pediatric patients aged 0 to 21 years enrolled in Medicaid in 12 US states from January 1 to December 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from February 2019 to April 2023. DMES exposure was identified with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services HCPCS codes. Three pediatricians categorized HCPCS DMES codes submitted by vendors for reimbursement of dispensed DMES into DMES types and end-organ systems; 15 expert reviewers refined the categorization (2576 DMES codes, 164 DMES types, 14 organ systems). The main outcome was DMES prevalence & Medicaid spending. The χ2 test was used to compare DMES prevalence and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to compare per-member-per-year (PMPY) spending by complex chronic conditions (CCC). Of the 4 569 473 patients in the study cohort, 49.3% were female and 56.1% were aged 5 to 15 years. Patients used 133 of 164 (81.1%) DMES types. The DMES prevalence was 17.1% (95% CI, 17.0%-17.2%) ranging from 10.1% (95% CI, 10.0%-10.2%) in patients with no chronic condition to 60.9% (95% CI, 60.8%-61.0%) for patients with 2 or more CCCs. The PMPY DMES spending was $593, ranging from $349 for no chronic condition to $4253 for 2 or more CCCs. Lens (7.9%), vision frames (6.2%), and orthotics for orthopedic injury (0.8%) were the most common DME in patients with no chronic condition. Enteral tube / feeding supplies (19.8%), diapers (19.2%), lower extremity orthotics (12.3%), wheelchair (9.6%), oxygen (9.0%), and urinary catheter equipment (4.2%) were among the most common DMES in children with 2 or more CCCs. In this cross-sectional study, HCPCS distinguished a variety of DME types and use across pediatric populations. Further investigation should assess the utility of the HCPCS DMES categorization with efforts to optimize the quality and safety of DMES use.

State Public Assistance Spending and Survival Among Adults With Cancer

Social determinants of health contribute to disparities in cancer outcomes. State public assistance spending, including Medicaid and cash assistance programs for socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals, may improve access to care; address barriers, such as food and housing insecurity; and lead to improved cancer outcomes for marginalized populations. To determine whether state-level public assistance spending is associated with overall survival (OS) among individuals with cancer, overall and by race and ethnicity. This cohort study included US adults aged at least 18 years with a new cancer diagnosis from 2007 to 2013, with follow-up through 2019. Data were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Data were analyzed from November 18, 2021, to July 6, 2023. Differential state-level public assistance spending. The main outcome was 6-year OS. Analyses were adjusted for age, race, ethnicity, sex, metropolitan residence, county-level income, state fixed effects, state-level percentages of residents living in poverty and aged 65 years or older, cancer type, and cancer stage. A total 2 035 977 individuals with cancer were identified and included in analysis, with 1 005 702 individuals (49.4%) aged 65 years or older and 1 026 309 (50.4%) male. By tertile of public assistance spending, 6-year OS was 55.9% for the lowest tertile, 55.9% for the middle tertile, and 56.6% for the highest tertile. In adjusted analyses, public assistance spending at the state-level was significantly associated with higher 6-year OS (0.09% [95% CI, 0.04%-0.13%] per $100 per capita; P < .001), particularly for non-Hispanic Black individuals (0.29% [95% CI, 0.07%-0.52%] per $100 per capita; P = .01) and non-Hispanic White individuals (0.12% [95% CI, 0.08%-0.16%] per $100 per capita; P < .001). In sensitivity analyses examining the roles of Medicaid spending and Medicaid expansion including additional years of data, non-Medicaid spending was associated with higher 3-year OS among non-Hispanic Black individuals (0.49% [95% CI, 0.26%-0.72%] per $100 per capita when accounting for Medicaid spending; 0.17% [95% CI, 0.02%-0.31%] per $100 per capita Medicaid expansion effects). This cohort study found that state public assistance expenditures, including cash assistance programs and Medicaid, were associated with improved survival for individuals with cancer. State investment in public assistance programs may represent an important avenue to improve cancer outcomes through addressing social determinants of health and should be a topic of further investigation.

Examining the Impact of State-Level Factors on HIV Testing for Medicaid Enrollees With Schizophrenia.

People with schizophrenia experience unique barriers to routine HIV testing, despite increased risk of HIV compared with the general US population. Little is known about how health care delivery system factors affect testing rates or whether there are testing differences for people with schizophrenia. Nationally representative sample of Medicaid enrollees with and without schizophrenia. Using retrospective longitudinal data, we examined whether state-level factors were associated with differences in HIV testing among Medicaid enrollees with schizophrenia compared with frequency-matched controls during 2002-2012. Multivariable logistic regression estimated testing rate differences between and within cohorts. Higher HIV testing rates for enrollees with schizophrenia were associated with higher state-level Medicaid spending per enrollee, efforts to reduce Medicaid fragmentation, and higher federal prevention funding. State-level AIDS epidemiology predicted more frequent HIV testing for enrollees with schizophrenia versus controls. Living in rural settings predicted lower HIV testing, especially for people with schizophrenia. Overall, state-level predictors of HIV testing rates varied among Medicaid enrollees, although rates were generally higher for those with schizophrenia than controls. Increased HIV testing for people with schizophrenia was associated with coverage of HIV testing when medically necessary, higher Centers for Disease Control and Prevention prevention funding, and higher AIDS incidence, prevalence, and mortality when compared with controls. This analysis suggests that state policymaking has an important role to play in advancing that effort. Overcoming fragmented care systems, sustaining robust prevention funding, and consolidating funding streams in innovative and flexible ways to support more comprehensive systems of care delivery deserve attention.

Inflationary Rebates For Generic Drugs Sold Through Medicaid Saved Billions During 2017-20.

State Medicaid programs cover nearly all Food and Drug Administration-approved prescription drugs in exchange for mandatory manufacturer rebates, including rebates that offset price increases beyond inflation. These inflationary rebates originally applied to brand-name drugs only, but in 2017 Congress expanded them to include generics. Using public Medicaid medication spending and utilization data and three different measures of drug prices, we found that nearly half of generic drugs were subject to inflationary rebates during the period 2017-20, offsetting 2-12percent of the $53.6billion in generic drug spending during that time. Rebates were larger among non-orally administered drugs and those with the highest prices. Generic inflationary rebates offset substantial Medicaid spending during that period, suggesting that many generic prices increased above inflation despite the new policy. This might change now that inflationary rebates have been expanded to Medicare under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, although additional policies that ensure competitive markets would better protect all US patients from rising generic drug prices.