An Effective Gated and Attention-Based Neural Network Model for Fine-Grained Financial Target-Dependent Sentiment Analysis

M. Jiang,Jianxiang Wang,Man Lan,Yuanbin Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63558-3_4

2017-08-19

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Association of Medicare Advantage Enrollment With Financial Burden of Care : A Retrospective Cohort Study

Sungchul Park,David J Meyers,Amal N Trivedi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M23-2480

Abstract:Background: Compared with traditional Medicare (TM), Medicare Advantage (MA) plans typically offer supplemental benefits and lower copayments for in-network services and must include an out-of-pocket spending limit. Objective: To examine whether the financial burden of care decreased for persons switching from TM to MA (TM-to-MA switchers) relative to those remaining in TM (TM stayers). Design: Retrospective longitudinal cohort study comparing changes in financial outcomes between TM-to-MA switchers and TM stayers. Setting: Population-based. Participants: 7054 TM stayers and 1544 TM-to-MA switchers from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, 2014 to 2021. Measurements: Individual health care costs (out-of-pocket spending and cost sharing), financial burden (high and catastrophic), and subjective financial hardship (difficulty paying medical bills, paying medical bills over time, and inability to pay medical bills). Results: Compared with TM stayers, TM-to-MA switchers had small differences in out-of-pocket spending ($168 [95% CI, -$133 to $469]) and proportions of total health expenses paid out of pocket (cost sharing) (0.2 percentage point [CI, -1.3 to 1.7 percentage points]), families with out-of-pocket spending greater than 20% of their income (high financial burden) (0.3 percentage point [CI, -2.5 to 3.0 percentage points]), families reporting out-of-pocket spending greater than 40% of their income (catastrophic financial burden) (0.7 percentage point [CI, -0.1 to 1.6 percentage points]), families reporting paying medical bills over time (-0.2 percentage point [CI, -1.7 to 1.4 percentage points]), families having problems paying medical bills (-0.4 percentage point [CI, -2.7 to 1.8 percentage points]), and families reporting being unable to pay medical bills (0.4 percentage point [CI, -1.3 to 2.0 percentage points]). Limitation: Inability to account for all medical care and cost needs and variations across MA plans, small baseline differences in out-of-pocket spending, and potential residual confounding. Conclusion: Differences in financial outcomes between beneficiaries who switched from TM to MA and those who stayed with TM were small. Differences in financial burden ranged across outcomes and did not have a consistent pattern. Primary funding source: The National Research Foundation of Korea.
Health Care Spending, Use, and Financial Hardship among Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage Enrollees with Mental Health Symptoms

Sungchul Park,David J Meyers,Daniel Enrique Jimenez,Nattalie Gualdrón,Benjamin Le Cook

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2024.01.014

IF: 7.996

2024-01-19

American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

Abstract:Objective We examined the differences in health care spending and utilization, and financial hardship between Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees with mental health symptoms. Design Cross-sectional study. Participants We identified Medicare beneficiaries with mental health symptoms using the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 and the Kessler-6 Psychological Distress Scale in the 2015-2021 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Measurements Outcomes included health care spending and utilization (both general and mental health services), and financial hardship. The primary independent variable was MA enrollment. Results MA enrollees with mental health symptoms were 2.3 percentage points (95% CI: -3.4, -1.2; relative difference: 16.1%) less likely to have specialty mental health visits than TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. There were no significant differences in total health care spending, but annual out-of-pocket spending was $292 (95% CI: 152-432; 18.2%) higher among MA enrollees with mental health symptoms than TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. Additionally, MA enrollees with mental health symptoms were 5.0 (95% CI: 2.9-7.2; 22.3%) and 2.5 percentage points (95% CI: 0.8-4.2; 20.9%) more likely to have difficulty paying medical bills over time and to experience high financial burden than TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. Conclusion Our findings suggest that MA enrollees with mental health symptoms were more likely to experience limited access to mental health services and high financial hardship compared to TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. There is a need to develop policies aimed at improving access to mental health services while reducing financial burden for MA enrollees.

psychiatry,geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology
Post-Acute Care Use Associated with Medicare Shared Savings Program and Disparities

Yeunkyung Kim,Caroline Thirukumaran,Helena Temkin-Greener,Robert Holloway,Elaine Hill,Yue Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2022.07.024

IF: 7.802

2022-09-14

Journal of the American Medical Directors Association

Abstract:Objectives Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) was implemented in 2012, but the impact of the MSSP on institutional post-acute care (PAC) use, and by race/ethnicity and payer status is less studied. We studied the impact of hospital participation in the MSSP on institutional PAC use and variations by race/ethnicity and payer status among 3 Medicare patient groups: ischemic stroke, hip fracture, and elective total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Design A retrospective analysis of 2010–2016 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files. Setting and Participants Medicare fee-for-service patients originally admitted for ischemic stroke, hip fracture, or elective TJA in MSSP-participating hospitals or nonparticipating hospitals. Methods Patient-level linear probability models with difference-in-differences approach were used to compare the changes in institutional PAC use in MSSP-participating hospitals with nonparticipating hospitals as well as to compare the changes in differences by race/ethnicity and payer status in institutional PAC use over time. Results Hospital participation in MSSP was significantly associated with increased institutional PAC use for the ischemic stroke cohort by 1.5 percentage points [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00–0.3, P < .05] compared with non-MSSP participating hospitals. Regarding variations by race/ethnicity and payer status, for the elective TJA patients, racial minority patients in MSSP-participating hospitals had 3.8 percentage points greater (95% CI 0.01–0.06, P < .01) in institutional PAC use than white patients. Also, for ischemic stroke cohort, dual-eligible patients in MSSP-participating hospitals had 2.0 percentage points greater (95% CI 0.00–0.04, P < .10) in institutional PAC use than Medicare-only patients. Conclusions and Implications This study found that hospital participation in the MSSP was associated with slightly increased institutional PAC use for ischemic stroke Medicare patients. Also, compared to non-MSSP participating hospitals, MSSP-participating hospitals were more likely to discharge racial minority patients for elective TJA and dual-eligible patients for ischemic stroke to institutional PAC.

geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology
Role of Patient Sorting in Avoidable Hospital Stays in Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare

Jianhui Frank Xu,Kelly E Anderson,Angela Liu,Brian J Miller,Daniel Polsky

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.3931

2023-11-03

JAMA Health Forum

Abstract:Importance: Unlike traditional Medicare (TM), Medicare Advantage (MA) plans limit in-network care to a specific network of Medicare clinicians. MA plans thus play a role in sorting patients to a subset of clinicians. It is unknown whether the performance of physicians who treat MA and TM beneficiaries is different. Objective: To examine whether avoidable hospital stay differences between MA and TM can be explained by the primary care clinicians who treat MA and TM beneficiaries. Design, setting, and participants: This was a cross-sectional study of a nationally representative sample of MA and TM beneficiaries in 2019 with any of 5 chronic ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs). The relative risk (RR) of avoidable hospital stays in MA compared with TM was estimated with inverse probability of treatment-weighted Poisson regression, both without and with clinician fixed effects. The degree to which the estimated MA vs TM difference could be explained by patient sorting was calculated by comparing the 2 RR estimates. Data were analyzed between February 2022 and April 2023. Exposure: Enrollment in MA. Main outcome and measures: Whether a beneficiary had avoidable hospital stays in 2019 due to any of the ACSCs. Avoidable hospital stays included both hospitalizations and observation stays. Results: The study sample comprised 1 323 481 MA beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 75.4 [7.0] years; 56.9% women; 69.3% White) and 1 965 863 TM beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 75.9 [7.4] years; 57.1% women; 82.5% White). When controlling for the primary care clinician, the RR of avoidable hospital stays in MA vs TM changed by 2.6 percentage points (95% CI, 1.72-3.50; P < .001), suggesting that compared with TM beneficiaries, MA beneficiaries saw clinicians with lower rates of avoidable hospital stays. This effect size was statistically significant to explain the 2% lower rate of avoidable hospital stays in MA than in TM. Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional study of MA and TM beneficiaries, the lower rate of avoidable hospital stays among MA beneficiaries than TM beneficiaries was attributable to MA beneficiaries visiting clinicians with lower rates of avoidable hospital stays. The patient sorting that occurs in MA plays a critical role in the lower rates of avoidable hospital stays compared with TM.
Tongue reconstruction with free radial forearm flap after hemiglossectomy: a functional assessment.

H. Hsiao,Y. Leu,Chang-Ching Lin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/S-2003-39824

2003-04-01

Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery

Abstract:Thirty-three patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the anteriolateral part of the tongue underwent a 50 percent resection of the tongue. The surgical defect was reconstructed with a microvascular radial forearm flap. All the flaps were especially designed to have a narrow waist, shaped like an omega in cross-section, thus allowing for a free tongue tip, and avoiding suturing the edge of the flap to the soft palate and tongue base. Sixteen patients were evaluated for swallowing and speech function at least 6 months following reconstruction. With this technique, the majority of the patients had nearly normal deglutition, although their speech was still unsatisfactory. However, the speech function in this series was better than that in other reported series.
Quantifying Differences in Health Care Consumption for the Management of Multiple Sclerosis Within Privately and Publicly Insured Health Care Programs

Terrie Livingston,Monica Fay,Ravi Iyer,Wendy Wells,Michael W. Pill

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2016.22.12.1385

2016-12-01

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic and debilitating disease of the central nervous system that affects more than 570,000 persons in the United States and 2.3 million worldwide. Since most individuals experience initial symptoms between the ages of 20 and 40 years, MS can have a significant effect on health care consumption, quality of life, productivity, and employment over the long-term disease course. Opportunities exist to better understand how benefit design and other nonclinical factors can affect health care delivery and associated costs.OBJECTIVE: To observe and report variances in health care consumed for the treatment of MS in patients enrolled in privately (commercial) and publicly (Medicaid) funded health insurance programs.METHODS: In a retrospective analysis using Havas Gemini's proprietary MS Benchmarks Disease-Modeling Process and IMS LifeLink Health Plan Claims and Longitudinal Prescriptions databases, integrated medical and pharmacy claims data were analyzed to select patients with a diagnosis of MS during the 2012 calendar year. Comorbidities were determined using ICD-9-CM codes present on medical claims. Prescription drug use was evaluated by pharmacy claims and drug-specific billing codes.RESULTS: 19,984 patients with MS were identified-18,269 from commercial payers and 1,715 from Medicaid. Although total annual costs related to the care of MS for the groups reflected a relatively small difference ($31,107 commercial; $33,344 Medicaid), costs associated with specific service categories varied greatly. Pharmacy costs were considerably less in the Medicaid group; however, inpatient and emergency room costs were as much as 5 times higher. Overall use of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) in the Medicaid group was seen in 32.5% of patients and 52.1% in the commercial patient group. Thus, lower pharmacy costs in the Medicaid group were possibly related to lesser use of DMTs among that group of patients.CONCLUSIONS: This analysis illustrates that notable variances exist in consumption of health care resources between patients enrolled in privately and publicly funded health care programs. These variances may have additional implications relating to outcomes specific to MS.DISCLOSURES: Funding for this study was contributed by Biogen. The preparation, writing, revision, and approval of this manuscript were conducted in collaboration with Pill, who is employed by Havas Gemini. Livingston, Fay, and Wells are employed by and own stock in Biogen. Iyer was employed with Biogen at the time of the study. Study concept and design were contributed by Livingston, Fay, and Iyer, along with Pill and Wells. Livingston, Fay, and Pill collected the data, along with Iyer and Wells. Data interpretation was performed by Livingston, Fay, and Iyer, along with Pill and Wells. The manuscript was written by Livingston, Fay, and Wells, along with Pill and Iyer, and revised by Fay, Wells, and Pill, along with Livingston and Iyer.

pharmacology & pharmacy,health care sciences & services
Racial/ethnic disparities in cost-related barriers to care among near-poor beneficiaries in Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare

Alexandra G Hames,Renuka Tipirneni,Galen E Switzer,John Z Ayanian,Jeffrey T Kullgren,Erica Solway,Eric T Roberts

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37765/ajmc.2024.89622

2024-10-01

Abstract:Objective: To compare racial and ethnic disparities in cost-related medical care and dental care barriers and use of vision care among near-poor Medicare beneficiaries in Medicare Advantage (MA) vs traditional Medicare (TM) overall and stratified by supplemental insurance enrollment. Study design: Cross-sectional analysis of 2015-2019 data from the nationally representative Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. Methods: Propensity score-weighted difference-in-disparities analyses comparing Black-White and Hispanic-White disparities in MA vs TM among near-poor Medicare beneficiaries with incomes between 101% and 250% of the federal poverty level. We assessed differences in cost-related medical care barriers and cost-related dental care barriers as well as receipt of annual eye exams in MA vs TM. Results: For cost-related barriers to medical care, Hispanic-White disparities were narrower by 8.8 (95% CI, -14.0 to -3.6) percentage points in MA relative to TM but differences in Black-White disparities were not statistically significant. MA was not associated with narrower differences in Hispanic-White or Black-White disparities in dental care access. Higher proportions of Black and Hispanic beneficiaries in MA received an annual eye exam vs White beneficiaries in both MA and TM. MA was associated with narrower racial disparities primarily compared with TM without supplemental insurance. Conclusions: Among near-poor Black and Hispanic Medicare beneficiaries, MA was associated with greater use of vision care and narrowing of some disparities in cost-related access barriers vs TM. However, MA did not uniformly narrow racial/ethnic disparities in access and use. These findings highlight the importance of maintaining and enhancing features of Medicare coverage that may promote equitable access to care, including additional benefits and lower cost sharing.
Low-Value Services Across Medicare Advantage Insurers and Traditional Medicare

Ciara Duggan,Adam L. Beckman,Ishani Ganguli,Mark Soto,E. John Orav,Thomas C. Tsai,Austin Frakt,Jose F. Figueroa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.42633

2024-11-02

JAMA Network Open

Abstract:Importance Compared with traditional Medicare (TM), Medicare Advantage (MA) insurers have greater financial incentives to reduce the delivery of low-value services (LVS); however, there is limited evidence at a national level on the prevalence of LVS utilization among MA vs TM beneficiaries and whether LVS utilization rates vary among the largest MA insurers. Objective To determine whether there are differences in the rates of LVS delivered to Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in MA vs TM, overall and by the 7 largest MA insurers. Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study included Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older residing in the US in 2018 with complete demographic information. Eligible TM beneficiaries were enrolled in Parts A, B, and D, and eligible MA beneficiaries were enrolled in Part C with Part D coverage. Data analysis was conducted between February 2022 and August 2024. Exposures Medicare plan type. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was utlization of 35 LVS defined by the Milliman Health Waste Calculator. An overdispersed Poisson regression model was used to calculate estimated margins comparing risk-adjusted rates of LVS in TM vs MA, overall and across the 7 largest MA insurers. Results The study sample included 3 671 364 unique TM beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 75.7 [7.7] years; 1 502 631 female [40.9%]) and 2 299 618 unique MA beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 75.3 [7.3] years; 983 592 female [42.8%]). LVS utilization was lower among those enrolled in MA compared with TM (50.02 vs 52.48 services per 100 beneficiary-years; adjusted absolute difference, −2.46 services per 100 beneficiary-years; 95% CI, −3.16 to −1.75 services per 100 beneficiary-years; P < .001). Within MA, LVS utilization was lower among beneficiaries enrolled in HMOs vs PPOs (48.03 vs 52.66 services per 100 beneficiary-years; adjusted absolute difference, −4.63 services per 100 beneficiary-years; 95% CI, −5.53 to −3.74 services per 100 beneficiary-years; P < .001). While MA beneficiaries enrolled in UnitedHealth, Humana, Centene, and smaller MA insurers had lower rates of LVS compared with those in TM, beneficiaries enrolled in CVS, Cigna, and Anthem showed no differences. Blue Cross Blue Shield Association plans had higher rates of LVS compared with TM. Conclusions and Relevance In this cross-sectional study of nearly 6 million Medicare beneficiaries, utilization of LVS was on average lower among MA beneficiaries compared with TM beneficiaries, possibly owing to stronger financial incentives in MA to reduce LVS; however, meaningful differences existed across some of the largest MA insurers, suggesting that MA insurers may have variable ability to influence LVS reduction.

medicine, general & internal
Physician Reimbursement in Medicare Advantage Compared With Traditional Medicare and Commercial Health Insurance

Erin Trish,Paul Ginsburg,Laura Gascue,Geoffrey Joyce

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.2679

2017-09-01

JAMA Internal Medicine

Abstract:Importance: Nearly one-third of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in a Medicare Advantage (MA) plan, yet little is known about the prices that MA plans pay for physician services. Medicare Advantage insurers typically also sell commercial plans, and the extent to which MA physician reimbursement reflects traditional Medicare (TM) rates vs negotiated commercial prices is unclear.Objective: To compare prices paid for physician and other health care services in MA, traditional Medicare, and commercial plans.Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective analysis of claims data evaluating MA prices paid to physicians and for laboratory services and durable medical equipment between 2007 and 2012 in 348 US core-based statistical areas. The study population included all MA and commercial enrollees with a large national health insurer operating in both markets, as well as a 20% sample of TM beneficiaries.Exposures: Enrollment in an MA plan.Main Outcomes and Measures: Mean reimbursement paid to physicians, laboratories, and durable medical equipment suppliers for MA and commercial enrollees relative to TM rates for 11 Healthcare Common Procedure Coding Systems (HCPCS) codes spanning 7 sites of care.Results: The sample consisted of 144 million claims. Physician reimbursement in MA was more strongly tied to TM rates than commercial prices, although MA plans tended to pay physicians less than TM. For a mid-level office visit with an established patient (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] code 99213), the mean MA price was 96.9% (95% CI, 96.7%-97.2%) of TM. Across the common physician services we evaluated, mean MA reimbursement ranged from 91.3% of TM for cataract removal in an ambulatory surgery center (CPT 66984; 95% CI, 90.7%-91.9%) to 102.3% of TM for complex evaluation and management of a patient in the emergency department (CPT 99285; 95% CI, 102.1%-102.6%). However, for laboratory services and durable medical equipment, where commercial prices are lower than TM rates, MA plans take advantage of these lower commercial prices, ranging from 67.4% for a walker (HCPCS code E0143; 95% CI, 66.3%-68.5%) to 75.8% for a complete blood cell count (CPT 85025; 95% CI, 75.0%-76.6%).Conclusions and Relevance: Traditional Medicare's administratively set rates act as a strong anchor for physician reimbursement in the MA market, although MA plans succeed in negotiating lower prices for other health care services for which TM overpays. Reforms that transition the Medicare program toward some premium support models could substantially affect how physicians and other clinicians are paid.

medicine, general & internal
Health Care Use and Spending Among Need-Based Subgroups of Medicare Beneficiaries With Full Medicaid Benefits

Brystana G Kaufman,Kelley A Jones,Melissa A Greiner,Abhigya Giri,Lucas Stewart,Amanda He,Amy G Clark,Donald H Taylor Jr,M Kate Bundorf,Rebecca G Whitaker,Courtney H Van Houtven,Aparna Higgins

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.0973

2023-05-05

JAMA Health Forum

Abstract:Importance: Beneficiaries dual eligible for Medicare and Medicaid account for a disproportionate share of expenditures due to their complex care needs. Lack of coordination between payment programs creates misaligned incentives, resulting in higher costs, fragmented care, and poor health outcomes. Objective: To inform the design of integrated programs by describing the health care use and spending for need-based subgroups in North Carolina's full benefit, dual-eligible population. Design, setting, and participants: This cross-sectional study using Medicare and North Carolina Medicaid 100% claims data (2014-2017) linked at the individual level included Medicare beneficiaries with full North Carolina Medicaid benefits. Data were analyzed between 2021 and 2022. Exposure: Need-based subgroups: community well, home- and community-based services (HCBS) users, nursing home (NH) residents, and intensive behavioral health (BH) users. Measures: Medicare and Medicaid utilization and spending per person-year (PPY). Results: The cohort (n = 333 240) comprised subgroups of community well (64.1%, n = 213 667), HCBS users (15.0%, n = 50 095), BH users (15.2%, n = 50 509), and NH residents (7.5%, n = 24 927). Overall, 61.1% reported female sex. The most common racial identities included Asian (1.8%), Black (36.1%), and White (58.7%). Combined spending for Medicare and Medicaid was $26 874 PPY, and the funding of care was split evenly between Medicare and Medicaid. Among need-based subgroups, combined spending was lowest among community well at $19 734 PPY with the lowest portion (38.5%) of spending contributed by Medicaid ($7605). Among NH residents, overall spending ($68 359) was highest, and the highest portion of spending contributed by Medicaid (70.1%). Key components of spending among HCBS users' combined total of $40 069 PPY were clinician services on carrier claims ($14 523) and outpatient facility services ($9012). Conclusions and relevance: Federal and state policy makers and administrators are developing strategies to integrate Medicare- and Medicaid-funded health care services to provide better care to the people enrolled in both programs. Substantial use of both Medicare- and Medicaid-funded services was found across all need-based subgroups, and the services contributing a high proportion of the total spending differed across subgroups. The diversity of health care use suggests a tailored approach to integration strategies with comprehensive set benefits that comprises Medicare and Medicaid services, including long-term services and supports, BH, palliative care, and social services.
Spending and quality after three years of Medicare's bundled payments for medical conditions: quasi-experimental difference-in-differences study

Joshua A Rolnick,Joshua M Liao,Ezekiel J Emanuel,Qian Huang,Xinshuo Ma,Eric Z Shan,Claire Dinh,Jingsan Zhu,Erkuan Wang,Deborah Cousins,Amol S Navathe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1780

2020-06-17

BMJ

Abstract:Objective: To evaluate whether longer term participation in the bundled payments for care initiative (BPCI) for medical conditions in the United States, which held hospitals financially accountable for all spending during an episode of care from hospital admission to 90 days after discharge, was associated with changes in spending, mortality, or health service use. Design: Quasi-experimental difference-in-differences analysis. Setting: US hospitals participating in bundled payments for acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or pneumonia, and propensity score matched to non-participating hospitals. Participants: 238 hospitals participating in the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative (BPCI) and 1415 non-BPCI hospitals. 226 BPCI hospitals were matched to 700 non-BPCI hospitals. Main outcome measures: Primary outcomes were total spending on episodes and death 90 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes included spending and use by type of post-acute care. BPCI and non-BPCI hospitals were compared by patient, hospital, and hospital market characteristics. Market characteristics included population size, competitiveness, and post-acute bed supply. Results: In the 226 BPCI hospitals, episodes of care totaled 261 163 in the baseline period and 93 562 in the treatment period compared with 211 208 and 78 643 in the 700 matched non-BPCI hospitals, respectively, with small differences in hospital and market characteristics after matching. Differing trends were seen for some patient characteristics (eg, mean age change -0.3 years at BPCI hospitals v non- BPCI hospitals, P<0.001). In the adjusted analysis, participation in BPCI was associated with a decrease in total episode spending (-1.2%, 95% confidence interval -2.3% to -0.2%). Spending on care at skilled nursing facilities decreased (-6.3%, -10.0% to -2.5%) owing to a reduced number of facility days (-6.2%, -9.8% to -2.6%), and home health spending increased (4.4%, 1.4% to 7.5%). Mortality at 90 days did not change (-0.1 percentage points, 95% confidence interval -0.5 to 0.2 percentage points). Conclusions: In this longer term evaluation of a large national programme on medical bundled payments in the US, participation in bundles for four common medical conditions was associated with savings at three years. The savings were generated by practice changes that decreased use of high intensity care after hospital discharge without affecting quality, which also suggests that bundles for medical conditions could require multiple years before changes in savings and practice emerge.
Comparison of Low-Value Care Among Commercial and Medicaid Enrollees

Jacqueline E Ellison,Soryan Kumar,Jon A Steingrimsson,Deepak Adhikari,Christina J Charlesworth,K John McConnell,Amal N Trivedi,Thomas A Trikalinos,Shaun P Forbes,Orestis A Panagiotou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-022-07823-8

Abstract:Background: Low-value healthcare is costly and inefficient and may adversely affect patient outcomes. Despite increases in low-value service use, little is known about how the receipt of low-value care differs across payers. Objective: To evaluate differences in the use of low-value care between patients with commercial versus Medicaid coverage. Design: Retrospective observational analysis of the 2017 Rhode Island All-payer Claims Database, estimating the probability of receiving each of 14 low-value services between commercial and Medicaid enrollees, adjusting for patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Ensemble machine learning minimized the possibility of model misspecification. Participants: Medicaid and commercial enrollees aged 18-64 with continuous coverage and an encounter at which they were at risk of receiving a low-value service. Intervention: Enrollment in Medicaid or Commercial insurance. Main measures: Use of one of 14 validated measures of low-value care. Key results: Among 110,609 patients, Medicaid enrollees were younger, had more comorbidities, and were more likely to be female than commercial enrollees. Medicaid enrollees had higher rates of use for 7 low-value care measures, and those with commercial coverage had higher rates for 5 measures. Across all measures of low-value care, commercial enrollees received more (risk difference [RD] 6.8 percentage points; CI: 6.6 to 7.0) low-value services than their counterparts with Medicaid. Commercial enrollees were also more likely to receive low-value services typically performed in the emergency room (RD 11.4 percentage points; CI: 10.7 to 12.2) and services that were less expensive (RD 15.3 percentage points; CI 14.6 to 16.0). Conclusion: Differences in the provision of low-value care varied across measures, though average use was slightly higher among commercial than Medicaid enrollees. This difference was more pronounced for less expensive services indicating that financial incentives may not be the sole driver of low-value care.
Editorial: EJMS—The European Journal of Mass Spectrometry since 1994. Personal Observations

P. Derrick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1255/EJMS.1380

2015-06-01

European Journal of Mass Spectrometry

Abstract:Curiously journals of mass spectrometry for me always have seemed to have something to do with Australia. I migrated from England to Australia in 1975 to work with one of the eminent " Jim's " in mass spectrometry in Australia—Jim Morrison in Melbourne—and later moved to be with the other " Jim " in mass spectrometry in Australia—Jim Shannon in Sydney. Almost on day one, Jim Shannon said I should take over as Australasian Editor of Organic Mass Spectrometry. I agreed, but I'm not sure that I understood exactly what I was agreeing to. And I don't think that I did anything much for the journal. I failed completely to persuade Jim Morrison to publish in the journal, and I noticed that other Australian mass spectroscopists would submit their papers directly to the Editor-in-Chief Allan Maccoll in London. Allan Maccoll was the Australian's Australian in Europe. So as Australasian Editor I didn't learn that much about editing and publishing scientific journals—but I probably did catch the " publishing bug ". Moving back to England in the eighties, I relinquished the Australasian Editorship to John Macleod. I put thoughts of journals aside, until Fred McLafferty opined that I should be Editor-in-Chief of Organic Mass Spectrometry. Allan Maccoll probably saw me as the least objectionable of the possible successors—at least, by that time, I was an Australian (on paper at least)! That was the beginning of five very good years, in which I came to know well and respect greatly Hans-Friedrich Grützmacher—the European Editor of Organic Mass Spectrometry—and also John Holmes—North American Editor—Mamoru Ohashi in Japan and Oleg Chizhov in Russia. I came to know Brian Chait, whose interests had always been close to mine and who joined the team as an Editor. And significantly, I worked alongside and grew close to Allan Maccoll. Metrics were not so important in those days, but in the beginning all of us could see that submissions were not going up, colleagues would from time to time mention losing their libraries' subscription and we had that feeling of being slightly off the pace in terms of where the field of mass spectrometry was going. So we did the " necessary " and we thought by 1994 that we had turned the journal around—certainly there were more pages of mass spectrometry (1679 in 1993 compared to 698 in 1990). We even had a very successful issue dedicated …
Diabetes Care Among Older Adults Enrolled in Medicare Advantage Versus Traditional Medicare Fee-For-Service Plans: The Diabetes Collaborative Registry

Utibe R Essien,Yuanyuan Tang,Jose F Figueroa,Terrence Michael A Litam,Fengming Tang,Philip G Jones,Ravi Patel,Rishi K Wadhera,Nihar R Desai,Sanjeev N Mehta,Mikhail N Kosiborod,Muthiah Vaduganathan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-1178

2022-07-07

Diabetes Care

Abstract:Objective: Medicare Advantage (MA), Medicare's managed care program, is quickly expanding, yet little is known about diabetes care quality delivered under MA compared with traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare. Research design and methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years old enrolled in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry from 2014 to 2019 with type 2 diabetes treated with one or more antihyperglycemic therapies. Quality measures, cardiometabolic risk factor control, and antihyperglycemic prescription patterns were compared between Medicare plan groups, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical factors. Results: Among 345,911 Medicare beneficiaries, 229,598 (66%) were enrolled in FFS and 116,313 (34%) in MA plans (for ≥1 month). MA beneficiaries were more likely to receive ACE inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers for coronary artery disease, tobacco cessation counseling, and screening for retinopathy, foot care, and kidney disease (adjusted P ≤ 0.001 for all). MA beneficiaries had modestly but significantly higher systolic blood pressure (+0.2 mmHg), LDL cholesterol (+2.6 mg/dL), and HbA1c (+0.1%) (adjusted P < 0.01 for all). MA beneficiaries were independently less likely to receive glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (6.9% vs. 9.0%; adjusted odds ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.77-0.84) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (5.4% vs. 6.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95). When integrating Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-linked data from 2014 to 2017 and more recent unlinked data from the Diabetes Collaborative Registry through 2019 (total N = 411,465), these therapeutic differences persisted, including among subgroups with established cardiovascular and kidney disease. Conclusions: While MA plans enable greater access to preventive care, this may not translate to improved intermediate health outcomes. MA beneficiaries are also less likely to receive newer antihyperglycemic therapies with proven outcome benefits in high-risk individuals. Long-term health outcomes under various Medicare plans requires surveillance.
Financial burden of care greatest among rural beneficiaries in Medicare advantage

Sungchul Park,David J. Meyers,Yubin Park,Amal N. Trivedi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.14393

2024-10-11

Health Services Research

Abstract:Objective To examine differences in access to care and financial burden between Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries in rural and urban areas and then explore whether there were potential differences in MA benefits between urban and rural areas. Study Setting and Design We conducted a cross‐sectional study within the Medicare setting in the United States. Data Sources and Analytical Sample Data from three distinct sources for 2017–2021: the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, the MA landscape data, and the Plan Benefit Package data. Our sample comprised 43,343 Medicare beneficiary‐years, including TM and MA beneficiaries in urban and rural areas. Principal Findings Our adjusted analysis showed that rural MA beneficiaries experienced higher rates of delayed care due to costs (10.0% [95% confidence interval (CI): 8.8–11.1]) compared with rural TM (9.5% [8.8–10.2]), urban MA (7.9% [7.4–8.4]), and urban TM (7.9% [7.5–8.2]) beneficiaries. Similarly, rural MA beneficiaries (11.4% [95% CI: 10.3–12.5]) reported more difficulty paying medical bills compared with rural TM (9.4% [8.7–10.1]), urban MA (8.1% [7.7–8.6]), and urban TM (7.8% [7.5–8.2]) beneficiaries. This disparity was associated with less generous financial structures in rural MA plans. Compared to urban MA plans, rural MA plans offered lower out‐of‐pocket maximums for in‐network care ( 5439), but required higher copayments ( 1724 for a 5‐day hospitalization, 41 for a specialist visit, and 38 for a mental health visit). However, differences in quality of care and provision of supplemental benefits were small. Conclusion Rural Medicare beneficiaries reported a greater financial burden of care than urban Medicare beneficiaries, but the most significant burden was observed among MA beneficiaries in rural areas. One possible mechanism could be the less generous financial structures offered by rural MA plans. These findings suggest the need for policies addressing the affordability of care for rural MA beneficiaries.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Enantioseparation of atropisomeric 1,1'-binaphthyl-2,2'-diyl hydrogen phosphate in capillary electrophoresis by using di- and oligosaccharides as chiral selectors: di- and oligosaccharide chiral selectors in capillary electrophoresis.

B. Chankvetadze,M. Saito,E. Yashima,Y. Okamoto

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/CHIR.21

Chirality

Abstract:Twelve different disaccharides and a series of noncyclic malto- and cello-oligosaccharides were used as chiral selectors in capillary electrophoresis (CE). Most saccharides resolved the enantiomers of atropisomeric 1,1'-binaphthyl-2,2'-diyl hydrogen phosphate (BDHP) depending on the type (alpha or beta) and position of the linkage between monosaccharides. The effect of chain length of malto- and cello-oligosaccharides on enantioseparation of BDHP was also investigated. The nature of cations in background electrolytes affected significantly the separation of BDHP enantiomers.
Primary Care Physicians In Medicare Advantage Were Less Costly, Provided Similar Quality Versus Regional Average

Eran Politzer,Timothy S Anderson,John Z Ayanian,Vilsa Curto,John A Graves,Laura A Hatfield,Jeffrey Souza,Alan M Zaslavsky,Bruce E Landon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2023.00803

Abstract:The use of many services is lower in Medicare Advantage (MA) compared with traditional Medicare, generating cost savings for insurers, whereas the quality of ambulatory services is higher. This study examined the role of selective contracting with providers in achieving these outcomes, focusing on primary care physicians. Assessing primary care physician costliness based on the gap between observed and predicted costs for their traditional Medicare patients, we found that the average primary care physician in MA networks was $433 less costly per patient (2.9 percent of baseline) compared with the regional mean, with less costly primary care physicians included in more networks than more costly ones. Favorable selection of patients by MA primary care physicians contributed partially to this result. The quality measures of MA primary care physicians were similar to the regional mean. In contrast, primary care physicians excluded from all MA networks were $1,617 (13.8 percent) costlier than the regional mean, with lower quality. Primary care physicians in narrow networks were $212 (1.4 percent) less costly than those in wide networks, but their quality was slightly lower. These findings highlight the potential role of selective contracting in reducing costs in the MA program.
Understanding Patient Experience With Medicare Advantage

Paul A. Fishman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.38967

2024-10-18

JAMA Network Open

Abstract:Enrollment in Medicare Advantage (MA) has grown from 19% of eligible seniors in 2007 to 54% in 2024, 1 and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) projects continued growth in MA relative to traditional fee-for-service Medicare. Although most Medicare beneficiaries now choose MA plans, much of the extant evidence about health care cost, quality, and patient satisfaction for US seniors is based on data from the Medicare fee-for-service program, owing in part to the availability of patient data from CMS for traditional Medicare. The growth in MA enrollment and greater access to data from health plans participating in the program allow for more research examining potential differences among enrollees in MA vs traditional Medicare, and whether differences exist with regard to system and patient out-of-pocket costs, and both clinical quality and patient satisfaction with their care. 2 The article by Bejarano and colleagues 3 makes an important contribution to the growing literature on the patient experience and satisfaction with their care for seniors enrolled in the MA plan with a focus on 2 critical aspects of the options seniors have among MA plans. Bejarano and colleagues first distinguish between vertically integrated and nonintegrated plans and, second, between what they refer to as legacy and nonlegacy plans. Vertical integration is a common concept within industrial organization in which all the activities required to produce a good or service are conducted by a single firm, or a collection of firms contractually linked with one another. In health care, the fully vertically integrated health plan would include all of the services required for complete patient care. The authors define legacy integrated plans as those that were fully integrated before the recent growth in MA enrollment, demonstrating a long-term commitment to this care model and the ability to provide the full range of patient care services. Citing previous research, 4 Bejarano and colleagues note that nonlegacy plans may have formed more recently around MA business and lack the experience and organizational capacity of the more established legacy plans. By presenting their analysis of patient experience through the lens of integrated and legacy MA plans, Bejarano and colleagues 3 provide insights into the important heterogeneity that exists along the managed care spectrum. Their analysis reveals that a better patient experience was associated with integrated legacy plans, finding small and statistically significant results when examining the relative experience between all integrated and nonintegrated plans, with the greatest impact of legacy plans in patient experiences in customer service and getting appointments and care quickly. These results highlight the experience legacy plans have in patient engagement but may also point to the different care delivery models used by the 3 legacy plans identified in the article (Kaiser Permanente, Intermountain Health, and Geisinger). These plans have decades of experience providing integrated care using salaried clinicians practicing in owned and operated facilities. Nonlegacy, integrated MA plans are more likely to be offered by indemnity insurers using contractual relationships to achieve integration and, therefore, do not offer the same seamless experience that is offered by legacy plans. In addition to reporting clear differences in the patient experience between legacy and nonlegacy integrated MA plans, Bejarano and colleagues 3 provide important insights into the differences among the populations served by these plans, which will provide policy guidance for quality improvement efforts. The authors report that enrollees in legacy integrated plans are more likely than enrollees in nonlegacy plans to be White (77.4% vs 70.3%) and in excellent or very good health (42.1% vs 34.8%) but are less likely to dually eligible for Medicaid (6.8% vs 32.8%). These findings point to critical issues that CMS should consider when evaluating options to improve the MA program and are consistent with evidence from recent studies on MA plan enrollment showing that individuals from minoritized racial and ethnic groups, those in poorer health, and those more likely to have disability or to be experiencing financial distress are less likely to be enrolled in the higher performing MA plans. These findings are consistent with research by Park and colleagues, 5 who found no difference in CMS star quality ratings among integrated and nonintegrated MA plans but did find that that integrated plans were less likely to enroll individuals from socially marginalized groups. 5 This aligns with previous research by Park et al 6 that individuals from minoritized racial and ethnic groups have fewer options for enrolling in higher quality MA plans. Legacy and integrated MA plans -Abstract Truncated-

medicine, general & internal
Is Medicare Advantage associated with more favorable health care access, acute care utilization, and affordability among beneficiaries with cancer?

Vishal R. Patel,Faraz Jafri,Arjun Gupta,S. M. Qasim Hussaini

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.1597

IF: 45.3

2023-06-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:1597 Background: The Medicare Advantage (MA) program provides care to nearly half of Medicare beneficiaries, including a rapidly growing population of cancer survivors. Although MA was designed to optimize healthcare access, outcomes, and affordability, it is unknown whether these effects have been achieved in cancer survivors. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years with a self-reported history of cancer in the 2019 National Health Interview Survey. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between Medicare program type (MA vs traditional Medicare, TM) and measures of healthcare access, acute care utilization, and affordability. Results: We identified 4,451 beneficiaries with a history of cancer, corresponding to 26.6 million weighted cancer survivors in 2019. Of beneficiaries, 35.8% were enrolled in MA while 64.2% were enrolled in TM. The age, sex, racial and ethnic composition, household income, primary site of cancer, and co-morbidity burden of MA and TM beneficiaries were similar. In adjusted analysis, there were no differences in health care access or acute care utilization between TM and MA beneficiaries. However, survivors enrolled in MA were more likely to worry about (34.3% vs 29.4%; aOR, 1.3 [95% CI, 1.1-1.5]) or have problems paying (13.6% vs 11.1%; aOR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.1-1.8]) medical bills. Conclusions: MA beneficiaries with a previous cancer diagnosis more often struggle paying medical bills despite similar healthcare access and preventive care as TM. Despite generous benefits and attractive incentives for care coordination and health management, privately run MA plans may not be more cost-effective than TM for cancer survivors. Our study informs ongoing congressional deliberations to re-evaluate the role of MA in promoting equity among beneficiaries.[Table: see text]

oncology
Total cost of care of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries participating in an appointment-based model in a national pharmacy chain

Heidi Luder,Josilaida Lawrence,Shirley Musich,Jennifer Friderici,Katherine Andrade,Casey Reed,Jinma Ren,Rachel Halpern

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2024.30.8.782

Abstract:Background: The appointment-based model (ABM) is a pharmacy service to improve medication-related health outcomes. ABM involves medication synchronization and medication review, plus other services such as medication reconciliation, medication therapy management, vaccine administration, and multimedication packaging. ABM can improve medication adherence, but the economic impact is unknown. Objective: To assess the effect of a national pharmacy chain's ABM program for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries on total cost of care (TCOC). Methods: This study analyzed administrative claims data from April 7, 2017, through February 29, 2020, for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with Part D using a propensity score-matched cohort design. The national pharmacy chain provided a list of ABM participants. Eligibility criteria for the ABM and control (non-ABM) groups included age 65 years or older on the index date (initial participation, ABM; random fill date, control) and continuous enrollment from at least 6 months pre-index (baseline) date through at least 6 months post-index (follow-up) date. Medical inflation-adjusted (2020) TCOC was calculated as the sum of all health care spending from Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with Part D plan and patient paid amounts, standardized to per patient per month (PPPM), during the follow-up period. Secondary outcomes included medication adherence calculated across prevalent maintenance therapeutic classes using proportion of days covered (PDC). Results: Each group contained 5,225 patients with balanced characteristics after matching: 64% female, 73% White, mean age 75 years, mean Quan-Charlson comorbidity index score 0.9, and hypertension and dyslipidemia, each >65%. Median baseline all-cause PPPM health care costs in the ABM and control groups, respectively, were $517 and $548 ($221 and $234 medical, $135 and $164 pharmacy). Baseline PDC of at least 80% was 83% in the ABM group and, similarly, 84% in the control group. The mean (SD) follow-up was 604 (155) days for the ABM group and 598 (151) days for the control group. During the follow-up period, the median PPPM TCOC for the ABM group was $656 and was $723 for the control group (P = 0.011). Median pharmacy costs were also significantly less in the ABM group ($161 vs $193, P < 0.001), whereas median medical costs were $328 in the ABM group and $358 among controls (P = 0.254). More patients in the ABM group were adherent during follow-up, with 84% achieving PDC of at least 80% vs 82% among controls (P = 0.009). Conclusions: The ABM program was associated with significantly lower follow-up median total costs (medical and pharmacy), driven primarily by pharmacy costs. More patients were adherent in the ABM program. Payers and pharmacies can use this evidence to assess ABM programs for their members.

An Effective Gated and Attention-Based Neural Network Model for Fine-Grained Financial Target-Dependent Sentiment Analysis

Association of Medicare Advantage Enrollment With Financial Burden of Care : A Retrospective Cohort Study

Health Care Spending, Use, and Financial Hardship among Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage Enrollees with Mental Health Symptoms

Post-Acute Care Use Associated with Medicare Shared Savings Program and Disparities

Role of Patient Sorting in Avoidable Hospital Stays in Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare

Tongue reconstruction with free radial forearm flap after hemiglossectomy: a functional assessment.

Quantifying Differences in Health Care Consumption for the Management of Multiple Sclerosis Within Privately and Publicly Insured Health Care Programs

Racial/ethnic disparities in cost-related barriers to care among near-poor beneficiaries in Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare

Low-Value Services Across Medicare Advantage Insurers and Traditional Medicare

Physician Reimbursement in Medicare Advantage Compared With Traditional Medicare and Commercial Health Insurance

Health Care Use and Spending Among Need-Based Subgroups of Medicare Beneficiaries With Full Medicaid Benefits

Spending and quality after three years of Medicare's bundled payments for medical conditions: quasi-experimental difference-in-differences study

Comparison of Low-Value Care Among Commercial and Medicaid Enrollees

Editorial: EJMS—The European Journal of Mass Spectrometry since 1994. Personal Observations

Diabetes Care Among Older Adults Enrolled in Medicare Advantage Versus Traditional Medicare Fee-For-Service Plans: The Diabetes Collaborative Registry

Financial burden of care greatest among rural beneficiaries in Medicare advantage

Enantioseparation of atropisomeric 1,1'-binaphthyl-2,2'-diyl hydrogen phosphate in capillary electrophoresis by using di- and oligosaccharides as chiral selectors: di- and oligosaccharide chiral selectors in capillary electrophoresis.

Primary Care Physicians In Medicare Advantage Were Less Costly, Provided Similar Quality Versus Regional Average

Understanding Patient Experience With Medicare Advantage

Is Medicare Advantage associated with more favorable health care access, acute care utilization, and affordability among beneficiaries with cancer?

Total cost of care of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries participating in an appointment-based model in a national pharmacy chain