Statistical inference in behavior analysis: Friend or foe?

A. Baron

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391983

The Behavior Analyst

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Enrollment Patterns of Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries by Dental, Vision, and Hearing Benefits

Avni Gupta,Diana Silver,David J Meyers,Genevra Murray,Sherry Glied,José A Pagán

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.4936

2024-01-05

JAMA Health Forum

Abstract:Importance: Most Medicare beneficiaries now choose to enroll in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans. Racial and ethnic minority group and low-income beneficiaries are increasingly enrolling in MA plans. Objective: To examine whether dental, vision, and hearing supplemental benefits offered in MA plans are associated with the plan choices of traditionally underserved Medicare beneficiaries. Design, setting, and participants: This exploratory observational cross-sectional study used data from the 2018 to 2020 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey linked to MA plan benefits. The nationally representative sample comprised primarily community-dwelling MA beneficiaries enrolled in general enrollment MA plans. Data analysis was performed between April and October 2023. Exposures: Beneficiary self-identified race and ethnicity and combined individual and spouse income and educational attainment. Main outcomes and measures: Binary indicators were developed to determine whether beneficiaries were enrolled in a plan offering any dental, comprehensive dental, any vision, eyewear, any hearing, or hearing aid benefit. Mixed-effects logistic regression models were estimated to report average marginal effects adjusted for beneficiary-level demographic and health characteristics, plan attributes, and plan availability. Results: This study included 8139 (weighted N = 31 million) eligible MA beneficiaries, with a mean (SD) age of 77.7 (7.5) years. More than half of beneficiaries (54.9%) were women; 9.8% self-identified as Black, 2.0% as Hispanic, 83.9% as White, and 4.2% as other or multiple races or ethnicities. Plan choices by dental benefits were examined among 7516 beneficiaries who were not enrolled in any dental standalone plan, by vision benefits for 8026 beneficiaries not enrolled in any vision standalone plan, and by hearing benefits for 8131 beneficiaries not enrolled in any hearing standalone plan. Black beneficiaries were more likely to enroll in plans with any dental benefit (9.0 percentage points [95% CI, 3.4-14.4]; P < .001), any comprehensive dental benefit (11.2 percentage points [95% CI, 5.7-16.7]; P < .001), any eye benefit (3.0 percentage points [95% CI, 1.0 to 5.0]; P = .004), or any eyewear benefit (6.0 percentage points [95% CI, 0.6-11.5]; P = .03) compared with White beneficiaries. Lower-income individuals (earning ≤200% of the federal poverty level) were more likely to enroll in a plan with a comprehensive dental benefit (4.4 percentage-point difference [95% CI, 0.1-7.9]; P = .01) compared with higher-income beneficiaries. Beneficiaries without a college degree were more likely to enroll in a plan with a comprehensive dental benefit (4.7 percentage-point difference [95% CI, 1.4-8.0]; P = .005) compared with those with higher educational attainment. Conclusions and relevance: The results of this study suggest that racial and ethnic minority individuals and those with lower income or educational attainment are more likely to choose MA plans with dental or vision benefits. As the federal government prepares to adjust MA plan star ratings for health equity, implements MA payment cuts, and allows increasing flexibility in supplemental benefit offerings, these findings may inform benefit monitoring for MA.
Disparities in Enrollment in Medicare Advantage Plans With Dental Benefits

Darien J. Weatherspoon,Susan Hutfless,Richard J. Manski,John F. Moeller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.56095

2024-02-15

JAMA Network Open

Abstract:Traditional fee-for-service Medicare rarely covers oral health services. 1 Medicare beneficiaries in racial and ethnic minority groups and with lower socioeconomic status (SES) are less likely to have recent dental visits than their counterparts. 2 Unlike traditional Medicare, most Medicare Advantage (MA) plans offer access to oral health services, 2 and enrollment in MA has been highest among historically underserved adults 65 years or older. 3 In this study, we aimed to assess the prevalence and likelihood of having MA plans offering dental coverage among beneficiaries by sociodemographic factors. A cross-sectional design was used to analyze dental coverage across the MA population. Beneficiaries with 12 months of Part C (MA) coverage were included. The University of Maryland Baltimore Institutional Review Board deemed the study exempt from review and informed consent because it was non–human participant research. We followed the STROBE reporting guideline. Three categories of dental coverage were constructed from dental benefits data in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 2019 Plan Benefit Package (PBP): no coverage, preventive only, and comprehensive. Dental coverage was not distinguished as optional or mandatory. The 2019 PBP quarterly data were linked to 2019 Master Beneficiary Summary File to determine prevalence of each level of dental coverage across sociodemographic characteristics of Medicare beneficiaries. Race and ethnicity were based on self-reported data from the Social Security Administration and subsequent linkage to Medicare enrollment data. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to estimate odds of having MA plans offering any dental coverage (preventive only or comprehensive) across demographic groups. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to ascertain whether these odds changed when having a plan with mandatory dental coverage was assessed as the outcome. Data analysis was performed between September and December 2023 using SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute). There were 21 219 195 Medicare beneficiaries (12 029 307 females [56.7%], 9 189 888 males [43.3%]; 18 590 043 aged ≥65 years [87.6%]) with 12 months of MA coverage in 2019 (Table 1). Overall, 32.7% of beneficiaries had an MA plan with no coverage, 14.0% with preventive only, and 53.3% with comprehensive coverage. Compared with beneficiaries in other demographic categories, beneficiaries with a higher prevalence of no dental coverage were 75 years or older (36.8%), White individuals (34.9%), not dual-eligible (37.3%), and qualified for Medicare because of age (36.7%). Dental coverage prevalence did not vary appreciably by sex. Odds of having MA plans offering any dental coverage were different across demographic groups (Table 2). Beneficiaries 64 years or younger had higher odds of having dental coverage than those aged 65 to 74 years (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.57; 95% CI, 1.56-1.58). Racial and ethnic minority beneficiaries generally had higher odds of having dental coverage than White beneficiaries, with Hispanic individuals displaying the highest AOR (1.71; 95% CI, 1.70-1.72). Dual-eligible beneficiaries had higher odds of having dental coverage compared with non-dual-eligible beneficiaries (AOR, 2.77; 95% CI, 2.76-2.77). Individuals qualifying for Medicare due to disability had higher odds than beneficiaries qualifying because of age (AOR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.46-1.47). In the regression model with mandatory coverage as the outcome, the overall findings were similar; however, the magnitude of many estimates were attenuated. The results suggest that almost one-third of 2019 Medicare beneficiaries had MA plans without dental coverage. Consistent with a previous study using 2016 data, 4 this study found that beneficiaries in racial and ethnic minority groups and with lower SES were more likely to have plans offering dental coverage than their counterparts; associations were also observed between other demographic factors and dental coverage. A study limitation is that we did not control for geography, which can affect who has access to MA plans with dental coverage. Because recent MA enrollment has been highest among traditionally underserved groups, 4 and many of these individuals have plans offering dental coverage, MA could play a role in increased access to dental care and subsequent reduction in oral health disparities among Medicare beneficiaries. 5 ,6 Accepted for Publication: December 20, 2023. Published: February 14, 2024. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.56095 Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2024 Weatherspoon DJ et al. JAMA Network Open . Corresponding Author: Darien J. Weatherspoon, DDS, MPH, Department of Dental Public Health, University of Maryland -Abstract Truncated-

medicine, general & internal
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.
Trends in the level and composition of supplemental benefits in Medicare Advantage

Grace McCormack,Erin Trish

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxad019

2023-06-20

Abstract:Medicare Advantage (MA) plans that bid below benchmarks (or bidding targets) receive a portion of that difference as rebates, which they then must return to beneficiaries through supplemental benefits or reduced premiums or cost-sharing. Using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data, we evaluate the growth in rebates and concomitant changes in supplemental benefit composition among health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and local preferred provider organizations (PPOs) from 2011 through 2022. Average rebates grew considerably, particularly after 2015 and among PPOs. Alongside this rebate growth, the share of enrollees in plans offering dental, vision, and hearing benefits also increased, with nearly universal coverage of these benefits among both HMOs and PPOs by 2022. Medicare Advantage plans also increasingly reduced beneficiary Part D premium obligations, while increasing beneficiary financial exposure in the form of higher Part D deductibles, medical out-of-pocket maximums, and cost-sharing for inpatient stays. These findings are particularly relevant as policymakers debate the merits of various reforms to MA payment policy.
The effect of shoe wedges and lifts on symmetry of stance and weight bearing in hemiparetic individuals.

G. Rodriguez,A. Aruin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/APMR.2002.31197

IF: 4.06

2002-04-01

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Abstract:OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of shoe wedges and lifts on symmetry of stance and weight bearing in hemiparetic individuals. DESIGN Weight bearing on the paretic side was measured in patients with hemiparesis during quiet standing and in conditions of compelled weight shift. SETTING Free-standing acute inpatient rehabilitation hospital. PARTICIPANTS Nine individuals with hemiparesis as a result of unilateral stroke who were able to stand for 3 to 5 minutes without assistance or rest, and satisfied other inclusion criteria. INTERVENTIONS Compelled shift of the body weight was induced with different shoe wedges (5 degrees, 7.5 degrees, 12.5 degrees) or shoe lifts (0.6, 0.9, 1.2cm), which extended under the entire shoe of the unaffected limb. Weight-bearing symmetry scores were used to characterize the symmetry of stance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Weight-bearing symmetry scores. RESULTS Without a shoe wedge or a shoe lift, weight-bearing symmetry was characterized by underloading of the paretic limb (39.90% +/-.80% of body weight). Weight shift induced by shoe wedges or shoe lifts applied to the unaffected limb promoted improved symmetry of weight bearing and stance. A shoe wedge of 5 degrees provided the most symmetrical weight distribution (51.44% +/- 1.88% of body weight). CONCLUSION Shoe wedges and shoe lifts under the unaffected limb induced compelled weight shift toward the paretic limb, resulting in improved symmetry of stance of individuals with mild hemiparesis. We suggest that improved symmetry of bipedal standing obtained with a shoe wedge or a shoe lift applied to the unaffected limb can help overcome the learned disuse of the affected limb. We further suggest that weight distribution induced by shoe wedges or shoe lifts may help in the treatment of ambulatory hemiparetic individuals with asymmetrical stance caused by unilateral stroke.
Profiling Social Needs Activities in Publicly Traded Medicare Advantage Organizations

Khyathi Gadag,Fred Ullrich,Keith J Mueller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/pop.2024.0045

2024-08-27

Abstract:The objective was to examine Medical Advantage (MA) organizations' commitment toward addressing social determinants of health (SDOH) through their health-related social benefit offerings, and the perceived impact of providing supplemental benefits associated with SDOH in their plans. Public reporting documents were reviewed from six of the largest MA firms: Humana, UnitedHealthcare, Cigna, Elevance Health, CVS Health, and Centene. Public reports were obtained from each company's website (eg, from the "Investor Relations" page). Quarterly reports for Q1 2023, annual reports for 2022, and proxy statements for 2023 for all companies were examined. Content analysis of the public reports was conducted under three constructs: (1) Growth of MA in the company, (2) SDOH-related activities in the company, and (3) SDOH-related activities in the MA plans of the company. Each of the three constructs was further analyzed for recurring themes and elements. The findings from content analysis suggests that plans are providing tailored benefits that may address the social needs of vulnerable and underserved populations. Companies that offered supplemental benefits and value-based arrangements that addressed social needs reported beneficiary clinical outcomes resulting in cost savings and increased revenue. Health insurance companies identify MA as a significant growth opportunity and a strategically important market for overall membership and revenue growth. Moreover, companies providing innovative social benefits through their MA plans reported witnessing increased value propositions by underserved and vulnerable populations, leading to increased revenue and cost containment.
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
Senior-Focused Primary Care Organizations Increase Access For Medicare Advantage Members, Especially Underserved Groups

Kaylyn E Swankoski,Amanda Sutherland,Emily Boudreau,Yong Li,Melanie Canterberry,J Michael McWilliams,Vivek Garg,Brian W Powers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2023.01357

Abstract:Population-based payment in Medicare Advantage (MA) can foster innovation in care delivery by giving risk-bearing providers flexibility and strong incentives to enhance care and engage patients. This may particularly benefit historically underserved groups for whom payments often exceed costs. In this study, using data from Humana MA plans, we examined "senior-focused" primary care organizations that are supported predominantly by population-based payments in contracts with MA plans. We explored whether such organizations supported by such payment are associated with better care and improved equity compared with other primary care organizations receiving other forms of payment in MA. Analyses of data from 462,872 MA beneficiaries in 2021 showed that senior-focused primary care organizations served more Black and dually eligible beneficiaries than other primary care organizations serving MA beneficiaries, and regression-adjusted analysis showed that senior-focused primary care patients received 17 percent more primary care visits. Differences were largest among Black and dual-eligible beneficiaries. These findings suggest that risk-bearing organizations in MA are responding to current payment dynamics and providing enhanced care and access to patients, particularly historically underserved populations.
Medicare Advantage customer service is used most by higher-need patients

Denise D Quigley,Ann Haas,Marc N Elliott,Amelia M Haviland,Nate Orr,Sarah Gaillot,Robert Weech-Maldonado

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37765/ajmc.2024.89589

Abstract:Objectives: To examine characteristics of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees who use their plan's customer service to help plans understand how to better meet members' needs. Study design: National sample of 259,533 respondents to MA Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey enrolled in any of the 559 MA contracts in 2022. Methods: We assessed the association between self-reported customer service use in the prior 6 months and enrollee demographic, coverage, health, and health care utilization characteristics. We used weighted linear regression models to test for bivariate and multivariate associations between customer service use and enrollee characteristics. Results: Forty-two percent of MA enrollees reported using customer service in the prior 6 months. Use was 20 percentage points (PP) higher for those in poor vs excellent/very good general health, 13 PP higher for those in poor vs excellent/very good mental health, and 14 PP higher for those reporting 3 or more vs no chronic conditions. Those using customer service more often had lower educational attainment, had limited income and assets, preferred another language to English, and had greater health care utilization. Conclusions: MA customer service supports a less healthy, higher-need population with greater-than-average barriers to health care, and so should be designed and staffed to effectively serve medically complex, high-need patients. Commercial plan evidence suggests that continuity in customer service support for a member or a given issue may be helpful. Customer service is an important mechanism for improving quality and addressing health equity.
New Supplemental Benefits and Plan Ratings Among Medicare Advantage Enrollees

Emma L. Tucher,David J. Meyers,Amal N. Trivedi,Laura M. Gottlieb,Kali S. Thomas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.15058

2024-06-07

JAMA Network Open

Abstract:This cohort study of Medicare Advantage enrollees examines the association between adoption of a primarily health-related benefit, Special Supplemental Benefit for the Chronically Ill, or both and changes in enrollees' overall plan ratings.

medicine, general & internal
Influence of regio- and stereoregularity of propene insertion on crystallization behavior and elasticity of ethene-propene copolymers.

G. Guerra,M. Galimberti,F. Piemontesi,Odda Ruiz de Ballesteros

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/JA017199F

IF: 15

2002-02-27

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Abstract:Melting enthalpies of several ethene-propene samples, obtained by different single-center catalytic systems and having widely different constitutions and compositions in the range of industrial interest, are compared. For the first time, a clear evidence of influence of the regio- and stereoregularity of propene insertion on crystallization behavior of ethene/propene copolymers is provided. This influence is in qualitative agreement with the results of simplified energy calculations relative to models of pseudo-hexagonal packing of ethene-propene copolymers.
Differences between integrated and non-integrated plans in Medicare Advantage

Sungchul Park,Brent A Langellier,David J Meyers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.14101

Abstract:Objective: To understand differences in financial performance, quality performance, supplemental benefits provision, and enrollee composition between integrated and non-integrated plans in the Medicare Advantage (MA) program. Data sources: We used data from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services for 2015-2017. We included 156 integrated MA plans (31 unique contracts) and 2096 non-integrated MA plans (392 unique contracts). Study design: We estimated linear probably models for financial performance, quality performance, supplemental benefits provision, and enrollee composition with state fixed effects and contract random effects. We adjusted for county-level market structure-related factors, cost-related factors, and demand-related factors. Our primary independent variable was an indicator of plan-provider integration. Principal findings: Integrated MA plans were associated with $19.4 (95% CI: 9.2, 29.7) and $16.6 (95% CI: 10.3, 22.9) higher Part C and Part D monthly premiums, but were associated with higher star quality ratings. There were no significant differences in revenues and plan payments per enrollee between integrated and non-integrated MA plans. Integrated MA plans were associated with $40.5 (95% CI: -54.0, -26.9) lower non-claims costs than non-integrated MA plans. There was limited evidence that integrated MA plans provided more generous supplemental benefits than non-integrated MA plans. Enrollment rates in integrated MA plans were particularly low among socially marginalized groups (3.4 [95% CI: -5.9, -1.0], 4.7 [95% CI: -8.5, -0.9], and 4.4 [95% CI: -6.4, -2.4] percentage points lower among non-Hispanic Black, Medicare-Medicaid dual eligible, and the disabled). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that integrated MA plans may achieve higher efficiency and quality, but these benefits may not be experienced by all beneficiaries due to disparities in enrollment. As these models continue to spread, it is critical to develop policies to ensure that MA enrollees have equal access to integrated plans.
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.
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
Telehealth availability and use among beneficiaries in Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage

Sungchul Park,Hye‐Young Jung,Jiani Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.19183

2024-09-08

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract:Background Medicare Advantage (MA) plans must cover all telehealth services offered by Traditional Medicare (TM), but have flexibility to provide additional telehealth services. It is not known whether these flexibilities are associated with telehealth availability and use. In this study, we examined differences in telehealth availability and use between TM and MA beneficiaries. Methods This cross‐sectional study analyzed beneficiaries who participated in the 2021 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. Our primary outcomes were telehealth availability and use, assessed both overall and by modality (telephone only, video only, and both). Our key independent variable was full‐year enrollment in MA versus TM. Differences in outcomes between TM and MA beneficiaries were estimated using logistic regression models that adjusted for beneficiary characteristics. The analysis of telehealth availability included all beneficiaries in the sample, while the analysis of telehealth use was limited to those offered telehealth services. In a secondary analysis, we examined differences between TM and MA beneficiaries in the availability of technology that may enable telehealth use and experience using the internet to seek information. Results Among 8130 Medicare beneficiaries, MA beneficiaries were 2.9 (95% CI: 0.6–5.2) percentage points more likely to have a provider who offered telehealth services than TM beneficiaries, including both telephone and video options. However, MA beneficiaries were 3.5 (−6.7, −0.4) percentage points less likely to use telehealth services than TM beneficiaries. Video‐only options were used less frequently among MA beneficiaries compared to those in TM (−2.7 [−5.1, −0.3]). Despite lower telehealth use, MA beneficiaries had comparable or higher rates of technology access and internet experience compared to TM beneficiaries. Conclusion Our findings suggest that greater access to telehealth services among MA beneficiaries did not translate into greater telehealth use. Future research is warranted to explore the underlying mechanisms behind lower use of telehealth services among MA beneficiaries.

geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology
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
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
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.
Dental Coverage for Medicare Beneficiaries

Gregory Wolownik,Sally S Cohen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15271544241283793

Abstract:Poor oral health has been associated with various systemic diseases (e.g., endocarditis, pneumonia, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes) and decreased quality of life. When enacted in 1965, Medicare excluded coverage for comprehensive dental services. As of 2023, Medicare has allowed coverage of limited dental services inextricably linked to specific medical conditions. Many Medicare Advantage plans (Medicare Part C) offer dental coverage. Yet in 2019, approximately 24 million Medicare beneficiaries (47% of all Medicare enrollees), lacked dental coverage. Seventy-one percent of traditional Medicare enrollees (those not enrolled in a Medicare Advantage Plan) reported that high cost was the primary reason that they did not obtain dental care. The importance of oral health for the older adults has been the main reason that a national interprofessional consortium, which includes several national nursing organizations, has been advocating for legislation to expand Medicare to include dental coverage. The consortium's efforts have been thwarted by fierce opposition from the American Dental Association and many Republican legislators. Given the vital role that nurses and advanced practice nurses play in caring for the nation's older adults and disabled, nursing's voice needs to be strengthened as leaders in advocating for inclusion of dental benefits in traditional Medicare.

Statistical inference in behavior analysis: Friend or foe?

Enrollment Patterns of Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries by Dental, Vision, and Hearing Benefits

Disparities in Enrollment in Medicare Advantage Plans With Dental Benefits

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

Trends in the level and composition of supplemental benefits in Medicare Advantage

The effect of shoe wedges and lifts on symmetry of stance and weight bearing in hemiparetic individuals.

Profiling Social Needs Activities in Publicly Traded Medicare Advantage Organizations

Understanding Patient Experience With Medicare Advantage

Senior-Focused Primary Care Organizations Increase Access For Medicare Advantage Members, Especially Underserved Groups

Medicare Advantage customer service is used most by higher-need patients

New Supplemental Benefits and Plan Ratings Among Medicare Advantage Enrollees

Influence of regio- and stereoregularity of propene insertion on crystallization behavior and elasticity of ethene-propene copolymers.

Differences between integrated and non-integrated plans in Medicare Advantage

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

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

Telehealth availability and use among beneficiaries in Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage

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

Low-Value Services Across Medicare Advantage Insurers and Traditional Medicare

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.

Dental Coverage for Medicare Beneficiaries