Explore the vast range of titles available.

Pay-for-performance programs are one strategy used by health plans to improve the efficiency and quality of care delivered to beneficiaries. Under such programs, providers are often compared against their peers in order to win bonuses or face penalties in payment. Yet luck has the potential to affect performance assessment through randomness in the sorting of patients among providers or through random events during the evaluation period. To investigate the impact luck can have on the assessment of performance, we investigated its role in assigning penalties under Medicare’s Hospital Readmissions Reduction Policy (HRRP), a program that penalizes hospitals with excess readmissions. We performed simulations that estimated program hospitals’ 2015 readmission penalties in 1,000 different hypothetical fiscal years. These hypothetical fiscal years were created by: (a) randomly varying which patients were admitted to each hospital and (b) randomly varying the readmission status of discharged patients. We found significant differences in penalty sizes and probability of penalty across hypothetical fiscal years, signifying the importance of luck in readmission performance under the HRRP. Nearly all of the impact from luck arose from events occurring after hospital discharge. Luck played a smaller role in determining penalties for hospitals with more beds, teaching hospitals, and safety-net hospitals.

Traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare's prospective payment systems for postacute care provide little incentive to coordinate care or control costs. In contrast, Medicare Advantage plans pay for postacute care out of monthly capitated payments and thus have stronger incentives to use it efficiently. We compared the use of postacute care in skilled nursing and inpatient rehabilitation facilities by enrollees in Medicare Advantage and FFS Medicare after hospital discharge for three high-volume conditions: lower extremity joint replacement, stroke, and heart failure. After accounting for differences in patient characteristics at discharge, we found lower intensity of postacute care for Medicare Advantage patients compared to FFS Medicare patients discharged from the same hospital, across all three conditions. Medicare Advantage patients also exhibited better outcomes than their FFS Medicare counterparts, including lower rates of hospital readmission and higher rates of return to the community. These findings suggest that payment reforms such as bundling in FFS Medicare may reduce the intensity of postacute care without adversely affecting patient health.

To examine trends in Dual-Eligible Special Needs Plan (D-SNP) offerings and enrollment before and after permanent authorization in 2018. Retrospective descriptive analysis. We analyzed publicly available monthly SNP Comprehensive Reports, comparing preauthorization (2010-2018) and postauthorization (2019-2025) periods. We calculated annual totals of D-SNPs and enrollees along with mean annual growth rates for both periods. The mean annual growth rate of unique D-SNP offerings increased from 10.0% preauthorization to 16.2% post authorization. Enrollment of dually eligible beneficiaries increased from a mean annual growth rate of 0.3% preauthorization to 12.8% post authorization. D-SNP enrollment has steadily increased, more than doubling over the past 5 years. By January 2025, there were 986 D-SNPs with 6,030,665 dual enrollees, representing approximately 44% of total dual enrollees. The significant acceleration in both D-SNP offerings and enrollment reflects notable changes in the D-SNP market following permanent authorization. As states transitioned plans into D-SNPs through 2025, these specialized Medicare Advantage plans are positioned to play an increasingly vital role in addressing the complex needs of Medicare-Medicaid dual enrollees.

This article compares patterns of postacute care-including care provided by skilled nursing facilities, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, and home health agencies-under Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare. Overall, Medicare Advantage enrollees received less postacute care, both institutional and home health, than traditional Medicare enrollees did for three common conditions.In traditional Medicare, postacute care is a target of efforts to reduce waste1 and lower hospital readmission rates,2 but few studies have examined postacute care in Medicare Advantage (MA). In contrast to traditional Medicare, MA plans have incentives to reduce costs and can manage postacute care networks and benefit use. MA plans may therefore provide fewer postacute care services, shift care to the least intensive setting (home health care), or both.Prior studies have reported that MA enrollees receive less institutional postacute care than traditional Medicare enrollees do, but these studies did not include the use ofhome health agencies and thus left unanswered the question ofwhether Medicare Advantage provides less postacute care or shifts care toward home health.3,4 This study builds on the work of Peter Huckfeldt and coauthors3 to examine the use of all types of postacute care, including home health agencies (exhibit 1). Like Huckfeldt and coauthors,3 we found that MA patients with three common conditions were less likelythan traditional Medicare patients to use inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), had fewer skilled nursing facility (SNF) days, andhadlowerreadmissionrates (exhibits 1 and 2). In addition, we found that MA enrollees were less likely than traditional Medicare enrollees to receive home health care (exhibit 1).

INTRODUCTION Diabetes and overweight/obesity are described as accelerating aging processes, yet many individuals with these conditions maintain high levels of cognitive and physical function and independence late into life. The Look AHEAD Aging study is designed to identify 20‐year trajectories of behaviors, risk factors, and medical history associated with resilience against geriatric syndromes and aging‐related cognitive and physical functional deficits among individuals with these conditions. METHODS Look AHEAD Aging extends follow‐up of the cohort of the former 10‐year Look AHEAD trial. The original cohort (N = 5145) was enrolled in 2001 to 2004 when participants were aged 45 to 76 years and randomly assigned to a multidomain intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) or a diabetes support and education (DSE) condition. The trial interventions ceased in 2012. Clinic‐based follow‐up continued through 2020. In 2021, the cohort was invited to enroll in Look AHEAD Aging, an additional 4‐year telephone‐based follow‐up (every 6 months) enhanced with Medicare linkage. Standardized protocols assess multimorbidity, physical and cognitive function, health care utilization, and health‐related quality of life. RESULTS Of the original N = 5145 Look AHEAD participants, N = 1552 active survivors agreed to participate in Look AHEAD Aging. At consent, the cohort's mean age was 76 (range 63 to 94) years and participants had been followed for a mean of 20 years. Of the original Look AHEAD enrollees, those who were younger, female, or with no history of cardiovascular disease were more likely to be represented in the Look AHEAD Aging cohort. Intervention groups were comparable with respect to age, diabetes duration, body mass index, insulin use, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and cognitive function. ILI participants had significantly lower deficit accumulation index scores. DISCUSSION By continuing the long‐term follow‐up of an extensively characterized cohort of older individuals with type 2 diabetes, Look AHEAD Aging is well positioned to identify factors associated with resilience against aging‐related conditions.

Medicare covers home health benefits for homebound beneficiaries who need intermittent skilled care. While home health care can help prevent costlier institutional care, some studies have suggested that traditional Medicare beneficiaries may overuse home health care. This study compared home health use in Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare, as well as within Medicare Advantage by beneficiary cost sharing, prior authorization requirement, and plan type. In 2016 Medicare Advantage enrollees were less likely to use home health care than traditional Medicare enrollees were, had 7.1 fewer days per home health spell, and were less likely to be admitted to the hospital during their spell. Among Medicare Advantage plans, those that imposed beneficiary cost sharing or prior authorization requirements had lower rates of home health use. Qualitative interviews suggested that Medicare Advantage payment and contracting approaches influenced home health care use. Therefore, changes in traditional Medicare home health payment policies implemented in 2020 may reduce these disparities in home health use and spell length.

In recent years state and federal policies have encouraged the use of telemedicine by formalizing payments for it. Telemedicine has the potential to expand access to timely care and reduce costs, relative to in-person care. Using information from the Minnesota All Payer Claims Database, we conducted a population-level analysis of telemedicine service provision in the period 2010-15, documenting variation in provision by coverage type, provider type, and rurality of patient residence. During this period the number of telemedicine visits increased from 11,113 to 86,238, and rates of use varied extensively by coverage type and rurality. In metropolitan areas telemedicine visits were primarily direct-to-consumer services provided by nurse practitioners or physician assistants and covered by commercial insurance. In nonmetropolitan areas telemedicine use was chiefly real-time provider-initiated services delivered by physicians to publicly insured populations. Recent federal and state legislation that expanded coverage and increased provider reimbursement for telemedicine services could lead to expanded use of telemedicine, including novel approaches in new patient populations.

In the National Pilot Program on Payment Bundling, a subset of Medicare providers will receive a single payment for an episode of acute care in a hospital, followed by postacute care in a skilled nursing or rehabilitation facility, the patient's home, or other appropriate setting. This article examines the promises and pitfalls of bundled payments and addresses two important design decisions for the pilot: which conditions to include, and how long an episode should be. Our analysis of Medicare data found that hip fracture and joint replacement are good conditions to include in the pilot because they exhibit strong potential for cost savings. In addition, these conditions pose less financial risk for providers than other common ones do, so including them would make participation in the program more appealing to providers. We also found that longer episode lengths captured a higher percentage of costs and hospital readmissions while adding little financial risk. We recommend that the Medicare pilot program test alternative design features to help foster payment innovation throughout the health system. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Black-white gaps in high-quality hospital use are documented, but the relative contributions of various factors are unclear. The objective of this study was to quantify the contributions of differences in geographic and nongeographic factors to the gap, using decomposition methods and data for coronary heart disease. We identified white and black fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 or older who were hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery during 2009-2011. We categorized hospitals with AMI mortality rates in the lowest quintile as high-quality hospitals. We first decomposed the white-black gap in high-quality hospital use into a component due to racial differences in region of residence and a within-region component. We then decomposed the within-region differences into contributions due to racial differences in geographic proximity to high-quality hospitals and due to nongeographic factors. The white-black gap in high-quality hospital use was smaller for AMI than for CABG (1.7 percentage points vs. 7.5 percentage points). For AMI, region of residence contributed more to the gap than within-region differences (1.0 percentage point vs. 0.6 percentage points), while for CABG, within-region differences prevailed (2.0 percentage points vs. 5.4 percentage points). For both conditions, the within-region white-black difference in high-quality hospital use was mainly driven by nongeographic factors. Decomposition methods are a useful tool in quantifying the contributions of various factors to the white-black gap in high-quality hospital use and could inform local policy aimed at reducing disparities in hospital quality.

Price transparency initiatives encourage patients to save money by choosing physicians with a relatively low price per office visit. Given that the price of such visits represents a small fraction of total spending, the extent of the savings from choosing such physicians has not been clear. Using a national sample of commercial claims data, we compared the care received by patients of high- and low-price primary care physicians. The median price for an established patient's office visit was$60 among low-price physicians and $ 86 among high-price physicians (price was calculated as reimbursement plus out-of-pocket spending). Patients of low-price physicians also received, on average, relatively low-price lab tests, imaging, and other procedures. Total spending per year among patients cared for by low-price physicians was $690 less than spending among patients cared for by high-price physicians. There were no consistent differences in patients' use of services between high- and low-price physicians. Despite modest differences in physicians' office visit prices, patients of low-price physicians had substantively lower overall spending, compared to patients of high-price physicians.