Explore the vast range of titles available.

Enrollment in Medicare Advantage, the managed care program for Medicare beneficiaries, has grown rapidly, from 4.6 million enrollees in 2003 to 12.8 million by 2012, or 27 percent of all current Medicare beneficiaries. We analyzed utilization patterns of enrollees in Medicare Advantage health maintenance organization (HMO) plans compared to matched samples of people in traditional Medicare during 2003-09, to ascertain whether the HMO enrollees demonstrated different levels of use of services, which can be a hallmark of more integrated care. We found that utilization rates in some major categories, including emergency departments and ambulatory surgery or procedures, generally were 20-30 percent lower in Medicare Advantage HMOs in all years. Medicare Advantage HMO enrollees initially had lower rates of ambulatory visits and hospitalizations, although these rates converged by 2008; they also received about 10 percent fewer hip or knee replacements. In contrast, HMO enrollees underwent more coronary bypass surgery than patients in traditional Medicare. These findings suggest that overall, Medicare Advantage HMO enrollees might use fewer services and be experiencing more appropriate use of services than enrollees in traditional Medicare. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

With ongoing interest in rising Medicare Advantage enrollment, we examined whether the growth in enrollment between 2006 and 2011 was mainly due to new beneficiaries choosing Medicare Advantage when they first become eligible for Medicare. We also examined the extent to which beneficiaries in traditional Medicare switched to Medicare Advantage, and vice versa. We found that 22 percent of new Medicare beneficiaries elected Medicare Advantage over traditional Medicare in 2011; they accounted for 48 percent of new Medicare Advantage enrollees that year. People ages 65-69 switched from traditional Medicare to Medicare Advantage at higher-than-average rates. Dual eligibles (people eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid) and beneficiaries younger than age sixty-five with disabilities disenrolled from Medicare Advantage at higher-than-average rates. On average, in each year of the study period we found that fewer than 5 percent of traditional Medicare beneficiaries switched to Medicare Advantage, and a similar percentage of Medicare Advantage enrollees switched to traditional Medicare. These results suggest that initial coverage decisions have long-lasting effects.

This article shows that there are substantial variations in diagnostic practices in different regions of the United States. These variations have an important effect on risk adjustment, which, according to the authors, may introduce biases in comparative-effectiveness research, public reporting, and payment reforms. There are substantial variations in diagnostic practices in different regions of the United States. These variations have an important effect on risk adjustment, which may introduce biases in comparative-effectiveness research, public reporting, and payment reforms. Risk adjustment is an essential element of comparative-effectiveness studies, measurements of health care performance, and payment programs and is destined to become even more important as health care reform proceeds. Observational studies comparing the outcomes of various approaches to treatment 1 or the performance of specific providers often adjust for patients' preexisting diagnoses. 2 The Medicare payment systems for institutional providers and health plans include payment adjustments that take into account the beneficiaries' health or functional status. 3 , 4 As payers move toward more bundled and value-based payment systems, incentives to avoid providing care for patients who are difficult to treat or patients . . .

Targeting efforts to improve medication adherence, especially among people with high health needs, can improve health and lower health care spending. To this end, Medicare requires that insurance plans that provide prescription drug (Part D) coverage offer specialized medication therapy management services to optimize medication use for enrollees with high drug costs, multiple chronic diseases, and multiple covered drugs. We analyzed a large random sample of Part D enrollees with diabetes, heart failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, to see whether poor adherence to recommended drugs was associated with higher Medicare costs. We found that beneficiaries with poor adherence had higher costs, ranging from $49 to $840 per month for patients with diabetes, for example. However, such beneficiaries were not uniformly more likely than others to be eligible for medication therapy management services. Aligning medication therapy management eligibility with a metric such as potentially preventable future costs holds promise for both improving the quality of care and reducing spending. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Medicare Advantage (MA) has grown rapidly since the Affordable Care Act; nearly one-third of Medicare beneficiaries now choose MA. An assessment of the comparative value of the 2 options is confounded by an apparent selection bias favoring MA, as reflected in mortality differences. Previous assessments have been hampered by lack of access to claims diagnosis data for the MA population. An indirect comparison of mortality as an outcome variable was conducted by modeling mortality on a traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare data set, applying the model to an MA data set, and then evaluating the ratio of actual-to-predicted mortality in the MA data set. The mortality model adjusted for clinical conditions and demographic factors. Model development considered the effect of potentially greater coding intensity in the MA population. Further analysis calculated ratios for subpopulations. Predicted, risk-adjusted mortality was lower in the MA population than in FFS Medicare. However, the ratio of actual-to-predicted mortality (0.80) suggested that the individuals in the MA data set were less likely to die than would be predicted had those individuals been enrolled in FFS Medicare. Differences between actual and predicted mortality were particularly pronounced in low income (dual eligibility), nonwhite race, high morbidity, and Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) subgroups. After controlling for baseline clinical risk as represented by claims diagnosis data, mortality differences favoring MA over FFS Medicare persisted, particularly in vulnerable subgroups and HMO plans. These findings suggest that differences in morbidity do not fully explain differences in mortality between the 2 programs.

Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Medicare coverage expanded in 2011 to fully cover annual preventive care visits. We assessed the impact of coverage expansion, using 2007-13 data from primary care patients of Medicare-eligible age at the Palo Alto Medical Foundation (204,388 patient-years), which serves people in four counties near San Francisco, California. We compared trends in preventive visits and recommended preventive services among Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare health maintenance organization (HMO) patients as well as non-Medicare patients ages 65-75 who were covered by private fee-for-service and private HMO plans. Among Medicare fee-for-service patients, the annual use of preventive visits rose from 1.4 percent before the implementation of the ACA to 27.5 percent afterward. This increase was significantly larger than was seen for patients in the other insurance groups. Nevertheless, rates of annual preventive care visit use among Medicare fee-for-service patients remained 10-20 percentage points lower than was the case for people with private coverage (43-44 percent) or those in a Medicare HMO (53 percent). ACA policy changes led to increased preventive service use by Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, which suggests that Medicare coverage expansion is an effective way to increase seniors' use of preventive services.

The rapid increase in the prevalence of chronic pain and disability, and the explosion of interventional pain management associated health care costs are a major concern for our community. Further, the increasing utilization of numerous modalities of treatments in managing chronic pain, continue to escalate at a pace which may not be sustainable. There are multiple regulations in place to control the growth of health care expenditures which seem to have been largely ineffective. Among the various modalities utilized in managing chronic pain, interventional techniques have shown a significant increase in their utilization in the face of continued debate with respect to the accuracy of diagnostic interventions and the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. To update and assess the utilization of interventional techniques in chronic pain management in fee-for-service Medicare population. An updated analysis of the growth of interventional techniques in managing chronic pain in fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries from 2000 through 2013. The data were derived and analyzed utilizing the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician Supplier Procedure Summary Master Data from 2000 through 2013. From 2000 through 2013, in fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, the overall utilization of interventional techniques services increased 236% at an annual average growth of 9.8%, whereas the per 100,000 Medicare population utilization increased 156% with an annual average growth of 7.5%. During this period, the US population increased 12% with an annual average increase of 0.9%, whereas those above 65 years of age increased 27% with an annual average increase of 1.9%. Total Medicare beneficiaries increased 31% with an annual average increase of 2.1%, with an overall increase of 64% for those above 65 years of age, an increase of 26%, constituting 17% of the US population in 2013. The overall increases in epidural and adhesiolysis procedures were 165% compared to 102% per 100,000 fee-for-service population with annual average increases of 7.8% and 5.6%. Facet joint and sacroiliac joint injections increased 417% for services with an annual average increase of 13.5%, whereas the rate per 100,000 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries increased 295% with an annual average increase of 11.1%. Limitations of this assessment include the lack of inclusion of participants from Medicare Advantage plans, lack of appropriate available data for state-wide utilization, and potential errors in documentation, coding, and billing. This update once again shows a significant increase in interventional techniques in fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries from 2000 through 2013 with an increase of 156% per 100,000 Medicare population with an annual average increase of 7.5%. During this period the Medicare population increased 31% with an annual average increase of 2.1%.

Charged with transforming geriatric emergency care by applying palliative care principles, a process improvement team at New York City's Mount Sinai Medical Center developed the GEDI WISE (Geriatric Emergency Department Innovations in Care through Workforce, Informatics, and Structural Enhancements) model. The model introduced workforce enhancements for emergency department (ED) and adjunct staff, including role redefinition, retraining, and education in palliative care principles. Existing ED triage nurses screened patients ages sixty-five and older to identify those at high risk of ED revisit and hospital readmission. Once fully trained, these nurses screened all but 6 percent of ED visitors meeting the screening criteria. Newly hired ED nurse practitioners identified high-risk patients suitable for and desiring palliative and hospice care, then expedited referrals. Between January 2011 and May 2013 the percentage of geriatric ED admissions to the intensive care unit fell significantly, from 2.3 percent to 0.9 percent, generating an estimated savings of more than $3 million to Medicare. The decline in these admissions cannot be confidently attributed to the GEDI WISE program because other geriatric care innovations were implemented during the study period. GEDI WISE programs are now running at Mount Sinai and two partner sites, and their potential to affect the quality and value of geriatric emergency care continues to be examined.

The number of older adults with cognitive impairment is increasing, and such adults often require a surrogate to make decisions about health care. However, little is known about the aggressiveness of end-of-life care for these people, especially those who reside in the community. We found that cognitive impairment is common among older adults approaching the end of life, whether they live in the community or in a nursing home, and that nearly 30 percent of patients with severe dementia remained in the community until death. Among those patients, having an advance directive in the form of a living will was associated with significantly less aggressive care at the end of life, compared to similar patients without an advance directive-as measured by Medicare spending ($11,461 less per patient), likelihood of in-hospital death (17.9 percentage points lower), and use of the intensive care unit (9.4 percentage points lower). In contrast, advance directives were not associated with differences in care for people with normal cognition or mild dementia, whether they resided in the community or in a nursing home. Timely advance care planning after a diagnosis of cognitive impairment may be particularly important for older adults who reside in the community. Adapted from the source document.

The large variation in Medicare spending across geographic areas has raised concern about inappropriate spending in some areas. In this study, the authors assessed how differences in patients' characteristics contribute to variation in spending. In unadjusted analyses, spending was 52% higher in areas in the highest quintile of per-beneficiary spending than in the lowest quintile. After adjustment for demographic and health-status variables, the difference was reduced to 33%. The authors assessed how differences in patients' characteristics contribute to variation in spending. In unadjusted analyses, spending was 52% higher in areas in the highest quintile of per-beneficiary spending than in the lowest quintile. The issue of geographic differences in Medicare spending per beneficiary has been fueled by more than two decades of research behind the Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care . 1 Most notably, after adjustment for baseline differences in health status and other variables, Medicare spending per beneficiary for physician and hospital services was 52% higher in regions in the top quintile of spending than in those in the lowest quintile, with no apparent differences in quality. 2 , 3 The Dartmouth research suggests that the primary source of the spending differences is variation in the supply of medical resources and that this variation leads . . .