No abstract available

In January 2005, Medicare began covering a one-time initial preventive physical examination (IPPE), also called a "Welcome-to-Medicare" visit, during a beneficiary's first 6 months under Part B. This paper examines the effects of offering Medicare IPPE coverage on the use of mammograms, breast self-exams, Pap smears, prostate cancer screenings, cholesterol screenings, and flu vaccines among beneficiaries new to Part B. We adopt a difference-in-difference estimator and estimate a set of multivariate logit models to quantify the effects of introducing Medicare IPPE coverage on the use of preventive services. Models are estimated separately for men and women. Data for the analysis come from the 1996-2008 Health and Retirement Study. Among both men and women, having coverage for a one-time IPPE under Medicare had no effects on the utilization of any of the preventive services listed above. In this study, we find that offering coverage for a one-time IPPE under Medicare was insufficient to spur greater use of preventive services among new Medicare beneficiaries. These findings are important and suggest that policy-makers may need to consider other approaches to increase the use of recommended preventive services.

Private Medicare Advantage (MA) plans recently surpassed traditional Medicare (TM) in enrollment. However, MA plans are facing scrutiny for burdensome prior authorization and potential rationing of care, including home health. MA beneficiaries are less likely to receive home health, but recent evidence on differences in service intensity and outcomes among home health patients is lacking.

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.

As healthcare costs are increasingly being shifted from payers to patients, it is important to understand the economic consequences of therapeutic strategies to both payers and patients.

Medicare Advantage plans have strong incentives to reduce potentially wasteful health care, including costly acute care visits for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs). However, it remains unknown whether Medicare Advantage plans lower acute care use compared with traditional Medicare, or if it shifts patients from hospitalization to observation stays and emergency department (ED) direct discharges.

In the Medicare Advantage (MA) program, Medicare enrollees may be steered by their health plan to specific hospitals. Little is known about the quality of hospitals that serve MA enrollees.

Medicare beneficiaries who have chronic conditions are responsible for a disproportionate share of Medicare fee-for-service expenditures. The objective of this study was to analyze the change in the health of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Part A (hospital insurance) between 2008 and 2010 by comparing the prevalence of 11 chronic conditions.

To compare the characteristics of dialysis facilities used by traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare advantage (MA) enrollees with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD).

We forecast the health and budgetary impact of hepatitis C (HCV) treatment on the Medicare program based on currently observed rates of treatment among Medicare and non-Medicare patients and identify the impact of higher rates of treatment among non-Medicare populations. We developed a computer microsimulation model to conduct an epidemiologic forecast, a budgetary impact analysis, and a cost-effectiveness analysis of the treatment of HCV based on three scenarios: 1) no treatment, 2) continuation of current-treatment rates, and 3) treatment rates among non-Medicare patients increased to match that of Medicare patients. The simulated population is based on National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data. HCV progression rates and costs were calculated in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program Medicare 5% claims data from the Chronic Hepatitis Cohort Study and published literature. We estimate that 13.6% of patients with HCV in the United States are enrolled in Medicare, but 75% will enter Medicare in the next 20 years. Medicare patients were over 5 times as likely to be treated in 2014-2015 as other patients. Medicare paid over $9 billion in treatment costs in both 2015 and 2016 and will total $28.4 billion from 2017-2026. Increasing treatment rates among non-Medicare patients would lead to 234,000 more patients being treated, reduce HCV mortality by 19%, and decrease Medicare costs by $18.6 billion from 2017-2026. We find that treatment remains cost-effective under most assumptions, costing $31,718 per quality adjusted life year gained. Conclusion: Medicare treats a disproportionately large share of HCV patients. Continued low rates of treatment among non-Medicare HCV patients will result in both reduced and deferred treatment, shifting future treatment costs to Medicare while increasing overall medical management costs, morbidity, and mortality. (Hepatology Communications 2017;1:99-109).

There have been no validated Medicare claims-based algorithms available to identify epilepsy by discrete etiology of stroke (e.g., post-stroke epilepsy, PSE) in community-dwelling elderly individuals, despite the increasing availability of large datasets. Our objective was to validate algorithms that detect which patients have true PSE.

Benzodiazepines, which are associated with safety-related harms for older adults, were not covered when the US Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit began. Coverage was extended to benzodiazepines in 2013.

The population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries collect information on first-course treatment, including surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and hormone therapy. However, the SEER program does not release data on chemotherapy or hormone therapy due to uncertainties regarding data completeness. Activities are ongoing to investigate the opportunity to supplement SEER treatment data with other data sources.

It is important that actual outcomes of care and not surrogate markers, such as process measures, be used to evaluate the quality of inpatient care. Because of the heterogenous composition of patients, risk-adjustment is essential for the objective evaluation of outcomes following inpatient care. Comparative evaluation of risk-adjusted outcomes can be used to identify suboptimal performance and can provide direction for care improvement initiatives.We studied the risk-adjusted outcomes of 6 medical conditions during the inpatient and 90-day post-discharge period to identify the opportunities for care improvement. The Medicare Limited Dataset for 2012 to 2014 was used to identify acute myocardial infarction (AMI), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), congestive heart failure (CHF), pneumonia (PNEU), cerebrovascular accidents (CVA), and gastrointestinal hemorrhage (GIH). Stepwise logistic predictive models were developed for the adverse outcomes (AOs) of inpatient deaths, 3-sigma prolonged length-of-stay outliers, 90-day post-discharge deaths, and 90-day readmissions after unrelated events were excluded. Observed and predicted AOs were determined for each hospital with ≥75 cases for each of the 6 medical conditions. Z-scores and risk-adjusted AO rates for each hospital permitted comparative analysis of outcomes after adjusting for covariance among the medical conditions.There were a total of 1,811,749 patients from 973 acute care hospitals with the 6 medical conditions. A total of 41% of all patients had ≥1 AO events. One or more readmissions were identified in 29.8% of patients. A total of 64 hospitals (6.4%) were 2 standard deviations better than the mean for risk-adjusted outcomes, and 72 (7.4%) were 2 standard deviations poorer. The best performing decile of hospitals had mean AO rates of 35.1% (odds ratio = 0.766; 95% confidence interval (CI) CI: 0.762-0.771) and the poorest performing decile a mean AO rate of 48.5% (odds ratio = 1.357; 95% CI: 1.346-1.369). Volume of qualifying cases ranged from 670 to 9314; no association was identified for increased volume of patients (P < .40).Risk-adjusted AO rates demonstrated nearly a 14% opportunity for care improvement between top and suboptimal performing hospitals. Hospitals must be able to benchmark objective measurement of outcomes to inform quality initiatives.

Although physician services represent a substantial portion of cancer care costs, little is known about trends in the costs of physician cancer services in the fee-for-service Medicare program. We analyzed aggregated data from all Part B Medicare claims for physician and supplier services attributed to cancer patients from 1999 to 2012 to characterize how billing and payments have changed over time for the most common cancer types. Billing and expenditure data are from the Medicare Statistical Supplement, and age-adjusted incidence data are from SEER. Physician services for cancer patients grew from $7.6 billion in 1999 to $12.3 billion in 2012 (60 percent increase). Reimbursements for physician and supplier services for cancer treatment in Medicare Part B beneficiaries steadily grew from 1999 to 2005 and then plateaued through 2012, led by a decrease in reimbursements for prostate cancer care. These trends may reflect shifts toward hospital-based care or changes in aggressiveness of care.

Policy Points Only a small minority of new drugs in "nonprotected" classes are widely covered by Part D plans nationwide in the year after US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. Part D plans frequently apply utilization management restrictions such as prior authorizations to newly approved drugs in both protected and nonprotected classes. Drug price influences both formulary inclusion (in nonprotected classes) and coverage restrictions (in both protected and nonprotected classes), while other drug characteristics such as therapeutic benefits are not consistently associated with formulary design. Plans do not seem to favor the minority of drugs that are determined to offer added therapeutic benefit over existing alternatives.

In fall 1998 CMS implemented the National Medicare Education Program (NMEP) to educate beneficiaries about their Medicare program benefits; health plan choices; supplemental health insurance; beneficiary rights, responsibilities, and protections; and health behaviors. CMS has been monitoring the implementation of the NMEP in six case study sites as well as monitoring each of the information channels for communicating with beneficiaries. This article describes select findings from the case studies, and highlights from assessment activities related to the Medicare & You handbook, the toll-free 1-800-MEDICARE Helpline, Internet, and Regional Education About Choices in Health (REACH).

Medicare is a large government health insurance program in the United States that covers about 60 million people. This paper analyzes the effects of Medicare insurance on health for a group of people in urgent need of medical care: people with cancer. We used a regression discontinuity design to assess impacts of near-universal Medicare insurance at age 65 on cancer detection and outcomes, using population-based cancer registries and vital statistics data. Our analysis focused on the three tumor sites for which screening is recommended both before and after age 65: breast, colorectal, and lung cancer. At age 65, cancer detection increased by 72 per 100,000 population among women and 33 per 100,000 population among men; cancer mortality also decreased by nine per 100,000 population for women but did not significantly change for men. In a placebo check, we found no comparable changes at age 65 in Canada. This study provides the first evidence to our knowledge that near-universal access to Medicare at age 65 is associated with improvements in population-level cancer mortality.

BACKGROUND: The progressive nature of Parkinson disease (PD), together with a lack of curative treatments, contributes to its economic burden. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the longitudinal incremental costs attributable to PD among Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we used data from the Chronic Conditions Data Warehouse to identify Medicare beneficiaries with and without PD-related claims identified from 2006 to 2014 with follow-up until 2015. We grouped PD cases and controls based on their survival profiles using a grouping algorithm that used the following baseline measures: age, race, sex, and comorbidity. We identified 3 survival groups and used them to stratify the descriptive annual cost estimates in the 9 years after the index date. We estimated the incremental 1-, 3-, and 5-year costs of PD using generalized linear models (GLM) that controlled for baseline factors. RESULTS: We identified 27,394 cases and controls who were grouped into 3 survival groups. The mean age of the full study sample was 73 years. No material differences were found in the incremental cost of PD across the survival groups. Based on the multivariable GLM, the 1-year incremental cost of PD was $9,625 (95% CI, $9,054-$10,197). The 3-year incremental cost of PD was $20,832 (95% CI, $19,390-$22,274). The 5-year incremental cost of PD was $27,466 (95% CI, 25,088-$29,844). CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare beneficiaries, PD is associated with excess costs compared with controls. We did not identify substantial differences in the incremental cost of PD across the survival groups. DISCLOSURES:This study was funded by Pfizer Inc. The funding agreement did not impact the authors' independence in designing the study, collecting the data, interpreting the data, writing the manuscript, and submitting the manuscript for publication. Dr Onukwugha reports grants from Pfizer Inc for the conduct of this study and is an employee of University of Maryland, Baltimore, which received financial support from Pfizer Inc in connection with the development of this manuscript; Dr Shulman reports research funding from Pfizer Inc related to the current work, is an employee of University of Maryland, Baltimore, which received financial support from Pfizer Inc in connection with the development of this manuscript, and reports research funding from the NIH, The Rosalyn Newman Foundation, and the Eugenia and Michael Brin family unrelated to the current work and royalties from Oxford University Press and Johns Hopkins University Press; Ms Myers and Dr Alvir are employees and stockholders of Pfizer Inc; Dr Gray was an employee and stockholder of Pfizer Inc at the time of analysis.

The objective of this study was to use a population-based dataset to evaluate the number of readmissions and reasons for readmission in Medicare patients undergoing pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer.