Comparing Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries with ESKD who Switched to Medicare Advantage versus Remained in Traditional Medicare.

IF 8.5 1区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Allan Y Gao, Christopher D Knapp, Jiannong Liu, Kirsten L Johansen
{"title":"Comparing Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries with ESKD who Switched to Medicare Advantage versus Remained in Traditional Medicare.","authors":"Allan Y Gao, Christopher D Knapp, Jiannong Liu, Kirsten L Johansen","doi":"10.2215/CJN.0000000000000512","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Patients choosing Medicare Advantage vs. Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) differ with respect to race, socioeconomic status, and burden of disease. However, it is unclear whether these differences also occur among patients with kidney failure, who were newly allowed to switch to Medicare Advantage after the 21st Century Cares Act. We used data from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) to examine differences in characteristics of dialysis patients and kidney transplant recipients who switched from FFS to Medicare Advantage compared with those who stayed with FFS in 2021, the first year such switching was allowed. We used unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression to compare odds of switching among demographic and geographic subgroups. Among 411,513 patients with FFS coverage in 2020, 10.1% switched to Medicare Advantage in 2021. Switchers constituted 12% of the dialysis population and 5% of the kidney transplant population. In the dialysis population, patients of Black race and Hispanic ethnicity were more likely to switch than patients of White race (adjusted OR 1.69, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.64, 1.73 and OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.40, 1.47, respectively), as were patients with dual eligibility for Medicaid (adjusted OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.09, 1.15). Patients living in the South were also more likely to switch to Medicare Advantage than those living in the West (adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.43, 1.52). Similar differences were observed among kidney transplant recipients. Patients who switched from FFS to Medicare Advantage were disproportionately from historically marginalized groups, including Black, Hispanic, and low income individuals. They were also more likely to live in the South. These differences may threaten the generalizability of USRDS data that relies on FFS insurance claims and suggest that comparisons of outcomes between FFS and MA beneficiaries with kidney failure should be adjusted for key patient characteristics.</p>","PeriodicalId":50681,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.0000000000000512","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Patients choosing Medicare Advantage vs. Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) differ with respect to race, socioeconomic status, and burden of disease. However, it is unclear whether these differences also occur among patients with kidney failure, who were newly allowed to switch to Medicare Advantage after the 21st Century Cares Act. We used data from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) to examine differences in characteristics of dialysis patients and kidney transplant recipients who switched from FFS to Medicare Advantage compared with those who stayed with FFS in 2021, the first year such switching was allowed. We used unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression to compare odds of switching among demographic and geographic subgroups. Among 411,513 patients with FFS coverage in 2020, 10.1% switched to Medicare Advantage in 2021. Switchers constituted 12% of the dialysis population and 5% of the kidney transplant population. In the dialysis population, patients of Black race and Hispanic ethnicity were more likely to switch than patients of White race (adjusted OR 1.69, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.64, 1.73 and OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.40, 1.47, respectively), as were patients with dual eligibility for Medicaid (adjusted OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.09, 1.15). Patients living in the South were also more likely to switch to Medicare Advantage than those living in the West (adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.43, 1.52). Similar differences were observed among kidney transplant recipients. Patients who switched from FFS to Medicare Advantage were disproportionately from historically marginalized groups, including Black, Hispanic, and low income individuals. They were also more likely to live in the South. These differences may threaten the generalizability of USRDS data that relies on FFS insurance claims and suggest that comparisons of outcomes between FFS and MA beneficiaries with kidney failure should be adjusted for key patient characteristics.

患有 ESKD 的聯邦醫療保險付費服務受益人轉換至聯邦醫療保險優良計劃與繼續參加傳統聯邦醫療保險的比較。
摘要:选择 "联邦医疗保险优势计划"(Medicare Advantage)和 "联邦医疗保险付费服务计划"(Medicare fee-for-service,FFS)的患者在种族、社会经济地位和疾病负担方面存在差异。然而,目前还不清楚肾衰竭患者是否也存在这些差异,因为在《21 世纪关爱法案》颁布后,肾衰竭患者新近被允许转入 "医疗保险优势计划"。我们利用美国肾脏数据系统(USRDS)的数据,研究了在 2021 年,即允许转入联邦医疗保险优势计划的第一年,从 FFS 转入联邦医疗保险优势计划的透析患者和肾移植受者的特征与留在 FFS 的透析患者和肾移植受者的特征之间的差异。我们使用未经调整和调整的逻辑回归来比较不同人口和地域亚群之间的转换几率。在 2020 年获得 FFS 保险的 411,513 名患者中,10.1% 在 2021 年转为 Medicare Advantage。转换者占透析人群的 12%,占肾移植人群的 5%。在透析人群中,黑人和西班牙裔患者比白人更有可能转保(调整后 OR 分别为 1.69,95% 置信区间 [CI] 1.64,1.73 和 OR 1.42,95% CI 1.40,1.47),具有双重医疗补助资格的患者也更有可能转保(调整后 OR 1.12,95% CI 1.09,1.15)。居住在南部的患者也比居住在西部的患者更有可能转入 "医疗保险优势计划"(调整后 OR 为 1.48,95% CI 为 1.43,1.52)。在肾移植受者中也观察到类似的差异。从 FFS 转为 Medicare Advantage 的患者大多来自历史上被边缘化的群体,包括黑人、西班牙裔和低收入人群。他们也更有可能居住在南方。这些差异可能会威胁到依赖于 FFS 保险索赔的 USRDS 数据的普遍性,并表明在比较肾衰竭 FFS 受益人和 MA 受益人的治疗结果时,应根据患者的主要特征进行调整。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
3.10%
发文量
514
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology strives to establish itself as the foremost authority in communicating and influencing advances in clinical nephrology by (1) swiftly and effectively disseminating pivotal developments in clinical and translational research in nephrology, encompassing innovations in research methods and care delivery; (2) providing context for these advances in relation to future research directions and patient care; and (3) becoming a key voice on issues with potential implications for the clinical practice of nephrology, particularly within the United States. Original manuscript topics cover a range of areas, including Acid/Base and Electrolyte Disorders, Acute Kidney Injury and ICU Nephrology, Chronic Kidney Disease, Clinical Nephrology, Cystic Kidney Disease, Diabetes and the Kidney, Genetics, Geriatric and Palliative Nephrology, Glomerular and Tubulointerstitial Diseases, Hypertension, Maintenance Dialysis, Mineral Metabolism, Nephrolithiasis, and Transplantation.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信