Medicare-Covered Services Near the End of Life in Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare.

IF 9.5 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Lauren Hersch Nicholas, Stacy M Fischer, Alicia I Arbaje, Marcelo Coca Perraillon, Christine D Jones, Daniel Polsky
{"title":"Medicare-Covered Services Near the End of Life in Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare.","authors":"Lauren Hersch Nicholas, Stacy M Fischer, Alicia I Arbaje, Marcelo Coca Perraillon, Christine D Jones, Daniel Polsky","doi":"10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.1777","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Financial incentives in Medicare Advantage (MA), the managed care alternative to traditional Medicare (TM), were designed to reduce overutilization. For patients near the end of life (EOL), MA incentives may reduce potentially burdensome care and encourage hospice but could also restrict access to costly but necessary services.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare receipt of potentially burdensome treatments and transfers and potentially necessary postacute services in the last 6 months of life in individuals with MA vs TM.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>A retrospective analysis of Medicare claims data among older Medicare beneficiaries who died between 2016 and 2018. The study included Medicare decedents aged 66 years or older covered by TM (n = 659 135) or MA (n = 360 430). All decedents and the subset of decedents with 1 or more emergent hospitalizations with a life-limiting condition (cancer, dementia, end-stage organ failure) that would likely qualify for hospice care were included.</p><p><strong>Exposure: </strong>MA enrollment.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes: </strong>Receipt of potentially burdensome hospitalizations and treatments; receipt of postdischarge home and facility care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 659 135 TM enrollees (mean [SD] age at death, 83.3 [9.0] years, 54% female, 15.1% non-White, 55% with 1 or more life-limiting condition) and 360 430 MA enrollees (mean [SD] age at death 82.5 [8.7] years, 53% female, 19.3% non-White, 49% with 1 or more life-limiting condition). After regression adjustment, MA enrollees were less likely to receive potentially burdensome treatments (-1.6 percentage points (pp); 95% CI, -2.1 to -1.1) and less likely to die in a hospital (-3.3 pp; 95% CI, -4.0 to -2.7) compared with TM. However, when hospitalized, MA enrollees were more likely to die in the hospital (adjusted difference, 1.3 pp; 95% CI, 1.1-1.5) and less likely to be transferred to rehabilitative or skilled nursing facilities (-5.2 pp; 95% CI, -5.7 to -4.6). Higher rates of home health and home hospice among those discharged home offset half of the decline in facility use. Results were unchanged in the life-limiting conditions sample.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>MA enrollment was associated with lower rates of potentially burdensome and facility-based care near the EOL. Greater use of home-based care may improve quality of care but may also leave patients without adequate assistance after hospitalization.</p>","PeriodicalId":53180,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Health Forum","volume":"5 7","pages":"e241777"},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11259900/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Health Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.1777","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Financial incentives in Medicare Advantage (MA), the managed care alternative to traditional Medicare (TM), were designed to reduce overutilization. For patients near the end of life (EOL), MA incentives may reduce potentially burdensome care and encourage hospice but could also restrict access to costly but necessary services.

Objective: To compare receipt of potentially burdensome treatments and transfers and potentially necessary postacute services in the last 6 months of life in individuals with MA vs TM.

Design, setting, and participants: A retrospective analysis of Medicare claims data among older Medicare beneficiaries who died between 2016 and 2018. The study included Medicare decedents aged 66 years or older covered by TM (n = 659 135) or MA (n = 360 430). All decedents and the subset of decedents with 1 or more emergent hospitalizations with a life-limiting condition (cancer, dementia, end-stage organ failure) that would likely qualify for hospice care were included.

Exposure: MA enrollment.

Main outcomes: Receipt of potentially burdensome hospitalizations and treatments; receipt of postdischarge home and facility care.

Results: The study included 659 135 TM enrollees (mean [SD] age at death, 83.3 [9.0] years, 54% female, 15.1% non-White, 55% with 1 or more life-limiting condition) and 360 430 MA enrollees (mean [SD] age at death 82.5 [8.7] years, 53% female, 19.3% non-White, 49% with 1 or more life-limiting condition). After regression adjustment, MA enrollees were less likely to receive potentially burdensome treatments (-1.6 percentage points (pp); 95% CI, -2.1 to -1.1) and less likely to die in a hospital (-3.3 pp; 95% CI, -4.0 to -2.7) compared with TM. However, when hospitalized, MA enrollees were more likely to die in the hospital (adjusted difference, 1.3 pp; 95% CI, 1.1-1.5) and less likely to be transferred to rehabilitative or skilled nursing facilities (-5.2 pp; 95% CI, -5.7 to -4.6). Higher rates of home health and home hospice among those discharged home offset half of the decline in facility use. Results were unchanged in the life-limiting conditions sample.

Conclusions: MA enrollment was associated with lower rates of potentially burdensome and facility-based care near the EOL. Greater use of home-based care may improve quality of care but may also leave patients without adequate assistance after hospitalization.

聯邦醫療保險優良計劃與傳統聯邦醫療保險的臨終聯邦醫療保險承保服務。
重要性:医疗保险优势计划(MA)是传统医疗保险(TM)的管理性护理替代计划,其经济激励措施旨在减少过度使用。对于临近生命终点(EOL)的患者,医疗保险的激励措施可能会减少潜在的护理负担并鼓励临终关怀,但也可能会限制患者获得昂贵但必要的服务:目的:比较在生命最后 6 个月中接受潜在负担性治疗和转院以及潜在必要的急性病后服务的情况:对 2016 年至 2018 年期间死亡的老年医疗保险受益人的医疗保险理赔数据进行回顾性分析。研究对象包括由 TM(n = 659 135)或 MA(n = 360 430)承保的 66 岁或以上的联邦医疗保险死者。所有死者和有1次或1次以上因危及生命的疾病(癌症、痴呆症、终末期器官衰竭)紧急住院并可能符合临终关怀条件的死者子集均包括在内:主要结果:接受可能造成负担的住院和治疗;接受出院后的家庭和设施护理:研究包括 659 135 名 TM 注册者(死亡时平均 [SD] 年龄为 83.3 [9.0] 岁,54% 为女性,15.1% 为非白人,55% 患有一种或多种限制生命的疾病)和 360 430 名 MA 注册者(死亡时平均 [SD] 年龄为 82.5 [8.7] 岁,53% 为女性,19.3% 为非白人,49% 患有一种或多种限制生命的疾病)。经过回归调整后,与 TM 相比,MA 参保者接受潜在负担治疗的可能性较低(-1.6 个百分点;95% CI,-2.1 至-1.1),在医院死亡的可能性较低(-3.3 个百分点;95% CI,-4.0 至-2.7)。然而,在住院治疗时,医保参保者更有可能死在医院(调整后的差异为 1.3 个百分点;95% CI,1.1-1.5),更不可能被转到康复或专业护理机构(-5.2 个百分点;95% CI,-5.7 至 -4.6)。在出院回家的患者中,使用家庭医疗和家庭临终关怀服务的比例较高,这抵消了设施使用率下降的一半。限制寿命样本的结果不变:结论:加入医保与临终前较低的潜在负担和设施护理率有关。更多地使用家庭护理可能会提高护理质量,但也可能使患者在住院后得不到足够的帮助。
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
4.00
自引率
7.80%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: JAMA Health Forum is an international, peer-reviewed, online, open access journal that addresses health policy and strategies affecting medicine, health, and health care. The journal publishes original research, evidence-based reports, and opinion about national and global health policy. It covers innovative approaches to health care delivery and health care economics, access, quality, safety, equity, and reform. In addition to publishing articles, JAMA Health Forum also features commentary from health policy leaders on the JAMA Forum. It covers news briefs on major reports released by government agencies, foundations, health policy think tanks, and other policy-focused organizations. JAMA Health Forum is a member of the JAMA Network, which is a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications. The journal presents curated health policy content from across the JAMA Network, including journals such as JAMA and JAMA Internal Medicine.
×
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