The impact of dual-enrolee (Medicare/Medicaid) status on venous leg ulcer outcomes: a retrospective study.

Abstract

Objective: To quantify race, sex, comorbidities, Medicaid status, and compare health outcomes for Medicare-only versus Medicare/Medicaid dual-enrolees who developed a hard-to-heal venous leg ulcer (VLU).

Method: Medicare Limited Data Standard analytic hospital inpatient and outpatient department files were used to follow episodes of medical care for a VLU from 1 October 2015-2 October 2019. In an earlier study, patients diagnosed concurrently with chronic venous insufficiency and a VLU were propensity-matched. In this current work, cohorts were split into patients enrolled in Medicare-only and those enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid (dual-enrolees). Treatment methods were compared and the most commonly used cellular, acellular and matrix-like product (CAMP) among Medicare beneficiaries-dehydrated human amnion chorion membrane (DHACM)-was evaluated. Episode claims were used to document demographics, comorbidities and treatments of Medicare enrolees who developed VLUs and outcomes such as time to ulcer closure, rates of complications and hospital usage rates. Quality of life (QoL) metrics, such as pain and time to VLU closure, were compared across the groups.

Results: Of the 555,284 Medicare beneficiaries evaluated in this analysis, 27% were Medicare/Medicaid dual-enrolees and 73% were Medicare-only enrolees. To qualify for Medicaid, patient income had to be ≤133% of the federal poverty level. Only 3% of Medicare-only patients and 6% of dual-enrolees had an Advantage plan, a lower rate than the general Medicare population. Dual-enrolees, compared to those covered by Medicare-only, demonstrated: a Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score one point greater (p<0.0001); a higher percentage (16%) of patients from minority ethnic backgrounds; and significantly higher rates of emergency department visits (p<0.0001) and cellulitis (p=0.034). Dual-enrolees who received early and regularly applied CAMPs also reduced their treatment time by 21 days (p=0.0027), all of which can impact costs.

Conclusion: The socioeconomic status of dual-enrolees included near poverty status, a higher percentage of patients from a minority ethnic background, and high rates of comorbidities compared to their Medicare-only counterparts. The VLUs of dual-enrolees took longer to close, developed more complications, and used significantly more hospital resources and expenses. Outcomes significantly improved when VLU episodes were treated with a CAMP, such as DHACM, while following parameters for use. Socioeconomic variables are associated with poor outcomes for patients with hard-to-heal (chronic) wounds. This should be tracked to find cost-effective interventions throughout their journey to provide equitable care and ensure they are not left behind. Greater access for dual-enrolees to CAMPs has the potential to improve clinical outcomes and patient QoL, while concomitantly reducing overall healthcare expenditure.