{"title":"Medicare Resource Use Differs by English Reading Proficiency.","authors":"Lilly Estenson, Eric T Roberts, Mireille Jacobson","doi":"10.1093/geroni/igae105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Medicare coverage decisions are complex. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) provides a hotline, handbook, and website to help Medicare beneficiaries understand their benefits and coverage options, yet it is unclear what factors affect beneficiary use of these resources. We examined limited English speaking and English reading proficiency status as predictors of CMS Medicare informational resource use in a nationally representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>We used 2016-2018 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey data and linear probability models to assess whether the likelihood of using CMS Medicare informational resources differed among beneficiaries with limited English proficiency. We adjusted models for demographic, socioeconomic, health, and local market factors and, in sensitivity analyses, health insurance characteristics. Our primary outcome was an indicator of having previously used at least 1 of the 3 CMS resources.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among noninstitutionalized beneficiaries (<i>n</i> = 20 715), 4.8% had limited English speaking proficiency, 7.0% had limited English reading proficiency, and 67.7% had used at least 1 CMS resource. After regression adjustment, beneficiaries with limited English reading proficiency were 16.3 percentage points less likely to have used a CMS resource compared to beneficiaries who reported English reading proficiency (<i>p</i> < .001). Limited English speaking proficiency was not associated with CMS resource use.</p><p><strong>Discussion and implications: </strong>These findings suggest that English reading proficiency may be an underappreciated factor in Medicare beneficiaries' use of the Medicare handbook, hotline, and website. Alternative approaches to providing and publicizing informational resources may reduce barriers to Medicare resource use among beneficiaries with limited English reading proficiency.</p>","PeriodicalId":13596,"journal":{"name":"Innovation in Aging","volume":"9 1","pages":"igae105"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11771191/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovation in Aging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igae105","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: Medicare coverage decisions are complex. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) provides a hotline, handbook, and website to help Medicare beneficiaries understand their benefits and coverage options, yet it is unclear what factors affect beneficiary use of these resources. We examined limited English speaking and English reading proficiency status as predictors of CMS Medicare informational resource use in a nationally representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries.
Research design and methods: We used 2016-2018 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey data and linear probability models to assess whether the likelihood of using CMS Medicare informational resources differed among beneficiaries with limited English proficiency. We adjusted models for demographic, socioeconomic, health, and local market factors and, in sensitivity analyses, health insurance characteristics. Our primary outcome was an indicator of having previously used at least 1 of the 3 CMS resources.
Results: Among noninstitutionalized beneficiaries (n = 20 715), 4.8% had limited English speaking proficiency, 7.0% had limited English reading proficiency, and 67.7% had used at least 1 CMS resource. After regression adjustment, beneficiaries with limited English reading proficiency were 16.3 percentage points less likely to have used a CMS resource compared to beneficiaries who reported English reading proficiency (p < .001). Limited English speaking proficiency was not associated with CMS resource use.
Discussion and implications: These findings suggest that English reading proficiency may be an underappreciated factor in Medicare beneficiaries' use of the Medicare handbook, hotline, and website. Alternative approaches to providing and publicizing informational resources may reduce barriers to Medicare resource use among beneficiaries with limited English reading proficiency.
期刊介绍:
Innovation in Aging, an interdisciplinary Open Access journal of the Gerontological Society of America (GSA), is dedicated to publishing innovative, conceptually robust, and methodologically rigorous research focused on aging and the life course. The journal aims to present studies with the potential to significantly enhance the health, functionality, and overall well-being of older adults by translating scientific insights into practical applications. Research published in the journal spans a variety of settings, including community, clinical, and laboratory contexts, with a clear emphasis on issues that are directly pertinent to aging and the dynamics of life over time. The content of the journal mirrors the diverse research interests of GSA members and encompasses a range of study types. These include the validation of new conceptual or theoretical models, assessments of factors impacting the health and well-being of older adults, evaluations of interventions and policies, the implementation of groundbreaking research methodologies, interdisciplinary research that adapts concepts and methods from other fields to aging studies, and the use of modeling and simulations to understand factors and processes influencing aging outcomes. The journal welcomes contributions from scholars across various disciplines, such as technology, engineering, architecture, economics, business, law, political science, public policy, education, public health, social and psychological sciences, biomedical and health sciences, and the humanities and arts, reflecting a holistic approach to advancing knowledge in gerontology.