Trends in the Use of Medicare Home Health Care among Congregate Living Residents

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Jun Li PhD , Bo Zheng MPA , Brian McGarry PhD
{"title":"Trends in the Use of Medicare Home Health Care among Congregate Living Residents","authors":"Jun Li PhD ,&nbsp;Bo Zheng MPA ,&nbsp;Brian McGarry PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jamda.2025.105498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To examine trends in home health care (HHC) use in congregate living and compare characteristics of HHC use between Medicare patients in congregate living and those in other home settings.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Retrospective cohort study describing HHC use, in and outside of congregate living, using national Medicare claims, assessment, and administrative data (2014-2019). We compared HHC use by setting, on HHC quality, planned visit quantity, referral source (post-acute or community-initiated), and recertifications. We additionally examined whether HHC patterns across settings differed by patient dual eligibility and race-ethnicity.</div></div><div><h3>Setting and Participants</h3><div>Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA) HHC patients aged 67 and older in congregate living or elsewhere.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Multivariable regressions.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>15.9% of HHC episodes in 2018-2019 were in congregate living, which increased 20.5% between 2014 and 2019. TM patients in congregate living were 4.4% (2.3 ppt, 95% CI: 1.7, 2.9) more likely to use high-quality agencies, had 8.7% (0.7 visits, 95% CI: 0.7, 0.8) more planned visits, were 27.6% (14.9 ppt, 95% CI: 14.7, 15.1) more likely to have community-initiated referrals, and 9.9% (3.2 ppt, 95% CI: 2.9, 3.5) more likely to be recertified compared with TM patients in other settings; differences were similar between settings among MA enrollees. Compared with their counterparts, dually eligible and racial-ethnic minoritized populations in congregate living were 2.6% (−1.5 ppt, 95% CI: −2.2, −0.8%) and 1.6% less likely (−0.9 ppt, 95% CI: −1.6, −0.3%) to use high-quality agencies, respectively, and dually eligible patients in congregate living had 6% fewer planned visits (−0.64 visits, 95% CI: −0.72, −55); these differences persisted across settings.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion and Implications</h3><div>Congregate living may have facilitated access to higher quality and quantity of HHC, but inequitably. Further research is needed to determine the value of high-frequency community-initiated HHC referrals in congregate living.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17180,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Directors Association","volume":"26 4","pages":"Article 105498"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Directors Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525861025000155","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To examine trends in home health care (HHC) use in congregate living and compare characteristics of HHC use between Medicare patients in congregate living and those in other home settings.

Design

Retrospective cohort study describing HHC use, in and outside of congregate living, using national Medicare claims, assessment, and administrative data (2014-2019). We compared HHC use by setting, on HHC quality, planned visit quantity, referral source (post-acute or community-initiated), and recertifications. We additionally examined whether HHC patterns across settings differed by patient dual eligibility and race-ethnicity.

Setting and Participants

Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA) HHC patients aged 67 and older in congregate living or elsewhere.

Methods

Multivariable regressions.

Results

15.9% of HHC episodes in 2018-2019 were in congregate living, which increased 20.5% between 2014 and 2019. TM patients in congregate living were 4.4% (2.3 ppt, 95% CI: 1.7, 2.9) more likely to use high-quality agencies, had 8.7% (0.7 visits, 95% CI: 0.7, 0.8) more planned visits, were 27.6% (14.9 ppt, 95% CI: 14.7, 15.1) more likely to have community-initiated referrals, and 9.9% (3.2 ppt, 95% CI: 2.9, 3.5) more likely to be recertified compared with TM patients in other settings; differences were similar between settings among MA enrollees. Compared with their counterparts, dually eligible and racial-ethnic minoritized populations in congregate living were 2.6% (−1.5 ppt, 95% CI: −2.2, −0.8%) and 1.6% less likely (−0.9 ppt, 95% CI: −1.6, −0.3%) to use high-quality agencies, respectively, and dually eligible patients in congregate living had 6% fewer planned visits (−0.64 visits, 95% CI: −0.72, −55); these differences persisted across settings.

Conclusion and Implications

Congregate living may have facilitated access to higher quality and quantity of HHC, but inequitably. Further research is needed to determine the value of high-frequency community-initiated HHC referrals in congregate living.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
6.60%
发文量
472
审稿时长
44 days
期刊介绍: JAMDA, the official journal of AMDA - The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine, is a leading peer-reviewed publication that offers practical information and research geared towards healthcare professionals in the post-acute and long-term care fields. It is also a valuable resource for policy-makers, organizational leaders, educators, and advocates. The journal provides essential information for various healthcare professionals such as medical directors, attending physicians, nurses, consultant pharmacists, geriatric psychiatrists, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, physical and occupational therapists, social workers, and others involved in providing, overseeing, and promoting quality
×
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