From Disappointment to Predominance: Medicare Advantage's Ascendancy and Transformation of Medicare.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Milbank Quarterly Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-31 DOI:10.1111/1468-0009.70042
Rick Mayes, Micah Johnson
{"title":"From Disappointment to Predominance: Medicare Advantage's Ascendancy and Transformation of Medicare.","authors":"Rick Mayes, Micah Johnson","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.70042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points Since 2004, beneficiaries in government-administered traditional Medicare decreased by about 3 million (8%), whereas enrollment in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans run by private insurance companies increased by approximately 30 million (500%). MA's growth has exceeded the adequate evolution and refinement of the program's regulatory apparatus. MA now annually costs at least 20% (around $84 billion) more than what Medicare would have spent if all MA enrollees were in traditional Medicare (TM). This differential in payments has advantaged MA relative to TM and transformed the Medicare program in part by corporatizing it for tens of millions of beneficiaries. Most MA revenue now flows to large, increasingly vertically integrated, multinational, for-profit companies that are reshaping the US health care landscape for all patients, providers, and payers. Overpayments have strengthened the political position of the largest MA plan providers such that the program is at risk of interest group capture because of their powerful lobbying and political influence. Reforming MA should include the following: (a) ongoing improvements to the program's risk adjustment system and benchmark policy for rate setting, (b) replacing the quality bonus program with a value incentive program that is budget-neutral, and (c) standardizing MA plans into a small number of basic plan categories and having private health companies make competitive bids in each of them to compete on price instead of on benefit offerings. Savings from any MA payment reforms could shore up Medicare's Hospital Trust Fund or improve TM for a \"Medicare 2.0\" that competes on a more level playing field with MA.</p>","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"652-675"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12438443/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Milbank Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.70042","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Policy Points Since 2004, beneficiaries in government-administered traditional Medicare decreased by about 3 million (8%), whereas enrollment in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans run by private insurance companies increased by approximately 30 million (500%). MA's growth has exceeded the adequate evolution and refinement of the program's regulatory apparatus. MA now annually costs at least 20% (around $84 billion) more than what Medicare would have spent if all MA enrollees were in traditional Medicare (TM). This differential in payments has advantaged MA relative to TM and transformed the Medicare program in part by corporatizing it for tens of millions of beneficiaries. Most MA revenue now flows to large, increasingly vertically integrated, multinational, for-profit companies that are reshaping the US health care landscape for all patients, providers, and payers. Overpayments have strengthened the political position of the largest MA plan providers such that the program is at risk of interest group capture because of their powerful lobbying and political influence. Reforming MA should include the following: (a) ongoing improvements to the program's risk adjustment system and benchmark policy for rate setting, (b) replacing the quality bonus program with a value incentive program that is budget-neutral, and (c) standardizing MA plans into a small number of basic plan categories and having private health companies make competitive bids in each of them to compete on price instead of on benefit offerings. Savings from any MA payment reforms could shore up Medicare's Hospital Trust Fund or improve TM for a "Medicare 2.0" that competes on a more level playing field with MA.

从失望到优势:医疗保险优势的优势和医疗保险的转型。
自2004年以来,政府管理的传统医疗保险的受益人减少了约300万(8%),而私营保险公司经营的医疗保险优势(MA)计划的注册人数增加了约3000万(500%)。MA的增长已经超过了该计划监管机构的适当演变和完善。如果所有参加MA的人都参加传统的Medicare (TM),那么MA每年的花费至少比Medicare多20%(约840亿美元)。这种支付方式上的差异使MA相对于TM更有优势,并通过将医疗保险计划公司化,使数千万受益人受益,从而在一定程度上改变了医疗保险计划。大多数并购收入现在都流向了大型的、日益垂直整合的、跨国的、以营利为目的的公司,这些公司正在为所有患者、提供者和支付者重塑美国的医疗保健格局。超额支付加强了最大的MA计划提供者的政治地位,由于他们强大的游说和政治影响力,该计划面临利益集团捕获的风险。改革MA应包括以下内容:(a)持续改进该计划的风险调整系统和费率设定的基准政策,(b)用预算中立的价值激励计划取代质量奖金计划,以及(c)将MA计划标准化为少数基本计划类别,并让私营医疗公司在每个计划中进行竞争性投标,以价格而不是福利提供竞争。任何MA支付改革所节省的费用都可以支撑Medicare的医院信托基金,或者为“Medicare 2.0”改善TM,使其在更公平的竞争环境中与MA竞争。
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
Milbank Quarterly
Milbank Quarterly 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
3.00%
发文量
37
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Milbank Quarterly is devoted to scholarly analysis of significant issues in health and health care policy. It presents original research, policy analysis, and commentary from academics, clinicians, and policymakers. The in-depth, multidisciplinary approach of the journal permits contributors to explore fully the social origins of health in our society and to examine in detail the implications of different health policies. Topics addressed in The Milbank Quarterly include the impact of social factors on health, prevention, allocation of health care resources, legal and ethical issues in health policy, health and health care administration, and the organization and financing of health care.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信