2012 rural Medicare Advantage quality ratings and bonus payments.

Q2 Medicine
Rural policy brief Pub Date : 2014-01-01
Leah Kemper, Abigail R Barker, Timothy D McBride, Keith Mueller
{"title":"2012 rural Medicare Advantage quality ratings and bonus payments.","authors":"Leah Kemper,&nbsp;Abigail R Barker,&nbsp;Timothy D McBride,&nbsp;Keith Mueller","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Key Data Findings. (1) The average rural Medicare Advantage (MA) plan enrollee in 2012 experienced a quality rating of 3.60 stars (of a potential 5.0), compared with a rating of 3.71 stars experienced by urban enrollees. (2) The measured rural-urban difference in the MA plan quality is a result of the difference in the composition of the enrollment and plan availability in MA markets, rather than differences between MA plans of the same type. (a) In general, rural Medicare beneficiaries often have limited MA plans available from which to choose, and typically have lower quality ratings than urban MA plans. (b) Rural MA beneficiaries are more likely to be enrolled in preferred provider organization (PPO) plans than in health maintenance organization (HMO) plans. (c) PPO plans have lower quality ratings on average than HMO plans. (d) HMO plans had the highest average quality rating at 3.83 and 3.78 stars, respectively, in rural and urban areas. PPO plans had lower quality ratings, at 3.52 and 3.50, respectively. (3) In rural areas, 32% of the MA population is enrolled in a plan with a star rating of 4.0 or higher, and 92% are enrolled in a plan with a star rating of at least 3.0, as contrasted to urban enrollment of 36% and 94% respectively, making these plans eligible for quality based bonus payments. (4) The quality rating of rural MA plans varies significantly across the country, with the highest quality ratings in rural areas in Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Maine.</p>","PeriodicalId":38994,"journal":{"name":"Rural policy brief","volume":" 2014 1","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rural policy brief","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Key Data Findings. (1) The average rural Medicare Advantage (MA) plan enrollee in 2012 experienced a quality rating of 3.60 stars (of a potential 5.0), compared with a rating of 3.71 stars experienced by urban enrollees. (2) The measured rural-urban difference in the MA plan quality is a result of the difference in the composition of the enrollment and plan availability in MA markets, rather than differences between MA plans of the same type. (a) In general, rural Medicare beneficiaries often have limited MA plans available from which to choose, and typically have lower quality ratings than urban MA plans. (b) Rural MA beneficiaries are more likely to be enrolled in preferred provider organization (PPO) plans than in health maintenance organization (HMO) plans. (c) PPO plans have lower quality ratings on average than HMO plans. (d) HMO plans had the highest average quality rating at 3.83 and 3.78 stars, respectively, in rural and urban areas. PPO plans had lower quality ratings, at 3.52 and 3.50, respectively. (3) In rural areas, 32% of the MA population is enrolled in a plan with a star rating of 4.0 or higher, and 92% are enrolled in a plan with a star rating of at least 3.0, as contrasted to urban enrollment of 36% and 94% respectively, making these plans eligible for quality based bonus payments. (4) The quality rating of rural MA plans varies significantly across the country, with the highest quality ratings in rural areas in Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Maine.

2012年农村医疗保险优势质量评级和奖金支付。
关键数据发现。(1) 2012年农村医疗保险优惠计划参保人的平均质量评分为3.60星(潜在评分为5.0星),而城市参保人的平均质量评分为3.71星。(2)测量的城乡MA计划质量差异是MA市场的招生构成和计划可得性差异的结果,而不是同一类型MA计划之间的差异。(a)总体而言,农村医疗保险受益人可选择的综合医疗保险计划往往有限,其质量评级通常低于城市综合医疗保险计划。农村综合医疗保险受益人更有可能参加首选提供者组织(PPO)计划,而不是健康维护组织(HMO)计划。(c) PPO计划的平均质量评级低于HMO计划。(d) HMO计划在农村和城市地区的平均质量评级最高,分别为3.83星和3.78星。PPO计划的质量评级较低,分别为3.52和3.50。(3)在农村地区,32%的MA人口参加星级4.0及以上的计划,92%的MA人口参加星级3.0以上的计划,而城市的这一比例分别为36%和94%,这使得这些计划有资格获得基于质量的奖金。(4)全国农村综合管理计划的质量评级差异显著,明尼苏达州、爱荷华州、威斯康星州、俄勒冈州、宾夕法尼亚州和缅因州的农村地区质量评级最高。
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
Rural policy brief
Rural policy brief Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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