Mortality Effects and Choice Across Private Health Insurance Plans

Fitting in? Physician practice style after forced relocation

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine how variation in physicians' treatment decisions for newborn deliveries responds to changes in the hospital-level norms for obstetric clinical decision-making.

DATA SOURCES

All hospital-based births in Florida from 2003 through 2017.

STUDY DESIGN

Difference-in-differences approach is adopted that leverages obstetric unit closures as the source of identifying variation to exogenously shift obstetricians to a new, nearby hospital with different propensities to approach newborn deliveries less intensively.

DATA EXTRACTION

Births attributed to physicians continuously observed 2 years before the closure event and 2 years after the closure event (treatment group physicians) or for identical time periods around a randomly assigned placebo closure date (control group physicians).

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

All of the physicians meeting our inclusion criteria shifted their births to a new hospital less than 20 miles from the hospital shuttering its obstetric unit. The new hospitals approached newborn births more conservatively, and treatment group physicians sharply became less aggressive in their newborn birth clinical management (e.g., use of C-section). The immediate 11-percentage point (33%) increase in delivering newborns without any procedure behavior change is statistically significant (p value <0.01) and persistent after the closure event; however, the physicians' payer and patient mix are unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Obstetric physician behavior change appears highly malleable and sensitive to the practice patterns of other physicians delivering newborns at the same hospital. Incentives and policies that encourage more appropriate clinical care norms hospital-wide could sharply improve physician treatment decisions, with benefits for maternal and infant outcomes.

Medicare Advantage plan characteristics associated with sorting their beneficiaries to providers that generate fewer avoidable hospital stays

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether certain Medicare Advantage (MA) plan characteristics are associated with driving beneficiaries to providers that generate fewer avoidable hospital stays.

DATA SOURCES

This paper primarily used 2018-2019 MA encounter data and traditional Medicare (TM) claims data for a nationally representative 20% sample of Medicare beneficiaries.

STUDY DESIGN

For each plan design aspect-plan type, carrier, star rating, and network breadth-we estimated two adjusted Poisson regressions of avoidable hospital stays: one without clinician fixed effects and the other with. We calculated the difference between the coefficients to evaluate the extent to which patient sorting affected avoidable hospital stays relative to TM.

DATA EXTRACTION METHODS

Our sample included Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older who were continuously enrolled in either MA or TM during 2018-2019. Beneficiaries in our sample had one or more chronic, ambulatory care-sensitive conditions.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Patient sorting can be attributed to certain characteristics of plan design aspects. For plan type, HMOs account for 86%, with PPOs accounting for only 14%. For carriers, Humana and smaller carriers account for 89%. For star ratings, high-star contracts account for 94%, with other stars only accounting for 6%. By network design, narrow network plan-counties explained 20% of the patient sorting effect.

CONCLUSIONS

While MA plans were found to be associated with driving beneficiaries to providers that generate fewer avoidable hospital stays, the effect is not homogeneous across the characteristics of MA plans. HMOs and high-star contracts are drivers of this MA phenomenon.

Is there an advantage? Considerations for researchers studying the effects of the type of Medicare coverage

OBJECTIVE

To describe common methodological problems that arise in comparisons of Medicare Advantage (MA) and Traditional Medicare (TM) and within-MA studies and provide suggestions of how researchers can address these issues.

STUDY SETTING

Published research evaluating Medicare coverage options in the United States.

STUDY DESIGN

We considered key conceptual challenges and promising solutions that have been used thus far and suggest additional directions.

DATA COLLECTION

Not available.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Many existing studies of MA versus TM include significant limitations, such as failing to account for unobserved confounders driving both beneficiary coverage choice and health outcomes once enrolled, not accounting for variation in benefit generosity, provider networks, or plan design across MA plans, and/or having been conducted at a time when MA enrollment was less than a third of all Medicare beneficiaries. We provide a review of methods that can help researchers to overcome these weaknesses and suggest additional methods and data sources that may aid future research.

CONCLUSIONS

The MA program is becoming an essential part of the US healthcare system. By accounting for non-random movement into and out of MA and studying the heterogeneity of beneficiary experience across plan and market characteristics, researchers can provide the high-quality evidence necessary for policymakers to design the program and reform TM in ways that maximize beneficiary outcomes.

Filgrastim and infliximab biosimilar uptake in Medicare Advantage compared with Traditional Medicare, 2016-2019

BACKGROUND

Medicare Advantage (MA) and Traditional Medicare face different financing structures and incentives and may implement different strategies to encourage biosimilar uptake. Strategies used by health insurers can influence biosimilar uptake, which can in turn promote savings to insurers and patients.

OBJECTIVE

To compare filgrastim and infliximab biosimilar uptake between MA and Traditional Medicare from 2016 to 2019 and examine biosimilar uptake by different MA carriers and plan types (Health Maintenance Organization [HMO] or Preferred Provider Organization).

METHODS

We use a 2016-2019 nationally representative random 20% sample of the carrier (physician) and outpatient paid claims for Traditional Medicare data and final-action carrier and outpatient records for MA data. We compare quarterly biosimilar uptake from 2016 to 2019 for the first 2 drugs with biosimilar competition: (1) filgrastim, (Neupogen, originator), and biosimilars tbo-filgrastim (GRANIX) and filgrastim-sndz (ZARXIO), and (2) infliximab (Remicade, originator), and biosimilars infliximab-dyyb (Inflectra) and infliximab-abda (Renflexis).

RESULTS

From their introduction, there was consistently greater uptake of filgrastim and infliximab biosimilars in MA compared with Traditional Medicare. By Q4 2019, filgrastim biosimilar uptake was 7.6 percentage points higher in MA (80.3%) than Traditional Medicare (72.7%). By Q4 2019, infliximab biosimilar uptake was 28.7% and 15.4% in MA and Traditional Medicare, respectively. Kaiser HMO plans were primarily responsible for the higher uptake of biosimilars in MA; in Q4 2019, filgrastim and infliximab biosimilar uptake was 98.8% and 78.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that filgrastim and infliximab biosimilar uptake is greater in MA compared with Traditional Medicare, which is driven in part by particularly high uptake of biosimilars in MA Kaiser HMO plans. This highlights the need for future work to examine specific strategies and levers employed by MA Kaiser HMO plans and other insurers to increase biosimilar uptake, which can lead to cost savings for physician-administered drugs.

Changes in Care Associated With Integrating Medicare and Medicaid for Dual-Eligible Individuals

Importance

There is growing interest in expanding integrated models, in which 1 insurer manages Medicare and Medicaid spending for dually eligible individuals. Fully integrated dual-eligible special needs plans (FIDE-SNPs) are one of the largest integrated models, but evidence about their performance is limited.

Objective

To evaluate changes in care associated with integrating Medicare and Medicaid coverage in a FIDE-SNP in Pennsylvania.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study using a difference-in-differences analysis compared changes in care between 2 cohorts of dual-eligible individuals: (1) an integration cohort composed of Medicare Dual Eligible Special Needs Plan enrollees who joined a companion Medicaid plan following a 2018 state reform mandating Medicaid managed care (leading to integration), and (2) a comparison cohort with nonintegrated coverage before and after the start of Medicaid managed care. Analyses were conducted between February 2022 and June 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Analyses examined outcomes in 4 domains: use of home- and community-based services (HCBS), care management and coordination, hospital stays and postacute care, and long-term nursing home stays.

Results

The study included 7967 individuals in the integration cohort and 3832 individuals in the comparison cohort. In the integration cohort, the mean (SD) age at baseline was 63.3 (14.7) years, and 5268 individuals (66.1%) were female and 2699 (33.9%) were male. In the comparison cohort, the mean (SD) age at baseline was 64.8 (18.6) years, and 2341 individuals (61.1%) were female and 1491 (38.9%) were male. At baseline, integration cohort members received a mean (SD) of 2.83 (8.70) days of HCBS per month and 3.34 (3.56) medications for chronic conditions per month, and the proportion with a follow-up outpatient visit after a hospital stay was 0.47. From baseline through 3 years after integration, HCBS use increased differentially in the integration vs comparison cohorts by 0.61 days/person-month (95% CI, 0.28-0.94; P < .001). However, integration was not associated with changes in care management and coordination, including medication use for chronic conditions (-0.02 fills/person-month; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.06; P = .65) or follow-up outpatient care after a hospital stay (-0.01 visits/hospital stay; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.03; P = .61). Hospital stays did not change differentially between the cohorts. Unmeasured factors contributing to differential mortality limited the ability to identify changes in long-term nursing home stays associated with integration.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study with a difference-in-differences analysis of 2 cohorts of individuals dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, integration was associated with greater HCBS use but not with other changes in care patterns. The findings highlight opportunities to strengthen how integrated programs manage care and a need to further evaluate their performance.

The Impact of Organizational Boundaries on Healthcare Coordination and Utilization

We measure organizational concentration-the distribution of a patient's healthcare across organizations-to examine how firm boundaries affect healthcare efficiency. First, when patients move to regions where outpatient visits are typically concentrated within a small set of firms, their healthcare utilization falls. Second, for patients whose PCPs exit the market, switching to a PCP with 1 standard deviation higher organizational concentration reduces utilization by 21%. This finding is robust to controlling for the spread of healthcare across providers. Increases in organizational concentration predict improvements in diabetes care and are not associated with greater use of emergency department or inpatient care.

What Difference Does a Health Plan Make? Evidence from Random Plan Assignment in Medicaid

Exploiting the random assignment of Medicaid beneficiaries to managed care plans, we find substantial plan-specific spending effects despite plans having identical cost sharing. Enrollment in the lowest-spending plan reduces spending by at least 25%-primarily through quantity reductions-relative to enrollment in the highest-spending plan. Rather than reducing "wasteful" spending, lower-spending plans broadly reduce medical service provision-including the provision of low-cost, high-value care-and worsen beneficiary satisfaction and health. Consumer demand follows spending: a 10 percent increase in plan-specific spending is associated with a 40 percent increase in market share. These facts have implications for the government's contracting problem and program cost growth.

Characteristics of Terminated Medicare Advantage Contracts, 2011 to 2020

This cross-sectional study characterizes Medicare Advantage contract terminations and identifies the characteristics of enrollees who may have been disproportionately affected by these events.

Measuring health insurance literacy in the Netherlands - First results of the HILM-NL questionnaire

BACKGROUND

There are several indications that citizens in the Netherlands struggle to make critical, well-considered decisions about which insurance policy best fits their needs and preferences. This can lead to citizens being sub-optimally insured, facing unexpected costs or suffering inadequate coverage. This study aims to examine how health insurance literacy (HIL) is distributed among citizens in the Netherlands; and to find out whether there are certain groups who have more difficulty choosing and using a health insurance policy.

METHODS

We measured health insurance literacy using the HILM-NL questionnaire, the validated Dutch version of the original health insurance literacy measure (HILM). In February 2020, the HILM-NL was sent to 1,500 members of the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel. The response rate was 54% (806).

RESULTS

There is a wide variation in HIL among citizens in the Netherlands. The average total HILM-NL score is 55.14 (on a range of 21-84). The level of education and the household net income are significantly related to HIL.

CONCLUSIONS

Citizens who completed less education or earn a lower income are relatively more likely to have difficulty choosing a health insurance policy or using policy benefits to pay for health services once enrolled. It is important to support these vulnerable groups properly in their choice and use of a health insurance policy.

Team Relationships and Performance: Evidence from Healthcare Referral Networks

We examine the teams that emerge when a primary care physician (PCP) refers patients to specialists. When PCPs concentrate their specialist referrals-for instance, by sending their cardiology patients to fewer distinct cardiologists-repeat interactions between PCPs and specialists are encouraged. Repeated interactions provide more opportunities and incentives to develop productive team relationships. Using data from the Massachusetts All Payer Claims Database, we construct a new measure of PCP team referral concentration and document that it varies widely across PCPs, even among PCPs in the same organization. Chronically ill patients treated by PCPs with a one standard deviation higher team referral concentration have 4% lower health care utilization on average, with no discernible reduction in quality. We corroborate this finding using a national sample of Medicare claims and show that it holds under various identification strategies that account for observed and unobserved patient and physician characteristics. The results suggest that repeated PCP-specialist interactions improve team performance.

Revisiting COVID-19 policies: 10 evidence-based recommendations for where to go from here

BACKGROUND

Strategies to control coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) have often been based on preliminary and limited data and have tended to be slow to evolve as new evidence emerges. Yet knowledge about COVID-19 has grown exponentially, and the expanding rollout of vaccines presents further opportunity to reassess the response to the pandemic more broadly.

MAIN TEXT

We review the latest evidence concerning 10 key COVID-19 policy and strategic areas, specifically addressing: 1) the expansion of equitable vaccine distribution, 2) the need to ease restrictions as hospitalization and mortality rates eventually fall, 3) the advantages of emphasizing educational and harm reduction approaches over coercive and punitive measures, 4) the need to encourage outdoor activities, 5) the imperative to reopen schools, 6) the far-reaching and long-term economic and psychosocial consequences of sustained lockdowns, 7) the excessive focus on surface disinfection and other ineffective measures, 8) the importance of reassessing testing policies and practices, 9) the need for increasing access to outpatient therapies and prophylactics, and 10) the necessity to better prepare for future pandemics.

CONCLUSIONS

While remarkably effective vaccines have engendered great hope, some widely held assumptions underlying current policy approaches call for an evidence-based reassessment. COVID-19 will require ongoing mitigation for the foreseeable future as it transforms from a pandemic into an endemic infection, but maintaining a constant state of emergency is not viable. A more realistic public health approach is to adjust current mitigation goals to be more data-driven and to minimize unintended harms associated with unfocused or ineffective control efforts. Based on the latest evidence, we therefore present recommendations for refining 10 key policy areas, and for applying lessons learned from COVID-19 to prevent and prepare for future pandemics.