TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Ambulatory Care Access and Quality for Beneficiaries with Disabilities Covered by Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare Insurance
AU - Johnston, Kenton J.
AU - Wen, Hefei
AU - Pollack, Harold A.
N1 - Funding Information:
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Johnston reported receiving funding from the National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH125820) and the National Institute on Aging (R21AG065526). Drs Pollack reported being coguardian of an adult with intellectual disabilities who is dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid services and thus affected by the policies studied in this work. No other disclosures were reported.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 JAMA Health Forum. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/1/14
Y1 - 2022/1/14
N2 - Importance: Medicare beneficiaries with disabilities aged 18 to 64 years face barriers accessing ambulatory care. Past studies comparing Medicare Advantage (MA) with traditional Medicare (TM) have not assessed how well these programs meet the needs of beneficiaries with disabilities. Objective: To compare differences in enrollment rates, ambulatory care access, and ambulatory care quality for beneficiaries with disabilities in MA vs TM. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included a nationally representative, weighted sample of 7201 person-years for beneficiaries aged 18 to 64 years with disability entitlement in the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey from 2015 through 2018. Differences in program enrollment and in measures of access and quality by program enrollment were compared after adjusting for demographic, insurance, social, health, and area characteristics and after reweighting the sample by propensity to enroll in MA as estimated by observed confounders. Data analyses were conducted between November 1, 2020, and November 11, 2021. Exposures: Medicare Advantage vs TM program enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Six patient-reported measures of ambulatory care access (usual source of care, primary care usual source of care, specialist visit) and quality (cholesterol screening, influenza vaccination, colon cancer screening). Results: The mean (SD) age of the overall study population was 52.1 (11.0) years; 49.5% were female and 50.5% were male; 1.6% were Asian/Pacific Islander; 17.4%, Black; 10.2% Hispanic; 1.4%, Native American; 65.1%, White, and 4.2%, multiracial. Among all beneficiaries living in the community, individuals with disability entitlement were less likely to enroll in MA than other beneficiaries (34.8% vs 41.2%). The final sample of beneficiaries with disabilities included 2444 person-years in MA and 4757 person-years in TM. Beneficiaries with disabilities in MA vs TM were more likely to be of a minority race or ethnicity (35.7% vs 27.6%) and less likely to be enrolled in private insurance (11.9% vs 25.0%). Comparing MA with TM among beneficiaries with disabilities, those in MA had significantly better rates of access to a usual source of care (90.2% vs 84.9%; adjusted propensity-weighted marginal difference [APWMD], 2.9%; 95% CI, 0.2%-5.7%), access to specialist visits (53.2% vs 44.8%; APWMD, 5.5%; 95% CI, 0.6%-10.5%), cholesterol screenings (91.1% vs 86.4%; APWMD, 3.8%; 95% CI, 0.9%-6.7%), influenza vaccinations (61.4% vs 51.5%; APWMD, 10.4%; 95% CI, 5.3%-15.5%), and colon cancer screenings (68.4% vs 54.6%; APWMD, 10.3%; 95% CI, 4.8%-15.8%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, Medicare beneficiaries with disabilities were enrolled in MA at significantly lower rates than those without disabilities. However, MA was associated with significantly better ambulatory care access and quality for these beneficiaries on 5 of 6 measures compared with TM.
AB - Importance: Medicare beneficiaries with disabilities aged 18 to 64 years face barriers accessing ambulatory care. Past studies comparing Medicare Advantage (MA) with traditional Medicare (TM) have not assessed how well these programs meet the needs of beneficiaries with disabilities. Objective: To compare differences in enrollment rates, ambulatory care access, and ambulatory care quality for beneficiaries with disabilities in MA vs TM. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included a nationally representative, weighted sample of 7201 person-years for beneficiaries aged 18 to 64 years with disability entitlement in the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey from 2015 through 2018. Differences in program enrollment and in measures of access and quality by program enrollment were compared after adjusting for demographic, insurance, social, health, and area characteristics and after reweighting the sample by propensity to enroll in MA as estimated by observed confounders. Data analyses were conducted between November 1, 2020, and November 11, 2021. Exposures: Medicare Advantage vs TM program enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Six patient-reported measures of ambulatory care access (usual source of care, primary care usual source of care, specialist visit) and quality (cholesterol screening, influenza vaccination, colon cancer screening). Results: The mean (SD) age of the overall study population was 52.1 (11.0) years; 49.5% were female and 50.5% were male; 1.6% were Asian/Pacific Islander; 17.4%, Black; 10.2% Hispanic; 1.4%, Native American; 65.1%, White, and 4.2%, multiracial. Among all beneficiaries living in the community, individuals with disability entitlement were less likely to enroll in MA than other beneficiaries (34.8% vs 41.2%). The final sample of beneficiaries with disabilities included 2444 person-years in MA and 4757 person-years in TM. Beneficiaries with disabilities in MA vs TM were more likely to be of a minority race or ethnicity (35.7% vs 27.6%) and less likely to be enrolled in private insurance (11.9% vs 25.0%). Comparing MA with TM among beneficiaries with disabilities, those in MA had significantly better rates of access to a usual source of care (90.2% vs 84.9%; adjusted propensity-weighted marginal difference [APWMD], 2.9%; 95% CI, 0.2%-5.7%), access to specialist visits (53.2% vs 44.8%; APWMD, 5.5%; 95% CI, 0.6%-10.5%), cholesterol screenings (91.1% vs 86.4%; APWMD, 3.8%; 95% CI, 0.9%-6.7%), influenza vaccinations (61.4% vs 51.5%; APWMD, 10.4%; 95% CI, 5.3%-15.5%), and colon cancer screenings (68.4% vs 54.6%; APWMD, 10.3%; 95% CI, 4.8%-15.8%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, Medicare beneficiaries with disabilities were enrolled in MA at significantly lower rates than those without disabilities. However, MA was associated with significantly better ambulatory care access and quality for these beneficiaries on 5 of 6 measures compared with TM.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85147580564&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.4562
DO - 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.4562
M3 - Article
C2 - 35977235
AN - SCOPUS:85147580564
SN - 2689-0186
VL - 3
JO - JAMA Health Forum
JF - JAMA Health Forum
IS - 1
M1 - e214562
ER -