Suppr超能文献

医疗保险计划时代的地理区域差异。

Geographic area variations in the Medicare health plan era.

机构信息

Yale School of Public Health, Yale School of Medicine, 60 College St #300C New Haven, CT 06520, USA.

出版信息

Med Care. 2010 Mar;48(3):260-6. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181ca410a.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Prior research identified variations in care experiences across Medicare health plans (Medicare Advantage [MA]), but the relative amount of variation in MA and traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

Compare variation and correlations of beneficiary reports of care experiences across geographic areas in MA and FFS.

METHODS

Using the 2001 to 2004 Medicare CAHPS surveys, we analyzed 14 measures of care experiences and preventive services reported by 433,092 MA beneficiaries (82% response rate) and 244,731 in FFS (69% response rate). We estimated hierarchical regression models with random effects for state, hospital referral region, and plan, adjusting for respondent characteristics. We examined the relative variation in FFS and MA scores across areas and among individual MA plans, the correlation between FFS and MA scores across areas, and variability relative to average MA-FFS differences in scores.

RESULTS

Although MA and FFS scores are highly correlated, variation is greater in MA than FFS across states and local areas for almost all measures. MA plan variation within areas accounts for 25% to 50% of explained MA variation. MA-FFS differences are smaller than the standard deviations of differences across areas for 10 of 14 measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Relative performance between MA and FFS may differ across areas and locally between individual plans and FFS. Quality improvement initiatives should address local system factors that affect both MA and FFS, and identify organizational factors that make some MA plans more successful in improving quality.

摘要

背景

先前的研究已经确定了医疗保险计划(医疗保险优势计划[MA])中护理体验的差异,但 MA 和传统按服务收费(FFS)医疗保险之间的差异程度尚不清楚。

目的

比较 MA 和 FFS 中受益人的护理体验报告在地理区域之间的差异和相关性。

方法

使用 2001 年至 2004 年的医疗保险 CAHPS 调查,我们分析了 433092 名 MA 受益人的 14 项护理体验和预防服务指标(82%的回复率)和 244731 名 FFS 受益人的报告(69%的回复率)。我们使用带有州、医院转诊区和计划的随机效应的分层回归模型进行分析,并调整了受访者特征。我们考察了 FFS 和 MA 评分在各地区的相对差异,以及各 MA 计划之间的差异,考察了各地区 FFS 和 MA 评分之间的相关性,以及与 MA-FFS 评分差异的平均差异相比的可变性。

结果

尽管 MA 和 FFS 评分高度相关,但在大多数指标中,MA 的州和地方差异大于 FFS。MA 计划内的区域差异占 MA 总差异的 25%至 50%。在 14 项措施中,有 10 项 MA-FFS 差异小于区域间差异的标准差。

结论

MA 和 FFS 之间的相对表现可能因地区而异,而且在个体计划和 FFS 之间也可能存在本地差异。质量改进计划应解决影响 MA 和 FFS 的本地系统因素,并确定使某些 MA 计划在提高质量方面更成功的组织因素。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验