Li Pengxiang, Doshi Jalpa A
Division of General Internal Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.
Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2016 May 5;11(5):e0154357. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154357. eCollection 2016.
Since 2007, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have published 5-star quality rating measures to aid consumers in choosing Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug Plans (MAPDs). We examined the impact of these star ratings on Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MAPD) enrollment before and after 2012, when star ratings became tied to bonus payments for MAPDs that could be used to improve plan benefits and/or reduce premiums in the subsequent year.
A longitudinal design and multivariable hybrid models were used to assess whether star ratings had a direct impact on concurrent year MAPD contract enrollment (by influencing beneficiary choice) and/or an indirect impact on subsequent year MAPD contract enrollment (because ratings were linked to bonus payments). The main analysis was based on contract-year level data from 2009-2015. We compared effects of star ratings in the pre-bonus payment period (2009-2011) and post-bonus payment period (2012-2015). Extensive sensitivity analyses varied the analytic techniques, unit of analysis, and sample inclusion criteria. Similar analyses were conducted separately using stand-alone PDP contract-year data; since PDPs were not eligible for bonus payments, they served as an external comparison group.
The main analysis included 3,866 MAPD contract-years. A change of star rating had no statistically significant effect on concurrent year enrollment in any of the pre-, post-, or pre-post combined periods. On the other hand, star rating increase was associated with a statistically significant increase in the subsequent year enrollment (a 1-star increase associated with +11,337 enrollees, p<0.001) in the post-bonus payment period but had a very small and statistically non-significant effect on subsequent year enrollment in the pre-bonus payment period. Further, the difference in effects on subsequent year enrollment was statistically significant between the pre- and post-periods (p = 0.011). Sensitivity analyses indicated that the findings were robust. No statistically significant effect of star ratings was found on concurrent or subsequent year enrollment in the pre- or post-period in the external comparison group of stand-alone PDP contracts.
Star ratings had no direct impact on concurrent year MAPD enrollment before or after the introduction of bonus payments tied to star ratings. However, after the introduction of these bonus payments, MAPD star ratings had a significant indirect impact of increasing subsequent year enrollment, likely via the reinvestment of bonuses to provide lower premiums and/or additional member benefits in the following year.
自2007年以来,医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心发布了五星级质量评级措施,以帮助消费者选择医疗保险优势处方药计划(MAPD)。我们研究了这些星级评级在2012年前后对医疗保险优势处方药(MAPD)参保人数的影响,2012年起星级评级与MAPD的奖金支付挂钩,这些奖金可用于改善次年的计划福利和/或降低保费。
采用纵向设计和多变量混合模型,评估星级评级是否对当年MAPD合同参保人数有直接影响(通过影响受益人的选择)和/或对次年MAPD合同参保人数有间接影响(因为评级与奖金支付挂钩)。主要分析基于2009 - 2015年合同年度水平的数据。我们比较了奖金支付前时期(2009 - 2011年)和奖金支付后时期(2012 - 2015年)星级评级的影响。广泛的敏感性分析改变了分析技术、分析单位和样本纳入标准。使用独立的PDP合同年度数据分别进行了类似分析;由于PDPs无资格获得奖金支付,它们作为外部比较组。
主要分析包括3866个MAPD合同年度。星级评级的变化在任何奖金支付前、后或前后合并时期对当年参保人数均无统计学上的显著影响。另一方面,在奖金支付后时期,星级评级的提高与次年参保人数的统计学显著增加相关(星级提高1级与参保人数增加11337人相关,p<0.001),但在奖金支付前时期对次年参保人数的影响非常小且无统计学显著意义。此外,前后时期对次年参保人数影响的差异具有统计学显著性(p = 0.011)。敏感性分析表明研究结果具有稳健性。在独立PDP合同的外部比较组中,未发现星级评级对奖金支付前或后时期的当年或次年参保人数有统计学显著影响。
在引入与星级评级挂钩的奖金支付之前或之后,星级评级对当年MAPD参保人数均无直接影响。然而,在引入这些奖金支付之后,MAPD星级评级对增加次年参保人数有显著的间接影响,可能是通过奖金的再投资,以便在次年提供更低的保费和/或额外的会员福利。