Suppr超能文献

不同医疗保险提供商在心血管高值和低值检测方面的差异。

Differences in High- and Low-Value Cardiovascular Testing by Health Insurance Provider.

机构信息

Division of Cardiology University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus Aurora CO.

University of Colorado School of Medicine Aurora CO.

出版信息

J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Feb 2;10(3):e018877. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.018877. Epub 2021 Jan 28.

Abstract

Background Quality of care incentives and reimbursements for cardiovascular testing differ between insurance providers. We hypothesized that there are differences in the use of guideline-concordant testing between Medicaid versus commercial insurance patients <65 years, and between Medicare Advantage versus Medicare fee-for-service patients ≥65 years. Methods and Results Using data from the Colorado All-Payer Claims Database from 2015 to 2018, we identified patients eligible to receive a high-value test recommended by guidelines: assessment of left ventricular function among patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction or incident heart failure, or a low-value test that provides minimal patient benefit: stress testing prior to low-risk surgery or routine stress testing within 2 years of percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Among 145 616 eligible patients, 37% had fee-for-service Medicare, 18% Medicare Advantage, 22% Medicaid, and 23% commercial insurance. Using multilevel logistic regression models adjusted for patient characteristics, Medicaid patients were less likely to receive high-value testing for acute myocardial infarction (odds ratio [OR], 0.84 [0.73-0.98]; =0.03) and heart failure (OR, 0.59 [0.51-0.70]; <0.01) compared with commercially insured patients. Medicare Advantage patients were more likely to receive high-value testing for acute myocardial infarction (OR, 1.35 [1.15-1.59]; <0.01) and less likely to receive low-value testing after percutaneous coronary intervention/ coronary artery bypass graft (OR, 0.63 [0.55-0.72]; <0.01) compared with Medicare fee-for-service patients. Conclusions Guideline-concordant testing was less likely to occur among patients with Medicaid compared with commercial insurance, and more likely to occur among patients with Medicare Advantage compared with fee-for-service Medicare. Insurance plan features may provide valuable targets to improve guideline-concordant testing.

摘要

背景

心血管检测的医疗质量激励措施和报销因保险公司而异。我们假设,在<65 岁的 Medicaid 患者与商业保险患者之间,以及在≥65 岁的 Medicare Advantage 患者与 Medicare 按服务收费患者之间,指南一致的检测使用存在差异。

方法和结果

我们使用了 2015 年至 2018 年来自科罗拉多州所有支付者索赔数据库的数据,确定了符合指南推荐的高价值检测条件的患者:急性心肌梗死或新发心力衰竭住院患者的左心室功能评估,或低价值检测提供最小的患者获益:低危手术前的应激检测或经皮冠状动脉介入治疗或冠状动脉旁路移植术后 2 年内的常规应激检测。在 145616 名符合条件的患者中,37%有按服务收费的医疗保险,18%有 Medicare Advantage,22%有医疗补助,23%有商业保险。使用多水平逻辑回归模型,根据患者特征进行调整,与商业保险患者相比,医疗补助患者接受急性心肌梗死(比值比 [OR],0.84 [0.73-0.98];=0.03)和心力衰竭(OR,0.59 [0.51-0.70];<0.01)高价值检测的可能性较小。与 Medicare 按服务收费患者相比,Medicare Advantage 患者更有可能接受急性心肌梗死的高价值检测(OR,1.35 [1.15-1.59];<0.01),而不太可能在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗/冠状动脉旁路移植术后接受低价值检测(OR,0.63 [0.55-0.72];<0.01)。

结论

与商业保险患者相比, Medicaid 患者接受指南一致的检测的可能性较低,而 Medicare Advantage 患者则更有可能接受指南一致的检测。保险计划的特点可能为改善指南一致的检测提供有价值的目标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e6d3/7955432/5911f8dadc1e/JAH3-10-e018877-g001.jpg

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