Humana Healthcare Research.
Humana Inc., Louisville, KY.
Med Care. 2022 Jan 1;60(1):66-74. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001661.
Home health use is rising rapidly in the United States as the population ages, the prevalence of chronic disease increases, and older Americans express their desire to age at home. Enrollment in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans rather than Traditional Medicare (TM) has grown as well, from 13% of total Medicare enrollment in 2004 to 39% in 2020. Despite these shifts, little is known about outcomes and costs following home health in MA as compared with TM.
The objective of this study was to measure the association of MA enrollment with outcomes and costs for patients using home health.
This was a retrospective cohort study.
Patients enrolled in plans offered by 1 large, national MA organization and patients enrolled in TM, with at least 1 home health visit between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2018.
MA enrollment.
We compared the intensity of home health services and types of care delivered. The main outcome measures were hospitalization, the proportion of days in the home, and total allowed costs during the 180-day period following the first qualifying home health visit during the study period.
Among patients who used home health, our models demonstrated enrollment in MA was associated with 14%, and 6% decreased odds of 60- and 180-day hospitalization, respectively, a 12.8% and 14.7% decrease in medical costs exclusive and inclusive of home health costs, respectively, and a 0.27% increase in the proportion of days at home during the 180-day follow-up, equivalent to an additional half-day at home. There were few differences in home health care delivered for MA and TM [mean number of visits in the first episode of care (17.1 vs. 17.3) and mean visits per week (3.2 vs. 3.3)]. The mean number of visits by visit type and percent of patients with each type was similar between MA and TM as well.
Compared with enrollment in TM, enrollment in MA was associated with improved patient-centered outcomes and lower cost and utilization, despite few differences in the way home health was delivered. These findings might be explained by structural components of MA that encourage better care management, but further investigation is needed to clarify the mechanisms by which MA enrollment may lead to higher value home health care.
随着人口老龄化、慢性病患病率上升以及越来越多的美国老年人希望在家中养老,美国的家庭医疗保健使用量迅速增长。此外,选择医疗保险优势计划(MA)而非传统医疗保险(TM)的人数也在增加,从 2004 年的医疗保险总参保人数的 13%增长到 2020 年的 39%。尽管发生了这些变化,但与 TM 相比,关于 MA 下家庭医疗保健的结局和成本的信息却很少。
本研究旨在衡量 MA 参保与使用家庭医疗保健的患者结局和成本之间的关联。
这是一项回顾性队列研究。
2017 年 1 月 1 日至 2018 年 6 月 30 日期间,参加了一家大型全国性 MA 组织提供的计划的患者,以及参加 TM 的患者,至少有一次家庭医疗保健访问。
MA 参保。
我们比较了家庭医疗保健服务的强度和提供的护理类型。主要结局指标为住院、在家天数比例以及研究期间首次符合资格的家庭医疗保健访问后 180 天内的总允许费用。
在使用家庭医疗保健的患者中,我们的模型表明,MA 参保与 60 天和 180 天住院的可能性分别降低 14%和 6%,医疗费用分别降低 12.8%和 14.7%,不包括家庭医疗保健费用的医疗费用分别降低 6%和 8%,以及在 180 天随访期间在家天数比例增加 0.27%,相当于在家时间增加了半天。MA 和 TM 之间家庭医疗保健服务交付的差异很小[首次护理发作的平均就诊次数(17.1 次 vs. 17.3 次)和每周就诊次数(3.2 次 vs. 3.3 次)]。MA 和 TM 之间的每种就诊类型的平均就诊次数和就诊患者比例也相似。
与 TM 参保相比,MA 参保与改善以患者为中心的结局以及降低成本和利用率相关,尽管家庭医疗保健的提供方式几乎没有差异。这些发现可能可以用 MA 的结构组成来解释,这些结构组成鼓励更好的医疗保健管理,但需要进一步调查以阐明 MA 参保如何导致更高价值的家庭医疗保健。