Health plan characteristics and consumers' assessments of quality

Many purchasers and consumers of health care have become concerned about the quality of care being delivered in managed care plans. Little is known, however, about the health plan characteristics that are associated with better performance. We used survey responses from 82,583 Medicare beneficiaries from 182 health plans to study the association of consumers' assessments of care with health plan characteristics. For-profit and nationally affiliated health plans received much worse scores on the outcomes of interest, particularly for overall ratings of the health plan and composite measures of customer service and access to care. Health plans accredited by the National Committee for Quality Assurance did not receive higher scores.     

An economic history of Medicare part C

Context: Twenty‐five years ago, private insurance plans were introduced into the Medicare program with the stated dual aims of (1) giving beneficiaries a choice of health insurance plans beyond the fee‐for‐service Medicare program and (2) transferring to the Medicare program the efficiencies and cost savings achieved by managed care in the private sector. Methods: In this article we review the economic history of Medicare Part C, known today as Medicare Advantage, focusing on the impact of major changes in the program's structure and of plan payment methods on trends in the availability of private plans, plan enrollment, and Medicare spending. Additionally, we compare the experience of Medicare Advantage and of employer‐sponsored health insurance with managed care over the same time period. Findings: Beneficiaries’ access to private plans has been inconsistent over the program's history, with higher plan payments resulting in greater choice and enrollment and vice versa. But Medicare Advantage generally has cost more than the traditional Medicare program, an overpayment that has increased in recent years. Conclusions: Major changes in Medicare Advantage's payment rules are needed in order to simultaneously encourage the participation of private plans, the provision of high‐quality care, and to save Medicare money.     

What are Medicare managed care plans doing to measure and improve quality of care?

To explore managed care plans' efforts to assess and improve quality of care for Medicare beneficiaries, the authors surveyed managed care plans with risk contracts for Medicare beneficiaries in 20 large metropolitan areas in January 1998. The survey inquired about: (1) the health plans' efforts to assess and improve quality of care for specific underuse, overuse, and misuse problems; (2) how the health plans assessed functional status of enrollees, and (3) the quality improvement program they believed had the greatest impact on the health of enrollees. The managed care plans reported a heterogeneous mix of quality improvement activities ranging from poorly developed to very sophisticated. The vast majority of the more sophisticated programs addressed problems with underuse of services rather than overuse or misuse.     

Gender Differences in Patient Experience Across Medicare Advantage Plans

BackgroundMedicare beneficiaries annually select fee-for-service Medicare or a private Medicare insurance (managed care) plan; information about plan performance on quality measures can inform their decisions. Although there is drill-down information available regarding quality variation by race and ethnicity, there remains a dearth of evidence regarding the extent to which care varies by other key beneficiary characteristics, such as gender. We measured gender differences for six patient experience measures and how gender gaps differ across Medicare plans.MethodsWe used data from 300,979 respondents to the 2015–2016 Medicare Advantage Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems surveys. We fit case mix–adjusted linear mixed-effects models to estimate gender differences and evaluate heterogeneity in differences across health plans.ResultsNationally, women's experiences were better than men's (p < .05) by 1 percentage point on measures involving interactions with administrative staff (+1.6 percentage point for customer service) and timely access to care (+1.1 percentage point for getting care quickly), but worse on a measure that may involve negotiation with physicians (getting needed care). Gender gaps varied across plans, particularly for getting care quickly and getting needed care, where plan-level differences of up to 5 to 6 percentage points were observed.ConclusionsAlthough the average national differences in patient experience by gender were generally small, gender gaps were larger in some health plans and for specific measures. This finding indicates opportunities for health plans with larger gender gaps to implement quality improvement efforts.     

Health outcomes. New quality measure for Medicare.

OBJECTIVE: A new measurement of health care quality for Medicare beneficiaries has been implemented by the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA). This paper describes the program, presents baseline data and highlights associated issues. DESIGN: The Health Outcomes Survey (HOS) is a longitudinal cohort mail survey. Changes in population health status after 2 years will be evaluated on an individual plan level. SETTING: Two-hundred and eighty-seven US Medicare managed care plans. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Physical component and mental component summary scales derived from the SF-36. FINDINGS: Baseline data documented lower health status in older populations, while functional limitations and disease prevalence were higher. Among different plans, mean functional levels were found to be similar, although a few plans contained populations with exceptionally low levels. These data do not support the assertion that enrolees in for-profit plans are healthier than non-profit plans. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: The HOS is the first large-scale program to evaluate health outcomes among older Americans. HCFA recognizes several technical and policy issues. Technical issues include possible biased reporting for subpopulations, the validity of proxy responses and respondent burden. Policy issues concern the appropriateness of using a generic measure such as the SF-36 and how much change in health status can be attributed to quality of health care. HCFA plans to extend the HOS to beneficiaries in traditional Medicare. The HOS project is expected to encourage more efforts to maintain or improve the health status of the Medicare managed care population.     

Language and regional differences in evaluations of Medicare managed care by Hispanics

OBJECTIVES: This study uses the Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS((R))) survey to examine the experiences of Hispanics enrolled in Medicare managed care. Evaluations of care are examined in relationship to primary language (English or Spanish) and region of the country. DATA SOURCES: CAHPS 3.0 Medicare managed care survey data collected in 2002. STUDY DESIGN: The dependent variables consist of five CAHPS multi-item scales measuring timeliness of care, provider communication, office staff helpfulness, getting needed care, and health plan customer service. The main independent variables are Hispanic primary language (English or Spanish) and region (California, Florida, New York/New Jersey, and other states). Ordinary least squares regression is used to model the effect of Hispanic primary language and region on CAHPS scales, controlling for age, gender, education, and self-rated health. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: The analytic sample consists of 125,369 respondents (82 percent response rate) enrolled in 181 Medicare managed care plans across the U.S. Of the 125,369 respondents, 8,463 (7 percent) were self-identified as Hispanic. The survey was made available in English and Spanish, and 1,353 Hispanics completed one in Spanish. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Hispanic English speakers had less favorable reports of care than whites for all dimensions of care except provider communication. Hispanic Spanish speakers reported more negative experiences than whites with timeliness of care, provider communication, and office staff helpfulness, but better reports of care for getting needed care. Spanish speakers in all regions except Florida had less favorable scores than English-speaking Hispanics for provider communication and office staff helpfulness, but more positive assessments for getting needed care. There were greater regional variations in CAHPS scores among Hispanic Spanish speakers than among Hispanic English speakers. Spanish speakers in Florida had more positive experiences than Spanish speakers in other regions for most dimensions of care. CONCLUSIONS: Hispanics in Medicare managed care face barriers to care; however, their experiences with care vary by language and region. Spanish speakers (except FL) have less favorable experiences with provider communication and office staff helpfulness than their English-speaking counterparts, suggesting language barriers in the clinical encounter. On the other hand, Spanish speakers reported more favorable experiences than their English-speaking counterparts with the managed care aspects of their care (getting needed care and plan customer service). Medicare managed care plans need to address the observed disparities in patient experiences among Hispanics as part of their quality improvement efforts. Plans can work with their network providers to address issues related to timeliness of care and office staff helpfulness. In addition, plans can provide incentives for language services, which have the potential to improve communication with providers and staff among Spanish speakers. Finally, health plans can reduce the access barriers faced by Hispanics, especially among English speakers.     

Consumer perspectives on information needs for health plan choice

The premise that competition will improve health care assumes that consumers will choose plans that best fit their needs and resources. However, many consumers are frustrated with currently available plan comparison information. We describe results from 22 focus groups in which Medicare beneficiaries, Medicaid enrollees, and privately insured consumers assessed the usefulness of indicators based on consumer survey data and Health Employer Data Information Set (HEDIS)-type measures of quality of care. Considerable education would be required before consumers could interpret report card data to inform plan choices. Policy implications for design and provision of plan information for Medicare beneficiaries and Medicaid enrollees are discussed.     

Who Switches from Medigap to Medicare HMOs?

OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors affecting whether Medigap owners switch to Medicare managed care plans. DATA SOURCES: The primary data were the 1993-1996 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) Cost and Use Files. These were supplemented by data available from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) website. STUDY DESIGN: Individuals on the MCBS files with Medigap coverage in the period 1993-1996 were included in the study. The person-year was the unit of analysis. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine whether or not a Medigap owner switched to a Medicare-managed care plan during a particular year. Independent variables included measures of affordability, need for services, health insurance benefits, sociodemographics, and supply of managed care plans. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We did not detect strong evidence that beneficiaries in poorer health were more likely than others to switch from Medigap coverage to Medicare-managed care. In addition, higher Medigap premiums did not appear to induce beneficiaries to switch into managed care. CONCLUSIONS: We examined selection bias in joining managed care plans among the subset of Medicare beneficiaries who have Medigap policies. No strong evidence of selection bias was found in this population. We conclude that there was no evidence that the Medigap market is becoming prohibitively expensive as a result of unfavorable selection.     

Impact of Medicare managed care market withdrawal on beneficiaries

The 2001 Survey of Involuntary Disenrollees was conducted to investigate the impact of Medicare+Choice (M+C) plan withdrawals on Medicare beneficiaries. Eighty-four percent of a total of 4,732 beneficiaries whose Medicare managed care (MMC) plan stopped serving them at the end of 2000 responded to the survey. Their responses indicated that the withdrawal of plans from Medicare affected beneficiaries in terms of concerns about getting and paying for care, increased payments for premiums and out-of-pocket costs, and changes in health care arrangements. Of particular concern were the impacts on those in vulnerable subgroups such as the disabled, less educated, and minorities.     

Estimating Medicare advantage lock-in provisions impact on vulnerable Medicare beneficiaries

Beginning January 2006, Medicare beneficiaries will have limited ability to change health plans. We examine the Medicare managed care enrollment and disenrollment behavior of traditionally vulnerable beneficiaries from 1999-2001 to estimate the potential impact of the new enrollment restrictions. Findings that several such groups were more likely to make multiple health plan elections, leave their managed care plan midyear, and/or have higher voluntary disenrollment rates and transfers to original fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare suggest that the lock-in provisions may have greater negative impacts on vulnerable beneficiaries. This article identifies several recommendations that CMS might consider to lessen the detrimental effects on at-risk groups.     

Voluntary disenrollment from Medicare managed care: market factors and disabled beneficiaries

Disenrollment rates from Medicare managed care plans have been reported to the public as an indicator of health plan quality. Previous studies have shown that voluntary disenrollment rates differ among vulnerable subgroups, and that these rates can reflect patient care experiences. We hypothesized that disabled beneficiaries may be affected differently than other beneficiaries by competitive market factors, due to higher expected expenditures and impaired mobility. Findings suggest that disabled beneficiaries are more likely to experience multiple problems with managed care.     

Race/ethnicity,language, and patients' assessments of care in Medicaid managed care

OBJECTIVE: Consumer assessments of health care provide important information about how well health plans and clinicians meet the needs of the people they serve. The purpose of this study was to examine whether consumer reports and ratings of care in Medicaid managed care vary by race/ethnicity and language. DATA SOURCES: Data were derived from the National CAHPS Benchmarking Database (NCBD) 3.0 and consisted of 49,327 adults enrolled in Medicaid managed care plans in 14 states in 2000. DATA COLLECTION: The CAHPS data were collected by telephone and mail. Surveys were administered in Spanish and English. The response rate across plans was 38 percent. STUDY DESIGN: Data were analyzed using linear regression models. The dependent variables were CAHPS 2.0 global rating items (personal doctor, specialist, health care, health plan) and multi-item reports of care (getting needed care, timeliness of care, provider communication, staff helpfulness, plan service). The independent variables were race/ethnicity, language spoken at home (English, Spanish, Other), and survey language (English or Spanish). Survey respondents were assigned to one of nine racial/ethnic categories based on Hispanic ethnicity and race: White, Hispanic/Latino, Black/African American, Asian/Pacific Islanders, American Indian/Alaskan native, American Indian/White, Black/White, Other Multiracial, Other Race/Ethnicity. Whites, Asians, and Hispanics were further classified into language subgroups based on the survey language and based on the language primarily spoken at home. Covariates included gender, age, education, and self-rated health. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Racial/ethnic and linguistic minorities tended to report worse care than did whites. Linguistic minorities reported worse care than did racial and ethnic minorities. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that racial and ethnic minorities and persons with limited English proficiency face barriers to care, despite Medicaid-enabled financial access. Health care organizations should address the observed disparities in access to care for racial/ethnic and linguistic minorities as part of their quality improvement efforts.     

Beneficiary selection, use, and charges in two Medicare capitation demonstrations.

Findings with regard to health status, service use, and charges are presented for Medicare beneficiaries who received care under Medicare risk contracts with two health maintenance organizations from 1980 through 1982 and for fee-for-service comparison groups. Health status of plan enrollees and fee-for-service beneficiaries were compared using mortality data, preenrollment claims, and self-reported health measures. Patterns of use and expenditures during preenrollment and postenrollment periods were examined using Medicare records and data supplied by the plans.     

Using global ratings of health plans to improve the quality of health care

Global ratings, such as those based on consumer satisfaction, are a commonly used form of report on the performance of health plans and providers. A simple averaging of the global rating by plan members leads to a problem: it gives a plan greater incentives to improve services used by low-cost members than services used by high-cost members. This paper presents a formal model of consumer formation of global ratings and the incentives these rating convey to plans. We use this model to characterize weights on consumer respondents to correct the incentive problem. We implement our proposed solution using data from the Consumer Assessments of Health Care Providers and Systems (CAHPS) and the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS). Our correction is low-cost, easily implemented on an on-going basis, and insensitive to assumptions about why health plans care about quality ratings.     

Alcohol,drug abuse,and mental health care for uninsured and insured adults

OBJECTIVE: To compare adults with different insurance coverage in care for alcohol, drug abuse, and mental health (ADM) problems. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: From a national telephone survey of 9,585 respondents. DESIGN: Follow-up of adult participants in the Community Tracking Study. DATA COLLECTION: Self-report survey of insurance plan (Medicare, Medicaid, unmanaged, fully, or partially managed private, or uninsured), ADM need, use of ADM services and treatments, and satisfaction with care in the last 12 months. PRINCIPAL METHODS: Logistic and linear regressions were used to compare persons by insurance type in ADM use. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The likelihood of ADM care was highest under Medicaid and lowest for the uninsured and those under Medicare. Perceived unmet need was highest for the uninsured and lowest under Medicare. Persons in fully rather than partially managed private plans tend to be more likely to have ADM care and ADM treatments given need. Satisfaction with care was high in public plans and low for the uninsured. CONCLUSIONS: The uninsured have the most problems with access to and quality of ADM care, relative to the somewhat comparable Medicaid population. Persons in fully managed plans had better rather than worse access and quality compared to partially managed plans, but findings are exploratory. Despite low ADM use, those with Medicare tend to be satisfied. Across plans, unmet need for ADM care was high, suggesting changes are needed in policy and practice.