Search

OBJECTIVES: Most Medicare beneficiaries obtain supplemental insurance or enroll in Medicare Advantage (MA) to protect against potentially high cost sharing in traditional Medicare (TM). We examined changes in Medicare supplemental insurance coverage in the context of MA growth. STUDY DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional analysis of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey from 2005 to 2019. METHODS: We determined whether Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older were enrolled in MA (without Medicaid), TM without supplemental coverage, TM with employersponsored supplemental coverage, TM with Medigap, orMedicaid (in TM or MA). RESULTS: From 2005 to 2019, beneficiaries with TM and supplemental insurance provided by their former (or current) employer declined by approximately half (31.8% to 15.5%) while the share in MA (without Medicaid) more than doubled (13.4% to 35.1%). The decline in supplemental employer-sponsored insurance use was greater for White and for higher-income beneficiaries. Over the same period, beneficiaries in TM without supplemental coverage declined by more than a quarter (13.9% to 10.1%). This decline was largest for Black, Hispanic, and lower-income beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid rise in MA enrollment from 2005 to 2019 was accompanied by substantial changes in supplemental insurance with TM. Our results emphasize the interconnectedness of different insurance choices made by Medicare beneficiaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To quantify shared patient relationships between primary care physicians (PCPs) and cardiologists and oncologists and the degree to which those relationships were captured within insurance networks. Data Sources: Secondary analysis of Vericred data on physician networks, CareSet data on physicians' shared Medicare patients, and insurance plan attributes from Health Insurance Compare. Data validation exercises used data from Physician Compare and IQVIA. Study Design: Cross‐sectional study of the PCP‐to‐specialist in‐network shared patient percentage (primary outcome). We also categorized networks by insurance market segment (Medicare Advantage [MA], Medicaid managed care, small‐group or individually purchased), insurance plan type, and network breadth. Data Extraction: We analyzed data on 219,982 PCPs, 29,400 cardiologists, and 22,745 oncologists who, in 2021, accepted MA (n = 941 networks), Medicaid managed care (n = 293), and individually‐purchased (n = 332) and small‐group (n = 501) plans. Principal Findings: Networks captured, on average, 64.6% of PCP‐cardiology shared patient ties, and 61.8% of PCP‐oncologist ties. Less than half of in‐network ties (44.5% and 38.9%, respectively) were among physicians with a common organizational affiliation. After adjustment for network breadth, we found no evidence of differences in the shared patient percentage across insurance market segments or networks of different types (p‐value >0.05 for all comparisons). An exception was among national versus local and regional networks, where we found that national plans captured fewer shared patient ties, particularly among the narrowest networks (58.4% for national networksvs. 64.7% for local and regional networks for PCP‐cardiology). Conclusions: Given recent trends toward narrower networks, our findings underscore the importance of incorporating additional and nuanced measures of network composition to aid plan selection (for patients) and to guide regulatory oversight. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs) are a type of Medicare Advantage (MA) plan for individuals who have both Medicare and Medicaid coverage. The authors compared the breadths of psychiatrist and nonpsychiatrist provider networks in D-SNPs and other MA plans. MA plan provider network data were merged with plan service areas and a nationwide provider database to form a data set with 843 observations on networks subclassified by state and network type (D-SNP or other MA) covering 42 U.S. states and Washington, D.C. Network breadth measured the in-network fraction of clinically active Medicare-accepting psychiatrists and other physician providers in the plans' service areas in each state. Regression analyses were used to compare psychiatrist and nonpsychiatrist network breadth and psychiatrist-nonpsychiatrist breadth differences between D-SNPs and other MA plans, after adjustment for state-level differences. Mean psychiatrist network breadth was 0.319 in D-SNPs and 0.299 in other MA plans, and nonpsychiatrist network breadth was 0.346 in D-SNPs and 0.358 in other MA plans. Psychiatrist networks were narrower than nonpsychiatrist networks (0.303 vs. 0.355, p<0.001), but mean psychiatrist network breadth did not differ between D-SNPs and other MA plans. In regression analyses, the psychiatrist-nonpsychiatrist breadth difference was smaller in D-SNPs (−0.031) than in other MA plans (−0.060) (p=0.002). Psychiatrist provider networks in a nationwide sample of D-SNPs had similar breadth as psychiatrist networks used in other MA plans. Special provider network adequacy requirements for psychiatrists in D-SNP networks may be worthy of further consideration given D-SNPs' disproportionate enrollment of adults with serious mental illness who have dual Medicare-Medicaid insurance coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several policymakers have suggested that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has fueled the opioid epidemic by subsidizing opioid pain medications. These claims have supported numerous efforts to repeal the ACA.Objective: To determine the effect of the ACA's young adult dependent coverage insurance expansion on emergency department (ED) encounters and out-of-hospital deaths from opioid overdose.Design: Difference-in-differences analyses comparing ED encounters and out-of-hospital deaths before (2009) and after (2011-2013) the ACA young adult dependent coverage expansion. We further stratified by prescription opioid, non-prescription opioid, and methadone overdoses.Participants: Adults aged 23-25 years old and 27-29 years old who presented to the ED or died prior to reaching the hospital from opioid overdose.Main Measures: Rate of ED encounters and deaths for opioid overdose per 100,000 U.S. adults.Key Results: There were 108,253 ED encounters from opioid overdose in total. The expansion was not associated with a significant change in the ED encounter rates for opioid overdoses of all types (2.04 per 100,000 adults [95% CI - 0.75 to 4.82]), prescription opioids (0.60 per 100,000 adults [95% CI - 1.98 to 0.77]), or methadone (0.29 per 100,000 adults [95% CI - 0.78 to 0.21]). There was a slight increase in the rate of non-prescription opioid overdoses (1.91 per 100,000 adults [95% CI 0.13-3.71]). The expansion was not associated with a significant change in the out-of-hospital mortality rates for opioid overdoses of all types (0.49 per 100,000 adults [95% CI - 0.80 to 1.78]).Conclusions: Our findings do not support claims that the ACA has fueled the prescription opioid epidemic. However, the expansion was associated with an increase in the rate of ED encounters for non-prescription opioid overdoses such as heroin, although almost all were non-fatal. Future research is warranted to understand the role of private insurance in providing access to treatment in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Among the three medications approved for the treatment of opioid use disorder, methadone has been in use for the longest period and has the most extensive evidence base of effectiveness. Yet it remains underutilized as new insurance policies favor access to buprenorphine and neglect to dismantle barriers to obtaining methadone. In the absence of wholesale regulatory change, private insurance carriers should take the lead in expanding access to this medication. We offer several solutions for private payers, including expanding coverage, removing prior authorization, addressing out-of-pocket costs, increasing provider reimbursement, and incentivizing system integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The design of the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) health insurance marketplaces influences complex health plan choices.Objective: To compare the choice environments of the public health insurance exchanges in the fourth (OEP4) versus third (OEP3) open enrollment period and to examine online marketplace run by private companies, including a total cost estimate comparison.Design: In November-December 2016, we examined the public and private online health insurance exchanges. We navigated each site for "real-shopping" (personal information required) and "window-shopping" (no required personal information).Participants: Public (n = 13; 12 state-based marketplaces and HealthCare.gov ) and private (n = 23) online health insurance exchanges.Main Measures: Features included consumer decision aids (e.g., total cost estimators, provider lookups) and plan display (e.g., order of plans). We examined private health insurance exchanges for notable features (i.e., those not found on public exchanges) and compared the total cost estimates on public versus private exchanges for a standardized consumer.Results: Nearly all studied consumer decision aids saw increased deployment in the public marketplaces in OEP4 compared to OEP3. Over half of the public exchanges (n = 7 of 13) had total cost estimators (versus 5 of 14 in OEP3) in window-shopping and integrated provider lookups (window-shopping: 7; real-shopping: 8). The most common default plan orders were by premium or total cost estimate. Notable features on private health insurance exchanges were unique data presentation (e.g., infographics) and further personalized shopping (e.g., recommended plan flags). Health plan total cost estimates varied substantially between the public and private exchanges (average difference $1526).Conclusions: The ACA's public health insurance exchanges offered more tools in OEP4 to help consumers select a plan. While private health insurance exchanges presented notable features, the total cost estimates for a standardized consumer varied widely on public versus private exchanges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. health care system is undergoing significant changes. Two prominent shifts include millions added to Medicaid and greater integration and consolidation among firms. We empirically assess if these two industry trends may have implications for each other. Using experimentally derived ("secret shopper") data on primary care physicians' real-world behavior, we observe their willingness to accept new privately insured and Medicaid patients across 10 states. We combine this measure of patient acceptance with detailed information on physician and commercial insurer market structure and show that insurer and provider concentration are each positively associated with relative improvements in appointment availability for Medicaid patients. The former is consistent with a smaller price discrepancy between commercial and Medicaid patients and suggests a beneficial spillover from greater insurer market power. The findings for physician concentration do not align with a simple price bargaining explanation but do appear driven by physician firms that are not vertically integrated with a health system. These same firms also tend to rely more on nonphysician clinical staff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: Commercial health insurers can participate in the rapidly growing Medicare Advantage (MA) market, which may affect network formation and prices in traditional commercial insurance markets. We aim to quantify the prevalence and growth of commercial insurers participating in MA within the same state. STUDY DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional analysis of Clarivate's Interstudy enrollment data comprising the universe of insurers in the United States from 2015 to 2021. METHODS: We calculated the share of employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) enrollees covered by an insurer offering MA in their state in 2015, 2017, 2019, and 2021. We documented this share across states, years, and the state's 2015 tercile. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2021, the share of ESI enrollees covered by an insurer offering MA in the same state increased from 83.5% to 95.3%. This growth was concentrated in states with initially low rates in 2015 (lowest 2015 state tercile, ≤ 70.5%), in which the share grew from 47.6% to 87.9%. In 2015, 23.5% of states had a share greater than 90.0% compared with 74.5% in 2021. CONCLUSIONS: By 2021, almost all ESI enrollees were covered by insurers who participated in MA in the same state. Future research should investigate how insurer participation in MA affects network formation and prices in commercial markets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Affordable Care Act mandates that private health insurance plans cover prescription contraceptives with no consumer cost sharing. The positive financial impact of this new provision on consumers who purchase contraceptives could be substantial, but it has not yet been estimated. Using a large administrative claims data set from a national insurer, we estimated out-of-pocket spending before and after the mandate. We found that mean and median per prescription out-of-pocket expenses have decreased for almost all reversible contraceptive methods on the market. The average percentages of out-of-pocket spending for oral contraceptive pill prescriptions and intrauterine device insertions by women using those methods both dropped by 20 percentage points after implementation of the ACA mandate. We estimated average out-of-pocket savings per contraceptive user to be $248 for the intrauterine device and $255 annually for the oral contraceptive pill. Our results suggest that the mandate has led to large reductions in total out-of-pocket spending on contraceptives and that these price changes are likely to be salient for women with private health insurance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) allow millions more Americans to obtain health insurance. However, a sizable number of people remain uninsured because they live in states that have not expanded Medicaid coverage or because they feel that Marketplace coverage is not affordable. Using data from a ten-state telephone survey in which callers posed as patients, we examined prices for primary care visits offered by physician offices to new uninsured patients in 2012-13, prior to ACA insurance expansions. Patients were quoted a mean price of $160. Significantly lower prices for the uninsured were offered by family practice offices compared to general internists, in offices participating in Medicaid managed care plans, and in federally qualified health centers. Prices were also lower for offices in ZIP codes with higher poverty rates. Only 18 percent of uninsured callers were told that they could bring less than the full amount to the visit and arrange to pay the rest later. ACA insurance expansions could greatly decrease out-of-pocket spending for low-income adults seeking primary care. However, benefits of health reform are likely to be greater in states expanding Medicaid eligibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores how a specialty type’s local workforce capacity and a specialty practice’s location relate to the likelihood of denying care to children covered by Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) while accepting private insurance. Data on discriminatory denials of care to children with public insurance came from an audit study involving 273 practices across seven medical specialties serving children in Cook County, Illinois. These data were linked to physician workforce data and neighborhood poverty data to test for associations with discriminatory denials of public insurance, after adjusting for control variables. In a large metropolitan county, discriminatory denials of specialty care access for publicly insured children were attenuated for specialty types with greater local workforce capacity (odds ratio [OR]: 0.74, 95 percent; confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-0.98) and for practices located in higher-poverty neighborhoods (OR: 0.95, 95 percent; CI: 0.93- 0.98). Although limited as a single-site study, our findings support the widespread consensus that payment rates are the strongest driver of decisions to serve patients enrolled in public insurance programs. At a time when state and federal budgets are under strain, ensuring access equity for children covered by Medicaid and CHIP may require policies focused on economic levers tailored based on practice location. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. To determine how the characteristics of the health benefits offered by employers affect worker insurance coverage decisions. Data Sources. The 1996–1997 and the 1998–1999 rounds of the nationally representative Community Tracking Study Household Survey. Study Design. We use multinomial logistic regression to analyze the choice between own-employer coverage, alternative source coverage, and no coverage among employees offered health insurance by their employer. The key explanatory variables are the types of health plans offered and the net premium offered. The models include controls for personal, health plan, and job characteristics. Principal Findings. When an employer offers only a health maintenance organization married employees are more likely to decline coverage from their employer and take-up another offer (odds ratio (OR)=1.27, p<.001), while singles are more likely to accept the coverage offered by their employer and less likely to be uninsured (OR=0.650, p<.001). Higher net premiums increase the odds of declining the coverage offered by an employer and remaining uninsured for both married (OR=1.023, p<.01) and single (OR=1.035, p<.001) workers. Conclusions. The type of health plan coverage an employer offers affects whether its employees take-up insurance, but has a smaller effect on overall coverage rates for workers and their families because of the availability of alternative sources of coverage. Relative to offering only a non-HMO plan, employers offering only an HMO may reduce take-up among those with alternative sources of coverage, but increase take-up among those who would otherwise go uninsured. By modeling the possibility of take-up through the health insurance offers from the employer of the spouse, the decline in coverage rates from higher net premiums is less than previous estimates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study conducted to describe the presentation of insurance plans and the availability of consumer decision aids. It examined decision support on the HealthCare.gov and all state-based marketplace Web sites created for Affordable Care Act. It further examined changes between the first and second open enrollment periods during October 1, 2013-March 31, 2014 and November 15, 2014-February 15, 2015.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article regarding health insurance by David W. Baker and Joseph J. Sudano in the 2005 issue.

Assisters provide in-person and phone-based support to help consumers narrow their plan options on the Affordable Care Act's health insurance Marketplaces. We elicited the perspectives of a national sample of thirty-two assisters from ten states on consumer plan selection and available Marketplace decision support tools (for example, total cost estimators and provider network look-up tools). Assisters identified several shortcomings that limited their use of decision support tools, such as nonspecific cost estimates and inaccurate provider network data. Assisters instead provided individualized cost estimates, called provider offices to verify network coverage, and found innovative strategies to help consumers access care affordably under their chosen plan. Two priorities emerged for optimizing consumers' Marketplace insurance selection process: improve the quality of data used in decision support tools and invest in assister programs. Assister strategies should be a benchmark for improving decision support tools, with lessons to be learned for future tool development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: To describe and compare pediatric and adult specialty physician networks in marketplace plans. METHODS: Data on physician networks, including physician specialty and address, in all 2014 individual marketplace silver plans were aggregated. Networks were quantified as the fraction of providers in the underlying rating area within a state that participated in the network. Narrow networks included none available networks (ie, no providers available in the underlying area) and limited networks (ie, included <10% of the available providers in the underlying area). Proportions of narrow networks between pediatric and adult specialty providers were compared. RESULTS: Among the 1836 unique silver plan networks, the proportions of narrow networks were greater for pediatric (65.9%) than adult specialty (34.9%) networks (P < .001 for all specialties). Specialties with the highest proportion of narrow networks for children were infectious disease (77.4%) and nephrology (74.0%), and they were highest for adults in psychiatry (49.8%) and endocrinology (40.8%). A larger proportion of pediatric networks (43.8%) had no available specialists in the underlying area when compared with adult networks (10.4%) (P < .001 for all specialties). Among networks with available specialists in the underlying area, a higher proportion of pediatric (39.3%) than adult (27.3%) specialist networks were limited (P < .001 except psychiatry). CONCLUSIONS: Narrow networks were more prevalent among pediatric than adult specialists, because of both the sparseness of pediatric specialists and their exclusion from networks. Understanding narrow networks and marketplace network adequacy standards is a necessary beginning to monitor access to care for children and families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medicare began covering the use of carotid stents to treat arterial blockages in 2005 under an innovative policy requiring hospitals to meet quality-of-care benchmarks before seeking reimbursement. By restricting carotid stent provision to a smaller subset of US hospitals than those typically adopting new cardiovascular technologies, this policy could have disproportionately reduced the availability of this technology for minority, low-income, and rural patients. Such patients are often served by hospitals less able than others to meet increasingly stringent quality requirements. However, our analysis of hospitals that provided stents during 2005-07 demonstrated that although 21-38 percent fewer hospitals offered stents than offered other types of interventional cardiovascular procedures, such as heart bypass grafts, stents were no less available in localities with substantial poor, black, or rural populations than they were in other areas. Our study provides important evidence that the carotid stent coverage policy met its goal of limiting the adoption of the technology by hospitals that weren't well prepared to provide it--while still maintaining equitable availability of the technology. Therefore, it may be a useful model for future Medicare coverage decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]