Comparing apples with oranges: administrative expenses and finances in Medicare systems.

OBJECTIVES: Proponents of a single-payer or public option health care system often cite the lower administrative expenses in public Medicare compared with those in private Medicare, claiming that this difference represents efficiency. We check the validity of this comparison in terms of accuracy and definitions and suggest expanding its scope to include expanded financial data of the 2 Medicare systems. STUDY DESIGN: Using annual Medicare Boards of Trustees and National Health Expenditure Accounts data from CMS and health insurers' financial statement data, we compare the level and percentage of the administrative expenses of the Medicare systems and show incompatible and not reconcilable definitions of administrative expenses. We expand our analysis to income, benefits, gains and losses, and loss ratios of the programs. METHODS: Our methodology is a careful comparison of categories of expenses between public and private insurers using official data sources. The comparison is both qualitative and quantitative. RESULTS: We validate the low administrative expenses of Medicare parts A, B, and D (1.35% of benefits in 2018) compared with Medicare Part C (10.86% of benefits without loss adjustment expenses [LAE] and 14.84% with LAE for 2018). Expanding the focus, the income and benefits per beneficiary grew faster and larger in Medicare parts A, B, and D than in Medicare Part C-a reversal of earlier trends. The public Medicare program suffered losses in 11 years during 2002-2018, whereas private insurers' Medicare remained solvent with about an 85% loss ratio. CONCLUSIONS: Comparisons of the systems in the United States would benefit from expanding the focus beyond incomparable administrative expenses. For the current period of coronavirus disease 2019, if the trends continue, public Medicare may suffer greater deficits relative to the private Medicare Part C.

Primary Care's Historic Role in Vaccination and Potential Role in COVID-19 Immunization Programs.

PURPOSE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic recovery will require a broad and coordinated effort for infection testing, immunity determination, and vaccination. With the advent of several COVID-19 vaccines, the dissemination and delivery of COVID-19 immunization across the nation is of concern. Previous immunization delivery patterns may reveal important components of a comprehensive and sustainable effort to immunize everyone in the nation. METHODS: The delivery of vaccinations were enumerated by provider type using 2017 Medicare Part B Fee-For-Service data and the 2013-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. The delivery of these services was examined at the service, physician, and visit level. RESULTS: In 2017 Medicare Part B Fee-For-Service, primary care physicians provided the largest share of services for vaccinations (46%), followed closely by mass immunizers (45%), then nurse practitioners/physician assistants (NP/PAs) (5%). The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey showed that primary care physicians provided most clinical visits for vaccination (54% of all visits). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians have played a crucial role in delivery of vaccinations to the US population, including the elderly, between 2012-2017. These findings indicate primary care practices may be a crucial element of vaccine counseling and delivery in the upcoming COVID-19 recovery and immunization efforts in the United States.

COVID-19 and cataract surgery backlog in Medicare beneficiaries.

PURPOSE: To forecast the volume of cataract surgery in Medicare beneficiaries in the United States in 2020 and to estimate the surgical backlog that may be created due to COVID-19. SETTING: Medicare Beneficiaries, United States. DESIGN: Epidemiologic modeling. METHODS: Baseline trends in cataract surgery among Medicare beneficiaries were assessed by querying the Medicare Part B Provider Utilization National Summary data. It was assumed that once the surgical deferment is over, there will be a ramp-up period; this was modeled using a stochastic Monte Carlo simulation. Total surgical backlog 2 years postsuspension was estimated. Sensitivity analyses were used to test model assumptions. RESULTS: Assuming cataract surgeries were to resume in May 2020, it would take 4 months under an optimistic scenario to revert to 90% of the expected pre-COVID forecasted volume. At 2-year postsuspension, the resulting backlog would be between 1.1 and 1.6 million cases. Sensitivity analyses revealed that a substantial surgical backlog would remain despite potentially lower surgical demand in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Suspension of elective cataract surgical care during the COVID-19 surge might have a lasting impact on ophthalmology and will likely result in a cataract surgical patient backlog. These data may aid physicians, payers, and policymakers in planning for postpandemic recovery.