Comparison of prior authorization across insurers: cross sectional evidence from Medicare Advantage.

OBJECTIVE: To measure and compare the scope of US insurers' policies for prior authorization (PA), a process by which insurers assess the necessity of planned medical care, and to quantify differences in PA across insurers, physician specialties, and clinical service categories. DESIGN: Cross sectional analysis. SETTING: PA policies for five insurers serving most of the beneficiaries covered by privately administered Medicare Advantage in the US, 2021, as applied to utilization patterns observed in Medicare Part B. PARTICIPANTS: 30 540 086 beneficiaries in traditional Medicare Part B. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportions of government administered traditional Medicare Part B spending and utilization that would have required PA according to Medicare Advantage insurer rules. RESULTS: The insurers required PA for 944 to 2971 of the 14 130 clinical services (median 1899; weighted mean 1429) constituting 17% to 33% of Part B spending (median 28%; weighted mean 23%) and 9% to 41% of Part B utilization (median 22%; weighted mean 18%). 40% of spending ($57bn; £45bn; €53bn) and 48% of service utilization would have required PA by at least one insurer; 12% of spending and 6% of utilization would have required PA by all insurers. 93% of Part B medication spending, or 74% of medication use, would have required PA by at least one Medicare Advantage insurer. For all Medicare Advantage insurers, hematology and oncology drugs represented the largest proportion of PA spending (range 27-34%; median 33%; weighted mean 30%). PA rates varied widely across specialties. CONCLUSION: PA policies varied substantially across private insurers in the US. Despite limited consensus, all insurers required PA extensively, particularly for physician administered medications. These findings indicate substantial differences in coverage policies between government administered and privately administered Medicare. The results may inform ongoing efforts to focus PA more effectively on low value services and reduce administrative burdens for clinicians and patients.

The Impact of the Medicaid Reimbursement Bump on Influenza Vaccination Rates Among US Teens: Evidence from the National Immunization Survey-Teen 2011-2020.

BACKGROUND: Many adolescents do not receive basic preventive care such as influenza vaccinations. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) temporarily increased Medicaid reimbursements for primary care services, including vaccine administration, in 2013 to 2014. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of reimbursement increases on influenza vaccination rates among adolescents with Medicaid. METHODS: This repeated cross-sectional study used a difference-in-difference approach to compare changes in annual influenza vaccination rates for 20,884 adolescents 13 to 17 years old covered by Medicaid with adequate provider-reported data in 18 states with larger extended (>$5, 2013 to 2019) versus larger temporary (2013 to 2014 only) versus smaller reimbursement changes. We used linear probability models with individual-level random effects, adjusting for state and individual characteristics and annual time trends to assess the impact of a Medicaid vaccine administration reimbursement increase on annual influenza vaccination. RESULTS: Mean Medicaid reimbursements for vaccine administration doubled from 2011 to 2013 to 2014 (eg, from $11 to $22 for CPT 90460). States with smaller reimbursement changes had higher mean reimbursements and higher adjusted vaccination rates at baseline (2011) compared with states with larger temporary and extended reimbursement changes. The reimbursement change was not associated with increases in influenza vaccination rates. DISCUSSION: Influenza vaccination rates were low among adolescents with Medicaid throughout the study period, particularly in states with lower Medicaid reimbursement levels before the ACA. CONCLUSION: That reimbursement increases were not associated with higher vaccination rates suggests additional efforts are needed to improve influenza vaccination rates in this population.

Benzodiazepine Initiation and the Risk of Falls or Fall-Related Injuries in Older Adults Following Acute Ischemic Stroke.

Background: Benzodiazepine use in older adults following acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is common, yet short-term safety concerning falls or fall-related injuries remains unexplored. Methods: We emulated a hypothetical randomized trial of benzodiazepine use during the acute post stroke recovery period to assess incidence of falls or fall related injuries in older adults. Using linked data from the Get With the Guidelines Registry and Mass General Brigham's electronic health records, we selected patients aged 65 and older admitted for Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS) between 2014 and 2021 with no documented prior stroke and no benzodiazepine prescriptions in the previous 3 months. Potential for immortal-time and confounding biases was addressed via separate inverse-probability weighting strategies. Results: The study included 495 patients who initiated inpatient benzodiazepines within three days of admission and 2,564 who did not. After standardization, the estimated 10-day risk of falls or fall-related injuries was 694 events per 1000 (95% confidence interval CI: 676-709) for the benzodiazepine initiation strategy and 584 events per 1000 (95% CI: 575-595) for the non-initiation strategy. Subgroup analyses showed risk differences of 142 events per 1000 (95% CI: 111-165) and 85 events per 1000 (95% CI: 64-107) for patients aged 65 to 74 years and for those aged 75 years or older, respectively. Risk differences were 187 events per 1000 (95% CI: 159-206) for patients with minor (NIHSS≤ 4) AIS and 32 events per 1000 (95% CI: 10-58) for those with moderate-to-severe AIS. Conclusions: Initiating inpatient benzodiazepines within three days of AIS is associated with an elevated 10-day risk of falls or fall-related injuries, particularly for patients aged 65 to 74 years and for those with minor strokes. This underscores the need for caution with benzodiazepines, especially among individuals likely to be ambulatory during the acute and sub-acute post-stroke period.

Associations Between Annual Medicare Part D Low-Income Subsidy Loss and Prescription Drug Spending and Use.

Importance: The Medicare Part D Low Income Subsidy (LIS) program provides millions of beneficiaries with drug plan premium and cost-sharing assistance. The extent to which LIS recipients experience subsidy losses with annual redetermination cycles and the resulting associations with prescription drug affordability and use are unknown. Objective: To examine how frequently annual LIS benefits are lost among Medicare Part D beneficiaries and how this is associated with prescription drug use and out-of-pocket costs. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study of Medicare Part D beneficiaries from 2007 to 2018, annual changes in LIS recipients among those automatically deemed eligible (eg, due to dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid) and nondeemed beneficiaries who must apply for LIS benefits were analyzed using Medicare enrollment and Part D event data. Subsidy losses were classified in 4 groups: temporary losses (<1 year); extended losses (≥1 year); subsidy reductions (change to partial LIS); and disenrollment from Medicare Part D after subsidy loss. Temporary losses could more likely represent subsidy losses among eligible beneficiaries. Multinomial logit models were used to examine associations between beneficiary characteristics and subsidy loss; linear regression models were used to compare changes in prescription drug cost and use in the months after subsidy losses vs before. Analyses were conducted between November 2022 and November 2023. Exposure: Subsidy loss at the beginning of each year among subsidy recipients in December of the prior year. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were out-of-pocket costs and prescription drug fills overall and for 4 classes: antidiabetes, antilipid, antidepressant, and antipsychotic drugs. Results: In 2008, 731 070 full LIS beneficiaries (17%) were not deemed automatically eligible (39% were aged <65 years; 59% were female). Nearly all beneficiaries deemed automatically eligible (≥99%) retained the subsidy annually from 2007 to 2018, compared with 78% to 84% of nondeemed beneficiaries. Among nondeemed beneficiaries, disabled individuals younger than 65 years and racial and ethnic minority groups were more likely to have temporary subsidy losses vs none. Temporary losses were associated with an average 700% increase in out-of-pocket drug costs (+$52.72/mo [95% CI, 52.52-52.92]) and 15% reductions in prescription fills (-0.58 fills/mo [95% CI, -0.59 to -0.57]) overall. Similar changes were found for antidiabetes, antilipid, antidepressant, and antipsychotic prescription drug classes. Beneficiaries who retained their subsidy had few changes. Conclusions and Relevance: The conclusions of this cohort study suggest that efforts to help eligible beneficiaries retain Medicare Part D subsidies could improve drug affordability, treatment adherence, and reduce disparities in medication access.

The Affordability Of Individual-Market Health Insurance In California Under The American Rescue Plan Act, 2021.

In 2021 the American Rescue Plan Act increased premium subsidies for people purchasing insurance from the Affordable Care Act Marketplaces and provided zero-premium Marketplace plans that covered 94 percent of medical care costs (silver 94 plans) to recipients of unemployment compensation. Using data on adult enrollees in on- and off-Marketplace individual plans in California in 2021, we found that 41 percent reported incomes at or below 400 percent of the federal poverty level and that 39 percent reported living in households receiving unemployment compensation. Overall, 72 percent of enrollees reported having no difficulty paying premiums, and 76 percent reported that out-of-pocket expenses did not affect their seeking of medical care. The majority of enrollees eligible for plans with cost-sharing subsidies were enrolled in Marketplace silver plans (56-58 percent). Many of these enrollees, however, may have missed opportunities for premium or cost-sharing subsidies: 6-8 percent enrolled in off-Marketplace plans and were more likely to have difficulty paying premiums than those in Marketplace silver plans, and more than one-quarter enrolled in Marketplace bronze plans and were more likely to delay care because of cost than those in Marketplace silver plans. In the coming era of expanded Marketplace subsidies under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, helping consumers identify high-value and subsidy-eligible plans could mitigate remaining affordability problems.

Nursing home infection control strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 awarded $500 million toward scaling "strike teams" to mitigate the impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) within nursing homes. The Massachusetts Nursing Facility Accountability and Support Package (NFASP) piloted one such model during the first weeks of the pandemic, providing nursing homes financial, administrative, and educational support. For a subset of nursing homes deemed high-risk, the state offered supplemental, in-person technical infection control support. METHODS: Using state death certificate data and federal nursing home occupancy data, we examined longitudinal all-cause mortality per 100,000 residents and changes in occupancy across NFASP participants and subgroups that varied in their receipt of the supplemental intervention. RESULTS: Nursing home mortality peaked in the weeks preceding the NFASP, with a steeper increase among those receiving the supplemental intervention. There were contemporaneous declines in weekly occupancy. The potential for temporal confounding and differential selection across NFASP subgroups precluded estimation of causal effects of the intervention on mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We offer policy and design suggestions for future strike team iterations that could inform the allocation of state and federal funding. We recommend expanded data collection infrastructure and, ideally, randomized assignment to intervention subgroups to support causal inference as strike team models are scaled under the direction of state and federal agencies.

Association of Early Seizure Prophylaxis With Posttraumatic Seizures and Mortality: A Meta-analysis With Evidence Quality Assessment.

Purpose of the Review: To evaluate the quality of evidence about the association of primary seizure prophylaxis with antiseizure medication (ASM) within 7 days postinjury and the 18- or 24-month epilepsy/late seizure risk or all-cause mortality in adults with new-onset traumatic brain injury (TBI), in addition to early seizure risk. Results: Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria (7 randomized and 16 nonrandomized studies). We analyzed 9,202 patients, including 4,390 in the exposed group and 4,812 in the unexposed group (894 in placebo and 3,918 in no ASM groups). There was a moderate to serious bias risk based on our assessment. Within the limitations of existing studies, our data revealed a lower risk for early seizures in the ASM prophylaxis group compared with placebo or no ASM prophylaxis (risk ratio [RR] 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.57, p < 0.00001, I 2 = 3%). We identified high-quality evidence in favor of acute, short-term primary ASM use to prevent early seizures. Early ASM prophylaxis was not associated with a substantial difference in the 18- or 24-month risk of epilepsy/late seizures (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.61-1.68, p = 0.96, I 2 = 63%) or mortality (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.89-1.51, p = 0.26, I 2 = 0%). There was no evidence of strong publication bias for each main outcome. The overall quality of evidence was low and moderate for post-TBI epilepsy risk and all-cause mortality, respectively. Summary: Our data suggest that the evidence showing no association between early ASM use and 18- or 24-month epilepsy risk in adults with new-onset TBI was of low quality. The analysis indicated a moderate quality for the evidence showing no effect on all-cause mortality. Therefore, higher-quality evidence is needed as a supplement for stronger recommendations.

Coverage Parity And Racial And Ethnic Disparities In Mental Health And Substance Use Care Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

Many older Americans do not receive needed care for mental health and substance use disorders (MHSUD), and there are substantial racial and ethnic disparities in receipt of this care across the lifespan. Medicare introduced cost-sharing parity for outpatient MHSUD care during the period 2010-14, reducing beneficiaries' out-of-pocket share of MHSUD spending from 50 percent to 20 percent. Among traditional Medicare beneficiaries ages sixty-five and older, we examined changes in MHSUD use and spending during the period 2008-18 for low-income beneficiaries with the cost-sharing reduction versus a control group of beneficiaries with free care throughout the study period among Black, Hispanic, Asian, and American Indian/Alaska Native versus White beneficiaries. Among older Medicare beneficiaries, overall use of MHSUD services increased during this period. For White beneficiaries, MHSUD cost-sharing parity was associated with an increased likelihood of having specialty MHSUD visits and medication use and a reduced likelihood of having unmonitored MHSUD medication use and MHSUD emergency department visits and hospitalizations. However, cost-sharing parity was associated with smaller or no gains in MHSUD services use for racial and ethnic minority beneficiaries compared with White beneficiaries, thus widening racial and ethnic disparities in MHSUD care.

The Design of the RAND Health Insurance Experiment: A Retrospective.

This article, prepared as part of a special issue on multiarmed experiments, describes the design of the RAND Health Insurance Experiment, paying particular attention to the choice of arms. It also describes how the results of the Experiment were used in a simulation model and, looking back, how the design might have differed, and how the results apply today, 4 decades after the Experiment was conducted.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Seizure Prophylaxis Among Adults After Acute Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Older adults occasionally receive seizure prophylaxis in an acute ischemic stroke (AIS) setting, despite safety concerns. There are no trial data available about the net impact of early seizure prophylaxis on post-AIS survival. METHODS: Using a stroke registry (American Heart Association's Get With The Guidelines) individually linked to electronic health records, we examined the effect of initiating seizure prophylaxis (ie, epilepsy-specific antiseizure drugs) within 7 days of an AIS admission versus not initiating in patients ≥65 years admitted for a new, nonsevere AIS (National Institutes of Health Stroke Severity score ≤20) between 2014 and 2021 with no recorded use of epilepsy-specific antiseizure drugs in the previous 3 months. We addressed confounding by using inverse-probability weights. We performed standardization accounting for pertinent clinical and health care factors (eg, National Institutes of Health Stroke Severity scale, prescription counts, seizure-like events). RESULTS: The study sample included 151 patients who received antiseizure drugs and 3020 who did not. The crude 30-day mortality risks were 219 deaths per 1000 patients among epilepsy-specific antiseizure drugs initiators and 120 deaths per 1000 among noninitiators. After standardization, the estimated mortality was 251 (95% CI, 190-307) deaths per 1000 among initiators and 120 (95% CI, 86-144) deaths per 1000 among noninitiators, corresponding to a risk difference of 131 (95% CI, 65-200) excess deaths per 1000 patients. In the prespecified subgroup analyses, the risk difference was 52 (95% CI, 11-72) among patients with minor AIS and 138 (95% CI, 52-222) among moderate-to-severe AIS patients. Similarly, the risk differences were 86 (95% CI, 18-118) and 157 (95% CI, 57-219) among patients aged 65 to 74 years and ≥75 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There was a higher risk of 30-day mortality associated with initiating versus not initiating seizure prophylaxis within 7 days post-AIS. This study does not support the role of seizure prophylaxis in reducing 30-day poststroke mortality.

No short-term mortality from benzodiazepine use post-acute ischemic stroke after accounting for bias.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Older adults receive benzodiazepines for agitation, anxiety, and insomnia after acute ischemic stroke (AIS). No trials have been conducted to determine if benzodiazepine use affects poststroke mortality in the elderly. METHODS: We examined the association between initiating benzodiazepines within 1 week after AIS and 30-day mortality. We included patients ≥65 years, admitted for new nonsevere AIS (NIH-Stroke-Severity[NIHSS]≤ 20), 2014-2020, with no recorded benzodiazepine use in the previous 3 months and no contraindication for use. We linked a stroke registry to electronic health records, used inverse-probability weighting to address confounding, and estimated the risk difference (RD). A process of cloning, weighting, and censoring was used to avoid immortal time bias. RESULTS: Among 2,584 patients, 389 received benzodiazepines. The crude 30-day mortality risk from treatment initiation was 212/1,000 among patients who received benzodiazepines, while the 30-day mortality was 34/1,000 among those who did not. When follow-up was aligned on day of AIS admission and immortal time was assigned to the two groups, the estimated risks were 27/1,000 and 22/1,000, respectively. Upon further adjustment for confounders, the RD was 5 (-12 to 19) deaths/1,000 patients. CONCLUSION: The observed higher 30-day mortality associated with benzodiazepine initiation within 7 days was largely due to bias.

Evaluating The Accuracy Of Medicare Risk Adjustment For Alzheimer's Disease And Related Dementias.

In 2020 Medicare reintroduced Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) Hierarchical Condition Categories (HCCs) to risk-adjust Medicare Advantage and accountable care organization (ACO) payments. The potential for Medicare spending increases from this policy change are not well understood because the baseline accuracy of ADRD HCCs is uncertain. Using linked 2016-18 claims and electronic health record data from a large ACO, we evaluated the accuracy of claims-based ADRD HCCs against a reference standard of clinician-adjudicated disease. An estimated 7.5 percent of beneficiaries had clinician-adjudicated ADRD. Among those with ADRD HCCs, 34 percent did not have clinician-adjudicated disease. The false-negative and false-positive rates were 22.7 percent and 3.2 percent, respectively. Medicare spending for those with false-negative ADRD HCCs exceeded that of true positives by $14,619 per beneficiary. If, after the reintroduction of risk adjustment for ADRD, all false negatives were coded as having ADRD, expenditure benchmarks for beneficiaries with ADRD would increase by 9 percent. Monitoring ADRD coding could become challenging in the setting of concurrent incentives to decrease false-negative rates and increase false-positive rates.

Changes in Insurance Coverage Continuity After Affordable Care Act Expansion of Medicaid Eligibility for Young Adults With Low Income in Massachusetts.

Importance: Young adults historically have had the highest uninsured rates among all age groups. In 2014, in addition to Medicaid expansion for adults with low income (≤133% of the federal poverty level [FPL]) through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Massachusetts also extended eligibility for children (≤150% FPL) to beneficiaries aged 19 to 20 years. Objective: To examine changes in insurance coverage continuity for Medicaid enrollees who turned age 19 years before and after eligibility policy changes. Design Setting and Participants: This cohort study used data from the Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database (2012 to 2016) to compare coverage for Medicaid beneficiaries turning age 19 years before and after Medicaid expansion. Monthly coverage was examined for each cohort for 3 years as beneficiaries aged from 18 and 19 years to 19 and 20 years to 20 and 21 years. Analyses were performed between November 1, 2020, and May 12, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: In each year, the likelihood of being uninsured or having Medicaid, employer-sponsored insurance, or individual commercial coverage for 3 or more months was examined along with the likelihood of having continuous Medicaid enrollment for 12 or more and 24 or more months. Multivariable linear probability models were used to compare the likelihood of these outcomes for those in the postexpansion vs preexpansion cohorts, adjusting for sex, comorbidity levels, neighborhood socioeconomic status, and neighborhood race and ethnicity. Results: A total of 41 247 young adults turning age 18 to 19 years in the baseline year (20 876 [50.6%] men) were included in the study, with 20 777 in the preexpansion cohort and 20 470 in the postexpansion cohort. Enrollees who turned age 19 years after vs before the Medicaid eligibility expansion were less likely to have 3 or more uninsured months at ages 18 to 19 years (4.4% [n = 891] vs 22.9% [n = 4750]; adjusted difference, -18.4 [95% CI, -19.0 to -17.7] percentage points) and 19 to 20 years (13.2% [n = 2702] vs 35.8% [n = 7447]; adjusted difference, -22.4 [95% CI, -23.2 to -21.6] percentage points) and more likely to have continuous insurance coverage for 12 or more months (94.1% [n = 19 272] vs 63.7% [n = 13 234]; adjusted difference, 30.5 [95% CI, 29.7-31.2] percentage points) or 24 or more months (77.5% [n = 15 868] vs 44.4% [n = 9221]; adjusted difference, 33.0 [95% CI, 32.1-33.9] percentage points). Differences in the likelihood of having 3 or more uninsured months diminished at ages 20 to 21 years, when both groups had access to Medicaid (ie, in calendar years 2014 for the preexpansion cohort and 2016 for the postexpansion cohort). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of young adults in Massachusetts, the combination of expanding Medicaid to lower-income adults and increasing the age threshold for child Medicaid eligibility was associated with reduced likelihood of becoming uninsured among Medicaid enrollees entering adulthood.

Evaluation of Claims-Based Ascertainment of Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias Across Health Care Settings.

This cohort study evaluates the ascertainment of Alzheimer disease and related dementia using diagnostic codes in various health care settings.

Premium tax credits in the American Rescue Plan and off-marketplace enrollees.

OBJECTIVES: The 2021 American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) increased the availability and magnitude of premium tax credits (PTCs) for consumers purchasing individual marketplace plans in 2021-2022. Millions currently purchase PTC-ineligible plans off of the marketplace. We estimate the proportion of off-marketplace enrollees who would be eligible for the expanded PTCs under ARPA, calculate PTC amounts for eligible enrollees, and examine factors influencing plan choice that could inform outreach efforts. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed data from a survey of a random sample of off-marketplace enrollees in California in 2017 (n = 829). METHODS: Using survey data including self-reported income, household size, and employment status combined with 2021 benchmark premium data from Covered California, we estimate eligibility for PTCs and potential PTC amounts under ARPA among off-marketplace enrollees. We adjust for both survey design weights and poststratification weights. RESULTS: Among off-marketplace enrollees, we estimate that approximately 12% are potentially ineligible for PTCs because they reported incomes less than 100% of the poverty level or because they had access to employer-sponsored coverage for their family through themselves or their partner. The median annual PTC in 2021 for eligible off-marketplace enrollees was $311 but varied greatly by age, family or individual plan, and household income (5%-95% range, $0-$14,836). In 2017, 69% of off-marketplace enrollees were unaware that they had to enroll in marketplace plans to receive PTCs, and 51% received enrollment assistance from insurance brokers. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest the need for targeted outreach to encourage off-marketplace enrollees to switch to marketplace plans.

Identifying Medicare Beneficiaries With Delirium.

BACKGROUND: Each year, thousands of older adults develop delirium, a serious, preventable condition. At present, there is no well-validated method to identify patients with delirium when using Medicare claims data or other large datasets. We developed and assessed the performance of classification algorithms based on longitudinal Medicare administrative data that included International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition diagnostic codes. METHODS: Using a linked electronic health record (EHR)-Medicare claims dataset, 2 neurologists and 2 psychiatrists performed a standardized review of EHR records between 2016 and 2018 for a stratified random sample of 1002 patients among 40,690 eligible subjects. Reviewers adjudicated delirium status (reference standard) during this 3-year window using a structured protocol. We calculated the probability that each patient had delirium as a function of classification algorithms based on longitudinal Medicare claims data. We compared the performance of various algorithms against the reference standard, computing calibration-in-the-large, calibration slope, and the area-under-receiver-operating-curve using 10-fold cross-validation (CV). RESULTS: Beneficiaries had a mean age of 75 years, were predominately female (59%), and non-Hispanic Whites (93%); a review of the EHR indicated that 6% of patients had delirium during the 3 years. Although several classification algorithms performed well, a relatively simple model containing counts of delirium-related diagnoses combined with patient age, dementia status, and receipt of antipsychotic medications had the best overall performance [CV- calibration-in-the-large <0.001, CV-slope 0.94, and CV-area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.88 95% confidence interval: 0.84-0.91)]. CONCLUSIONS: A delirium classification model using Medicare administrative data and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition diagnosis codes can identify beneficiaries with delirium in large datasets.

Geographic access to federally qualified health centers before and after the affordable care act.

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) increased funding for Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). We defined FQHC service areas based on patient use and examined the characteristics of areas that gained FQHC access post-ACA. METHODS: We defined FQHC service areas using total patient counts by ZIP code from the Uniform Data System (UDS) and compared this approach with existing methods. We then compared the characteristics of ZIP codes included in Medically Underserved Areas/Populations (MUA/Ps) that gained access vs. MUA/P ZIP codes that did not gain access to FQHCs between 2011-15. RESULTS: FQHC service areas based on UDS data vs. Primary Care Service Areas or counties included a higher percentage of each FQHC's patients (86% vs. 49% and 71%) and ZIP codes with greater use of FQHCs among low-income residents (29% vs. 22% and 22%), on average. MUA/Ps that gained FQHC access 2011-2015 included more poor, uninsured, publicly insured, and foreign-born residents than underserved areas that did not gain access, but were less likely to be rural (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Measures of actual patient use provide a promising method of assessing FQHC service areas and access. Post-ACA funding, the FQHC program expanded access into areas that were more likely to have higher rates of poverty and uninsurance, which could help address disparities in access to care. Rural areas were less likely to gain access to FQHCs, underscoring the persistent challenges of providing care in these areas.

Coverage Denials: Government And Private Insurer Policies For Medical Necessity In Medicare.

Little is publicly known about coverage denials for medical services that do not meet medical necessity criteria. We characterized the extent of these denials and their key features, using Medicare Advantage claims for a large insurer from the period 2014-19. In this setting, claims could be denied because of traditional Medicare's coverage rules or additional Medicare Advantage private insurer rules. We observed $416 million in denied spending, with 0.81 denials and $60 of denied spending per beneficiary annually. We found that 1.40 percent of services were denied and 0.68 percent of total spending was denied, with rates rising over time. Traditional Medicare's coverage rules accounted for 85 percent of denied services and 64 percent of denied spending; the remaining denials were due to additional Medicare Advantage insurer rules. Denial rates varied greatly across service type and provider type, with the most denials being for laboratory services and hospital outpatient providers. Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage insurer coverage policies each addressed different sources of medical spending; together they contributed to the denial of a modest but nontrivial portion of payments.