Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 145
Filter
2.
Milbank Q ; 101(1): 26-47, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36692967

ABSTRACT

Policy Points A decade after failing to make it into the Affordable Care Act, the public option reemerged as a health reform goal at both the national and state levels, with polls reporting strong, bipartisan support. A 2020 poll that probed both support for one public option approach (Medicare "buy-in") and attitudes toward government suggests that differences in these attitudes could plague reform advocates' efforts. Although the COVID-19 pandemic viscerally highlighted the need for a more coherent health care system-including universal coverage-other recent evolutions in the broader US political context could undermine reform.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Care Reform , Aged , Humans , United States , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Medicare , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Politics
3.
J Rural Health ; 39(3): 636-642, 2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36071015

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To investigate whether rural-urban differences in quality of care for Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees vary between females and males. METHODS: Data for this study came from the 2019 Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set. Linear regression was used to investigate urban-rural differences in individual MA enrollee scores on 34 clinical care measures grouped into 7 categories, and how those differences varied by sex (through evaluation of statistical interactions). FINDINGS: Across all 7 categories of measures, scores for rural residents were worse than scores for urban residents. For 4 categories-care for patients with (suspected) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, avoiding prescription misuse, behavioral health, and diabetes care-the average difference across measures in the category was greater than 3 percentage points. Across all 34 measures, there were 15 statistically significant rural-by-sex interactions that exceeded 1 percentage point. In 11 of those cases, the deficit associated with living in a rural area was greater for males than for females. In 3 cases, the deficit associated with living in a rural area was larger for females than for males. In 1 case involving Follow-up After Hospitalization for Mental Illness, rural residents had an advantage, and it was larger for males than for females. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions may help address patient- (eg, health literacy and patient activation), provider- (eg, workforce recruitment and retention), and structural-level issues contributing to these disparities, especially for rural males.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Aged , Male , Female , Humans , United States , Medicare , Hospitalization , Rural Population , Urban Population
4.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(11): e2243127, 2022 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36409495

ABSTRACT

Importance: New York City, an early epicenter of the pandemic, invested heavily in its COVID-19 vaccination campaign to mitigate the burden of disease outbreaks. Understanding the return on investment (ROI) of this campaign would provide insights into vaccination programs to curb future COVID-19 outbreaks. Objective: To estimate the ROI of the New York City COVID-19 vaccination campaign by estimating the tangible direct and indirect costs from a societal perspective. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytical model of disease transmission was calibrated to confirmed and probable cases of COVID-19 in New York City between December 14, 2020, and January 31, 2022. This simulation model was validated with observed patterns of reported hospitalizations and deaths during the same period. Exposures: An agent-based counterfactual scenario without vaccination was simulated using the calibrated model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Costs of health care and deaths were estimated in the actual pandemic trajectory with vaccination and in the counterfactual scenario without vaccination. The savings achieved by vaccination, which were associated with fewer outpatient visits, emergency department visits, emergency medical services, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit admissions, were also estimated. The value of a statistical life (VSL) lost due to COVID-19 death and the productivity loss from illness were accounted for in calculating the ROI. Results: During the study period, the vaccination campaign averted an estimated $27.96 (95% credible interval [CrI], $26.19-$29.84) billion in health care expenditures and 315 724 (95% CrI, 292 143-340 420) potential years of life lost, averting VSL loss of $26.27 (95% CrI, $24.39-$28.21) billion. The estimated net savings attributable to vaccination were $51.77 (95% CrI, $48.50-$55.85) billion. Every $1 invested in vaccination yielded estimated savings of $10.19 (95% CrI, $9.39-$10.87) in direct and indirect costs of health outcomes that would have been incurred without vaccination. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this modeling study showed an association of the New York City COVID-19 vaccination campaign with reduction in severe outcomes and avoidance of substantial economic losses. This significant ROI supports continued investment in improving vaccine uptake during the ongoing pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , New York City/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunization Programs , Investments
6.
Health Serv Res ; 57(6): 1361-1369, 2022 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35752926

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To introduce a novel analytical approach for randomized controlled trials that are underpowered because of low participant enrollment or engagement. DATA SOURCES: Reanalysis of data for 805 patients randomized as part of a pilot complex care intervention in 2015-2016 in a large delivery system. In the pilot randomized trial, only 64.6% of patients assigned to the intervention group participated. STUDY DESIGN: A case study and simulation. The "Distillation Method" capitalizes on the frequently observed correlation between the probability of subjects' participation or engagement in the intervention and the magnitude of benefit they experience. The novel method involves three stages: first, it uses baseline covariates to generate predicted probabilities of participation. Next, these are used to produce nested subsamples of the randomized intervention and control groups that are more concentrated with subjects who were likely to participate/engage. Finally, for the outcomes of interest, standard statistical methods are used to re-evaluate intervention effectiveness in these concentrated subsets. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: We assembled secondary data on patients who were randomized to the pilot intervention for one year prior to randomization and two follow-up years. Data included program enrollment status, membership data, demographics, utilization, costs, and clinical data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Using baseline covariates only, Generalized Boosted Regression Models predicting program enrollment performed well (AUC 0.884). We then distilled the full randomized sample to increasing levels of concentration and reanalyzed program outcomes. We found statistically significant differences in outpatient utilization and emergency department utilization (both follow-up years), and in total costs (follow-up year two only) at select levels of population concentration. CONCLUSIONS: By offering an internally valid analytic framework, the Distillation Method can increase the power to detect effects by redefining the estimand to subpopulations with higher enrollment probabilities and stronger average treatment effects while maintaining the original randomization.


Subject(s)
Distillation , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Health Services , Research Design
7.
J Med Internet Res ; 24(2): e33961, 2022 02 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35142631

ABSTRACT

The need to support innovation in health care delivery was prompted by payment reforms and access to digital tools and has been accelerated by the shift to virtual care as part of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Prior to the pandemic, a growing number of health systems set up innovation centers to focus on creating new services and exploring new business models relevant to value-based care. This is distinct from process improvement or implementation science, and often needs a different set of incentives to succeed within a large organization. We used a national survey to identify a diverse sample of innovation centers, and interviewed leaders to describe their aims, organizational structures, and activities. They all aim to improve patient outcomes and experience while reducing costs, but their strategic focus may differ. The centers also vary in their reporting structure, how they build internal capacity, and how they measure success. We highlight the range of strategies through examples of projects that improve quality, reduce costs, and generate new revenue. While the optimal forms and impact of innovation centers are still emerging, the fiscal pressures and the rapid uptake of digital technologies present opportunities for the redesign of health services in the postpandemic era. The experiences of these centers illustrate a set of approaches to increase any organization's capacity for innovation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Organizational Innovation , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; 6: 100147, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34977848

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The fourth wave of COVID-19 pandemic peaked in the US at 160,000 daily cases, concentrated primarily in southern states. As the Delta variant has continued to spread, we evaluated the impact of accelerated vaccination on reducing hospitalization and deaths across northeastern and southern regions of the US census divisions. METHODS: We used an age-stratified agent-based model of COVID-19 to simulate outbreaks in all states within two U.S. regions. The model was calibrated using reported incidence in each state from October 1, 2020 to August 31, 2021, and parameterized with characteristics of the circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants and state-specific daily vaccination rate. We then projected the number of infections, hospitalizations, and deaths that would be averted between September 2021 and the end of March 2022 if the states increased their daily vaccination rate by 20 or 50% compared to maintaining the status quo pace observed during August 2021. FINDINGS: A 50% increase in daily vaccine doses administered to previously unvaccinated individuals is projected to prevent a total of 30,727 hospitalizations and 11,937 deaths in the two regions between September 2021 and the end of March 2022. Southern states were projected to have a higher weighted average number of hospitalizations averted (18.8) and lives saved (8.3) per 100,000 population, compared to the weighted average of hospitalizations (12.4) and deaths (2.7) averted in northeastern states. On a per capita basis, a 50% increase in daily vaccinations is expected to avert the most hospitalizations in Kentucky (56.7 hospitalizations per 100,000 averted with 95% CrI: 45.56 - 69.9) and prevent the most deaths in Mississippi, (22.1 deaths per 100,000 population prevented with 95% CrI: 18.0 - 26.9). INTERPRETATION: Accelerating progress to population-level immunity by raising the daily pace of vaccination would prevent substantial hospitalizations and deaths in the US, even in those states that have passed a Delta-driven peak in infections. FUNDING: This study was supported by The Commonwealth Fund. SMM acknowledges the support from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research [OV4 - 170643, COVID-19 Rapid Research] and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Emerging Infectious Disease Modelling, MfPH grant. MCF acknowledges support from the National Institutes of Health (5 K01 AI141576).

9.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; 5: 100085, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34746912

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Following the start of COVID-19 vaccination in New York City (NYC), cases have declined over 10-fold from the outbreak peak in January 2020, despite the emergence of highly transmissible variants. We evaluated the impact of NYC's vaccination campaign on saving lives as well as averting hospitalizations and cases. METHODS: We used an age-stratified agent-based model of COVID-19 to include transmission dynamics of Alpha, Gamma, Delta and Iota variants as identified in NYC. The model was calibrated and fitted to reported incidence in NYC, accounting for the relative transmissibility of each variant and vaccination rollout data. We simulated COVID-19 outbreak in NYC under the counterfactual scenario of no vaccination and compared the resulting disease burden with the number of cases, hospitalizations and deaths reported under the actual pace of vaccination. FINDINGS: We found that without vaccination, there would have been a spring-wave of COVID-19 in NYC due to the spread of Alpha and Delta variants. The COVID-19 vaccination campaign in NYC prevented such a wave, and averted 290,467 (95% CrI: 232,551 - 342,664) cases, 48,076 (95% CrI: 42,264 - 53,301) hospitalizations, and 8,508 (95% CrI: 7,374 - 9,543) deaths from December 14, 2020 to July 15, 2021. INTERPRETATION: Our study demonstrates that the vaccination program in NYC was instrumental to substantially reducing the COVID-19 burden and suppressing a surge of cases attributable to more transmissible variants. As the Delta variant sweeps predominantly among unvaccinated individuals, our findings underscore the urgent need to accelerate vaccine uptake and close the vaccination coverage gaps. FUNDING: This study was supported by The Commonwealth Fund.

10.
Vaccine ; 40(4): 562-567, 2022 01 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34903376

ABSTRACT

Recent data indicates increasing hesitancy towards both COVID-19 and influenza vaccination. We studied attitudes towards COVID-19 booster, influenza, and combination influenza-COVID-19 booster vaccines in a nationally representative sample of US adults between May and June 2021 (n = 12,887). We used pre-qualification quotes to ensure adequate sample sizes for minority populations. Overall vaccine acceptance was 45% for a COVID-19 booster alone, 58% for an influenza vaccine alone, and 50% for a combination vaccine. Logistic regression showed lower acceptance among female, Black/African American, Native American/American Indian, and rural respondents. Higher acceptance was found among those with college and post-graduate degrees. Despite these differences, our results suggest that a combination vaccine may provide a convenient method of dual vaccination that may increase COVID-19 vaccination coverage.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Adult , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Vulnerable Populations
11.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 78(25): 2599-2611, 2021 12 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34887146

ABSTRACT

This review summarizes racial and ethnic disparities in the quality of cardiovascular care-a challenge given the fragmented nature of the health care delivery system and measurement. Health equity for all racial and ethnic groups will not be achieved without a substantially different approach to quality measurement and improvement. The authors adapt a tool frequently used in quality improvement work-the driver diagram-to chart likely areas for diagnosing root causes of disparities and developing and testing interventions. This approach prioritizes equity in quality improvement. The authors demonstrate how this approach can be used to create interventions that reduce systemic racism within the institutions and professions that deliver health care; attends more aggressively to social factors related to race and ethnicity that affect health outcomes; and examines how hospitals, health systems, and insurers can generate effective partnerships with the communities they serve to achieve equitable cardiovascular outcomes.


Subject(s)
Health Equity , Healthcare Disparities/ethnology , Quality Improvement , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Humans , Systemic Racism
13.
J Gen Intern Med ; 36(12): 3665-3671, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34545472

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prior studies using aggregated data suggest that better care coordination is associated with higher performance on measures of clinical care process; it is unclear whether this relationship reflects care coordination activities of health plans or physician practices. OBJECTIVE: Estimate within-plan relationships between beneficiary-reported care coordination measures and HEDIS measures of clinical process for the same individuals. DESIGN: Mixed-effect regression models in cross-sectional data. PARTICIPANTS: 2013 Medicare Advantage CAHPS respondents (n=152,069) with care coordination items linked to independently collected HEDIS data on clinical processes. MAIN MEASURES: Care coordination measures assessed follow-up, whether doctors had medical records during visits, whether doctors discussed medicines being taken, how informed doctors seemed about specialist care, and help received with managing care among different providers. HEDIS measures included mammography, colorectal cancer screening, cardiovascular LDL-C screening, controlling blood pressure, 5 diabetes care measures (LDL-C screening, retinal eye exam, nephropathy, blood sugar/HbA1c <9%, LCL-C<100 mg/dL), glaucoma screening in older adults, BMI assessment, osteoporosis management for women with a fracture, and rheumatoid arthritis therapy. KEY RESULTS: For 9 of the 13 HEDIS measures, within health plans, beneficiaries who reported better care coordination also received better clinical care (p<0.05) and none of the associations went in the opposite direction; HEDIS differences between those with excellent and poor coordination exceeded 5 percentage points for 7 measures. Nine measures had positive associations (breast cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, cardiovascular care LDL-C screening, 4 of 5 diabetes care measures, osteoporosis management, and rheumatoid arthritis therapy). CONCLUSIONS: Within health plans, beneficiaries who report better care coordination also received higher-quality clinical care, particularly for care processes that entail organizing patient care activities and sharing information among different healthcare providers. These results extend prior research showing that health plans with better beneficiary-reported care coordination achieved higher HEDIS performance scores.


Subject(s)
Medicare Part C , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Patient Care , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Health Care , United States/epidemiology
19.
J Health Polit Policy Law ; 45(5): 729-755, 2020 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32589212

ABSTRACT

Ten years after its enactment, public support for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) still only reaches a scant majority. Candidates for the presidency-and the sitting president-have endorsed health reforms that would radically transition US health care away from the current system upon which the ACA was built. Few opinion surveys to date have captured dominant preferences among alternative health reform policies or characterized attitudes and experiences that might be associated with policy preferences. Using a 2019 nationally representative telephone survey, this article considers how variations in political values, attitudes toward government, and experiences with the health care system relate to competing health reform preferences. Differences between those who favor Medicare for All over building on the ACA largely reflect different levels of satisfaction with the status quo and views of private health insurance. By contrast, differences between ACA supporters and those who would favor replacing it with a state-based alternative reflect sharply different political values and attitudes. Key differences remain significant after controlling for demographic, health, and political characteristics. Overwhelming public support still eludes the ACA, and reaching consensus on future directions for health reform will remain challenging given differences in underlying beliefs.


Subject(s)
Attitude , Health Care Reform/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Care Reform/methods , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Politics , Public Opinion , Adult , Aged , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Female , Government Programs/standards , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...