The moderating role of neighborhood disadvantage on the link between functional limitations and self-rated health.

BACKGROUND: Self-rated health is an important health outcome and determinant of health. Improvements to our understanding on self-rated health could help design plans and strategies to improve self-rated health and achieve other preferred health outcomes. This study examined whether the link between functional limitations and self-rated health varies by neighborhood socioeconomic status. METHODS: This study used the Midlife in the United States study linked with the Social Deprivation Index developed by the Robert Graham Center. Our sample consist of noninstitutionalized middle to older adults in the United States (n = 6,085). Based on stepwise multiple regression models, we computed adjusted odds ratios to examine the relationships between neighborhood socioeconomic status, functional limitations, and self-rated health. RESULTS: Respondents in the socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods were older, had higher percentage of females, non-White respondents, lower educational attainment, lower perceived neighborhood quality, and worse health status with greater number of functional limitations than those in socioeconomically advantaged neighborhoods. Results showed a significant interaction was found where neighborhood-level discrepancies in self-rated health was biggest among individuals with highest number of functional limitations (B = -0.28, 95% CI[0.53, -0.04], p = 0.025). Specifically, individuals with the highest number of functional limitations from the disadvantaged neighborhoods had higher self-rated health compared to those from advantaged neighborhoods. CONCLUSIONS: Our study findings highlight that neighborhood discrepancy in self-rated health is underestimated particularly among those with severe functional limitations. Moreover, when interpreting self-rated health status, values should not be taken face value, and should be considered together with the environmental conditions of where one resides.

Outcomes of Medicaid home- and community-based long-term services relative to nursing home care among dual eligibles.

OBJECTIVE: To provide the first plausibly causal national estimates of health outcomes for older dual-eligible recipients of Medicaid HCBS relative to nursing home care and to explore possible mechanisms for the effect. DATA SOURCES: We use 2005 and 2012 Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX), a national compilation of Medicaid claims, merged with Medicare claims to identify hospital admissions, our main outcome variable. STUDY DESIGN: We model the effects of HCBS using a longitudinal instrumental variables framework. To address the endogeneity of HCBS receipt, we instrument for it using the county percentage of nonelderly long-term care users who receive HCBS. The percentage of nonelderly users is highly predictive of HCBS use for an elderly beneficiary, but because the instrument was derived from a separate population, the exclusion restriction is unlikely to be violated. POPULATION STUDIED: 1,312,498 older adults (65+) dually enrolled in Medicaid and Medicare and are using long-term care. We also examine heterogeneity of effects by race/ethnicity and the presence of dementia. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: HCBS users have 10 percentage points higher (P < .01) annual rates of hospitalization than their nursing home counterparts when selection bias is addressed; rates of potentially avoidable hospitalizations are 3 percentage points higher (P < .01). These differences persist across races, dementia status, and intensity of HCBS spending. CONCLUSIONS: Shifting Medicaid long-term care funding for older adults from nursing homes to HCBS, while well-motivated, results in the unintended consequence of substantially higher hospitalization rates for older dual eligibles. The quality and/or quantity of services may be inadequate for some HCBS recipients. Hospitalizations are costly to Medicare but also to the HCBS recipient in terms of stress and risks. Although consumer preferences to remain at home may outweigh poor outcomes of HCBS, the full costs and benefits need to be considered. HCBS outcomes-not just expansion-need more attention.

Likelihood of hospital readmission in Medicare Advantage and Fee-For-Service within same hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent to which all-cause 30-day readmission rate varies by Medicare program within the same hospitals. STUDY DESIGN: We used conditional logistic regression clustered by hospital and generalized estimating equations to compare the odds of unplanned all-cause 30-day readmission between Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) and Medicare Advantage (MA). DATA COLLECTION: Wisconsin Health Information Organization collects claims data from various payers including private insurance, Medicare, and Medicaid, twice a year. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: For 62 of 66 hospitals, hospital-level readmission rates for MA were lower than those for Medicare FFS. The odds of 30-day readmission in MA were 0.92 times lower than Medicare FFS within the same hospital (odds ratio, 0.93; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.89-0.98). The adjusted overall readmission rates of Medicare FFS and MA were 14.9 percent and 11.9 percent, respectively. CONCLUSION: These findings provide additional evidence of potential variations in readmission risk by payer and support the need for improved monitoring systems in hospitals that incorporate payer-specific data. Further research is needed to delineate specific care delivery factors that contribute to differential readmission risk by payer source.

Differences in Receipt of Three Preventive Health Care Services by Race/Ethnicity in Medicare Advantage Plans: Tracking the Impact of Pay for Performance, 2010 and 2013.

INTRODUCTION: In 2012, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced the Quality Bonus Payment Demonstration, a pay-for-performance (P4P) program, into Medicare Advantage plans. Previous studies documented racial/ethnic disparities in receipt of care among participants in these plans. The objective of this study was to determine whether P4P incentives have affected these disparities in Medicare Advantage plans. METHODS: We studied 411 Medicare Advantage health plans that participated in the Medicare Health Outcome Survey in 2010 and 2013. Preventive health care was defined as self-reported receipt of health care provider communication or treatment to reduce risk of falling, improve bladder control, and monitor physical activity among individuals reporting these problems. Logistic regression stratified by health care plan was used to examine racial/ethnic disparities in receipt of preventive health care before and after the introduction of the P4P program in 2012. RESULTS: We found similar racial/ethnic differences in receipt of preventive health care before and after the introduction of P4P. Blacks and Asians were less likely than whites to receive advice to improve bladder control and more likely to receive advice to reduce risk of falling and improve physical activity. Hispanics were more likely to report receiving advice about all 3 health issues than whites. After the introduction of P4P, the gap decreased between Hispanics and whites for improving bladder control and monitoring physical activity and increased between blacks and whites for monitoring physical activity. CONCLUSION: Racial/ethnic differences in receipt of preventive health care are not always in the expected direction. CMS should consider developing a separate measure of equity in preventive health care services to encourage health plans to reduce gaps among racial/ethnic groups in receiving preventive care services.