Mayank Ajmera1, Tricia Lee Wilkins, Usha Sambamoorthi. 1. Department of Pharmaceutical Systems and Policy, School of Pharmacy, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA. majmera2@hsc.wvu.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to examine the association between ambulatory care sensitive hospitalizations (ACSH) and dual Medicare/Veteran Health Administration use. PARTICIPANTS: A nationally representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries, who participated in the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS). DESIGN/MEASUREMENTS: Cross-sectional analyses (N = 44,988) of linked fee-for-service Medicare claims and survey data from multiple years of the MCBS (2001-2005). Any ACSH and specific types of ACSH were measured using the list of prevention quality indicators developed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Among veterans, dual Medicare/VHA use was defined as having inpatient or outpatient visits paid by VHA and consisted of three categories: 1) predominant-VHA use; 2) some VHA use and no VHA use. Unadjusted group differences in any ACSH were tested using chi-square tests. Logistic regressions were used to analyze the association between dual Medicare/VHA use and ACSH after controlling for demographic, socio-economic status, health status, functional status, smoking status and obesity. All analyses accounted for the complex design of the MCBS. RESULTS: Among inpatient users, 10.1% had ACSH events for acute conditions and 15.8% for chronic conditions. Among all survey respondents, 5% had any ACSH event. Among predominant-VHA users the rate was 4.9% and among veterans with some VHA use it was 3.7%. In bivariate and multivariate analyses, dual Medicare/VHA use was not significantly associated with any ACSH. CONCLUSION: In a representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries, despite low income and health status, veterans with dual Medicare/VHA use were as likely as veterans without dual use to have any ACSH, perhaps due to expanded healthcare access and emphasis on primary care in the VHA system.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to examine the association between ambulatory care sensitive hospitalizations (ACSH) and dual Medicare/Veteran Health Administration use. PARTICIPANTS: A nationally representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries, who participated in the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS). DESIGN/MEASUREMENTS: Cross-sectional analyses (N = 44,988) of linked fee-for-service Medicare claims and survey data from multiple years of the MCBS (2001-2005). Any ACSH and specific types of ACSH were measured using the list of prevention quality indicators developed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Among veterans, dual Medicare/VHA use was defined as having inpatient or outpatient visits paid by VHA and consisted of three categories: 1) predominant-VHA use; 2) some VHA use and no VHA use. Unadjusted group differences in any ACSH were tested using chi-square tests. Logistic regressions were used to analyze the association between dual Medicare/VHA use and ACSH after controlling for demographic, socio-economic status, health status, functional status, smoking status and obesity. All analyses accounted for the complex design of the MCBS. RESULTS: Among inpatient users, 10.1% had ACSH events for acute conditions and 15.8% for chronic conditions. Among all survey respondents, 5% had any ACSH event. Among predominant-VHA users the rate was 4.9% and among veterans with some VHA use it was 3.7%. In bivariate and multivariate analyses, dual Medicare/VHA use was not significantly associated with any ACSH. CONCLUSION: In a representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries, despite low income and health status, veterans with dual Medicare/VHA use were as likely as veterans without dual use to have any ACSH, perhaps due to expanded healthcare access and emphasis on primary care in the VHA system.
Authors: A B Bindman; K Grumbach; D Osmond; M Komaromy; K Vranizan; N Lurie; J Billings; A Stewart Journal: JAMA Date: 1995-07-26 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Thomas R Radomski; Xinhua Zhao; Carolyn T Thorpe; Joshua M Thorpe; Chester B Good; Maria K Mor; Michael J Fine; Walid F Gellad Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Thomas R Radomski; Xinhua Zhao; Carolyn T Thorpe; Joshua M Thorpe; Jennifer G Naples; Maria K Mor; Chester B Good; Michael J Fine; Walid F Gellad Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Donna M Zulman; Liberty Greene; Cindie Slightam; Sara J Singer; Matthew L Maciejewski; Mary K Goldstein; Megan E Vanneman; Jean Yoon; Ranak B Trivedi; Todd Wagner; Steven M Asch; Derek Boothroyd Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2022-03-11 Impact factor: 3.734
Authors: Wei Duan-Porter; Brian C Martinson; Nancy Greer; Brent C Taylor; Kristen Ullman; Lauren McKenzie; Christina Rosebush; Roderick MacDonald; Samuel Falde; Timothy J Wilt Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-07-20 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Laura J Chavez; Chuan-Fen Liu; Nathan Tefft; Paul L Hebert; Brendan J Clark; Anna D Rubinsky; Gwen T Lapham; Katharine A Bradley Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2015-11-19 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Drew A Helmer; Nilanjana Dwibedi; Mazhgan Rowneki; Chin-Lin Tseng; Dennis Fried; Danielle Rose; Nisha Jani; Usha Sambamoorthi Journal: Am Health Drug Benefits Date: 2020-05
Authors: Joshua M Thorpe; Carolyn T Thorpe; Walid F Gellad; Chester B Good; Joseph T Hanlon; Maria K Mor; John R Pleis; Loren J Schleiden; Courtney Harold Van Houtven Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2016-12-06 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Lamberto Manzoli; Maria Elena Flacco; Corrado De Vito; Silvia Arcà; Flavia Carle; Lorenzo Capasso; Carolina Marzuillo; Angelo Muraglia; Fabio Samani; Paolo Villari Journal: Eur J Public Health Date: 2013-12-23 Impact factor: 3.367