Jose F Figueroa1, Zoe Lyon2, Xiner Zhou3, David C Grabowski4, Ashish K Jha1. 1. Harvard School of Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (J.F.F., A.K.J.). 2. Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts (Z.L.). 3. Harvard School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts (X.Z.). 4. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (D.C.G.).
Abstract
Background: Little is known about the persistence of high-cost status among dual-eligible Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, who account for a substantial proportion of expenditures in both programs. Objective: To determine what proportion of this population has persistently high costs. Design: Observational study. Setting: Medicare-Medicaid Linked Enrollee Analytic Data Source data for 2008 to 2010. Participants: 1 928 340 dual-eligible Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries who were alive all 3 years. Measurements: Medicare and Medicaid payments for these beneficiaries were calculated for each year. Beneficiaries were categorized as high-cost for a given year if their spending was in the top 10% for that year. Differences in spending were then examined for those who were persistently high-cost (all 3 years) versus those who were transiently high-cost (2008 but not 2009 or 2010) and those who were non-high-cost in all 3 years. Results: In the first year, 192 835 patients were high-cost. More than half (54.8%) remained high-cost across all 3 years. These patients were younger than transiently high-cost patients, with fewer medical comorbidities and greater intellectual impairment. Persistently high-cost patients spent $161 224 per year compared with $86 333 per year for transiently high-cost patients and $22 352 per year for non-high-cost patients. Most of the spending among persistently high-cost patients (68.8%) was related to long-term care, and very little (<1%) was related to potentially preventable hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions. Limitation: Potential misclassification of preventable spending and lack of detailed clinical data in administrative claims. Conclusion: A substantial majority of high-cost dual-eligible beneficiaries had persistently high costs over 3 years, with most of the cost related to long-term care and very little related to potentially preventable hospitalizations. Primary Funding Source: Peterson Center on Healthcare.
Background: Little is known about the persistence of high-cost status among dual-eligible Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, who account for a substantial proportion of expenditures in both programs. Objective: To determine what proportion of this population has persistently high costs. Design: Observational study. Setting: Medicare-Medicaid Linked Enrollee Analytic Data Source data for 2008 to 2010. Participants: 1 928 340 dual-eligible Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries who were alive all 3 years. Measurements: Medicare and Medicaid payments for these beneficiaries were calculated for each year. Beneficiaries were categorized as high-cost for a given year if their spending was in the top 10% for that year. Differences in spending were then examined for those who were persistently high-cost (all 3 years) versus those who were transiently high-cost (2008 but not 2009 or 2010) and those who were non-high-cost in all 3 years. Results: In the first year, 192 835 patients were high-cost. More than half (54.8%) remained high-cost across all 3 years. These patients were younger than transiently high-cost patients, with fewer medical comorbidities and greater intellectual impairment. Persistently high-cost patients spent $161 224 per year compared with $86 333 per year for transiently high-cost patients and $22 352 per year for non-high-cost patients. Most of the spending among persistently high-cost patients (68.8%) was related to long-term care, and very little (<1%) was related to potentially preventable hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions. Limitation: Potential misclassification of preventable spending and lack of detailed clinical data in administrative claims. Conclusion: A substantial majority of high-cost dual-eligible beneficiaries had persistently high costs over 3 years, with most of the cost related to long-term care and very little related to potentially preventable hospitalizations. Primary Funding Source: Peterson Center on Healthcare.
Authors: J Madison Hyer; Diamantis I Tsilimigras; Anghela Z Paredes; Kota Sahara; Susan White; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: World J Surg Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Rishi K Wadhera; Yun Wang; Jose F Figueroa; Francesca Dominici; Robert W Yeh; Karen E Joynt Maddox Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Vincent Mor; Todd H Wagner; Cari Levy; Mary Ersek; Susan C Miller; Risha Gidwani-Marszowski; Nina Joyce; Katherine Faricy-Anderson; Emily A Corneau; Karl Lorenz; Bruce Kinosian; Scott Shreve Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Samuel J Amodeo; Henrik F Kowalkowski; Halley L Brantley; Nicholas W Jones; Lauren R Bangerter; David J Cook Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-06-07 Impact factor: 6.473