Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37594745›Full record

ArticleJAMA health forum2023

Postacute Care Services Use and Outcomes Among Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries.

Emma M Achola, David G Stevenson, Laura M Keohane

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA health forum, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emma M AcholaDepartment of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
David G StevensonDepartment of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Laura M KeohaneDepartment of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Vanderbilt University Medical Center · USGeriatric Research Education and Clinical Center · US

Funding

The National Health and Trends StudyU01AG032947 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI VICKI A. FREEDMAN, JENNIFER ANN SCHRACK · 2008 to 2026
$169.4M
Quality of Care for Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries in Managed Care PlansK01AG058700 · NIA · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI KEOHANE, LAURA MARGARET · 2018 to 2022
$570k
NIA NIH HHS K01 AG058700NIA NIH HHS U01 AG032947
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Better evidence is needed on whether Medicare Advantage (MA) plans can control the use of postacute care services while achieving excellent outcomes. Objective: To compare self-reported use of postacute care services and outcomes among traditional Medicare (TM) beneficiaries and MA enrollees. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) with linked Medicare enrollment data from 2015 to 2017. Participants were community-dwelling MA or TM beneficiaries 70 years and older; those with dual Medicare and Medicaid eligibility were also identified. Analyses were conducted from May 2022 to February 2023 and were weighted to account for the complex survey design. Exposures: Enrollment in MA and dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid. Main Outcomes and Measures: Postacute care service use including site of use, duration, primary indication, and whether participants met their goals or experienced improved functional status during or after services. Results: Included in the analysis were 2357 Medicare beneficiaries who used postacute care. Of these beneficiaries, 815 (32.6%; 62.0% were females [weighted percentages]) had MA and 1542 (67.4%; 59.5% were females [weighted percentages]) had TM. Enrollees in MA reported using postacute care services across all NHATS survey rounds: between 16.2% (95% CI, 14.3%-18.4%) and 17.7% (95% CI, 15.4%-20.4%) of MA enrollees reported using postacute care services each round, vs 22.4% (95% CI, 20.9%-24.1%) to 24.1% (95% CI, 21.8%-26.6%) of TM beneficiaries (P for all rounds <.002). Enrollees in MA reported less functional improvement during postacute care use (63.1% [95% CI, 59.2%-66.8%] vs 71.7% [95% CI, 68.9%-74.3%], P < .001). Among beneficiaries who ended postacute service use, fewer MA enrollees than TM enrollees reported that they met their goals (70.5% [95% CI, 65.1%-75.3%] vs 76.2% [95% CI, 73.1%-79.1%]; P = .053) or had improved functional status (43.9% [95% CI, 38.9%-49.1%] vs 46.0% [95% CI, 42.5%-49.5%]; P = .42), but differences were not statistically significant. Differences in postacute care use and functional improvement were not statistically significant between MA and TM enrollees with dual eligibility. Conclusions and relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries, we found that MA enrollees overall used less postacute care services than their TM counterparts. Among users of postacute care services, MA enrollees reported less favorable outcomes compared with TM enrollees. These findings highlight the importance of assessing patient-reported outcomes, especially as MA and other payment models seek to reduce inefficient use of postacute care services.

Indexed as

Medicare Part CAgedAgingCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMedicaidSubacute CareUnited States

Identifiers

PMID37594745
PMCPMC10439482
OpenAlexW4385969497

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.