ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2024
Long-term outcomes after rehabilitation in Medicare Advantage and fee-for-service beneficiaries.
Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFinancial incentives in capitated Medicare Advantage (MA) plans may lead to inadequate rehabilitation. We therefore investigated if MA enrollees had worse long-term physical performance and functional outcomes after rehabilitation.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries in the nationally representative National Health and Aging Trends Study. We compared MA and fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries reporting rehabilitation between 2014 and 2017 by change in (1) Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and (2) NHATS-derived Functional Independence Measure (FIM) from the previous year, using t-tests incorporating inverse-probability weighting and complex survey design. Secondary outcomes were self-reported: (1) improved function during rehabilitation, (2) worse function since rehabilitation ended, (3) meeting rehabilitation goals, and (4) meeting insurance limits.
resultsAmong 738 MA and 1488 FFS participants, weighted mean age was 76 years (SD 7.0), 59% were female, and 9% had probable dementia. MA beneficiaries were more likely to be Black (9% vs. 6%) or Hispanic/other race (15% vs. 10%), be on Medicaid (14% vs. 10%), have lower income (median $35,000 vs. $48,000), and receive <1 month of rehabilitation (30% vs. 23%). MA beneficiaries had a similar decline in SPPB (-0.46 [SD 1.8] vs. -0.21 [SD 2.7], p-value 0.069) and adapted FIM (-1.05 [SD 3.7] vs. -1.13 [SD 5.45], p-value 0.764) compared to FFS. MA beneficiaries were less likely to report improved function during rehabilitation (61% [95% CI 56-67] vs. 70% [95% CI 67-74], p-value 0.006). Other outcomes and analyses restricted to inpatient rehabilitation participants were non-significant. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: MA enrollment was associated with lower likelihood of self-reported functional improvement during rehabilitation but no clinically or statistically significant differences in annual changes of physical performance or function. As MA expands, future studies must monitor implications on rehabilitation coverage and older adults' independence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.