Primary care quality in the Medicare program - Comparing the performance of Medicare health maintenance organizations and traditional fee-for-service Medicare

被引:38
|
作者
Safran, DG
Wilson, IB
Rogers, WH
Montgomery, JE
Chang, H
机构
[1] Tufts Univ New England Med Ctr, Hlth Inst, Div Clin Care Res, Boston, MA 02111 USA
[2] Tufts Univ, Dept Med, Boston, MA 02111 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1001/archinte.162.7.757
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Since 1972, Medicare beneficiaries have had the option of enrolling in a Medicare-qualified health maintenance organization (HMO). Little information exists to inform beneficiaries' choices between the traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare program and an HMO. Objectives: To compare the primary care received by seniors in Medicare HMOs with that of seniors in the traditional FFS Medicare program, and among HMOs, and to examine performance differences associated with HMO model-type and profit status. Methods: Data were derived from a cross-sectional observational survey of Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older in the 13 states with mature, substantial Medicare HMO markets. Only beneficiaries continuously enrolled for 12 months or more in traditional FFS Medicare or a qualified Medicare HMO were eligible. Data were obtained using a 5-stage protocol involving mail and telephone (64% response rate). Analyses included respondents who identified a primary physician and had all required data elements (N = 8828). We compared FFS and HMO performance on 11 summary scales measuring 7 defining characteristics of primary care: (1) access, (2) continuity, (3) integration, (4) comprehensiveness, (5) (5) "whole-person" orientation, (6) clinical interaction, and (7) sustained clinician-patient partnership. Results: For 9 of 11 indicators, performance favored traditional FFS Medicare over HMOs (P<.001). Financial access favored HMOs (P<.001). Preventive counseling did not differ by system. Network-model HMOs performed more favorably than staff/group-model HMOs on 9 of 11 indicators (P<.001). Few differences were associated with HMO profit status. Conclusions: The findings are consistent with previous comparisons of indemnity insurance and network-model and staff/group-model HMOs in elderly and nonelderly populations. The stability of results across time, geography, and populations suggests that the relative strengths and weaknesses of each system are enduring attributes of their care. Medicare enrollees seem to face the perennial cost-quality trade-off: that is, deciding whether the advantages of primary care under traditional FFS Medicare are worth the higher out-of-pocket costs.
引用
收藏
页码:757 / 765
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Medicare Advantage and Traditional Fee-For-Service Medicare
    Newhouse, Joseph P.
    [J]. POPULATION HEALTH MANAGEMENT, 2016, 19 : S4 - S5
  • [2] Patient Experiences of Integrated Care in Medicare Accountable Care Organizations and Medicare Advantage Versus Traditional Fee-for-Service
    Frean, Molly
    Covington, Christian
    Tietschert, Maike
    Bahadurzada, Hassina
    So, Jodi
    Singer, Sara J.
    [J]. MEDICAL CARE, 2021, 59 (03) : 195 - 201
  • [3] Comparing Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries with ESKD who Switched to Medicare Advantage versus Remained in Traditional Medicare
    Gao, Allan Y.
    Knapp, Christopher D.
    Liu, Jiannong
    Johansen, Kirsten L.
    [J]. CLINICAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY, 2024, 19 (09): : 1183 - 1190
  • [4] Primary Care Spending in the Fee-for-Service Medicare Population
    Reid, Rachel
    Damberg, Cheryl
    Friedberg, Mark W.
    [J]. JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2019, 179 (07) : 977 - 980
  • [5] Comparing the Health Care Experiences of Medicare Beneficiaries with and without Depressive Symptoms in Medicare Managed Care versus Fee-for-Service
    Martino, Steven C.
    Elliott, Marc N.
    Haviland, Amelia M.
    Saliba, Debra
    Burkhart, Q.
    Kanouse, David E.
    [J]. HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2016, 51 (03) : 1002 - 1020
  • [6] Trends in Use of Low-Value Care in Traditional Fee-for-Service Medicare and Medicare Advantage
    Park, Sungchul
    Jung, Jeah
    Burke, Robert E.
    Larson, Eric B.
    [J]. JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2021, 4 (03)
  • [7] COMPARING UTILIZATION, COST AND QUALITY IN DUAL ELIGIBLE MEDICARE ADVANTAGE AND FEE-FOR-SERVICE MEDICARE BENEFICIARIES
    Teigland, C.
    Pulungan, Z.
    Sutton, B. S.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2019, 22 : S258 - S258
  • [8] Inappropriate Utilization in Fee-for-Service Medicare and Medicare Advantage Plans
    Parashuram, Shriram
    Kim, Seung
    Dowd, Bryan
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL QUALITY, 2018, 33 (01) : 58 - 64
  • [9] Rehospitalizations among Patients in the Medicare Fee-for-Service Program
    Jencks, Stephen F.
    Williams, Mark V.
    Coleman, Eric A.
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2009, 360 (14): : 1418 - 1428
  • [10] Comparing Post-Acute Care Services and Impact on Frailty between Medicare Advantage and Fee-for-service Medicare
    Shi, S.
    Oh, G.
    Olivieri-Mui, B.
    Park, C.
    Sison, S. M.
    Mccarthy, E.
    Kim, D. H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 2024, 72 : S164 - S165