RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between prescriber workforce exit, long term opioid treatment discontinuation, and clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental difference-in-differences study SETTING: 20% sample of US Medicare beneficiaries, 2011-18. PARTICIPANTS: People receiving long term opioid treatment whose prescriber stopped providing office based patient care or exited the workforce, as in the case of retirement or death (n=48 079), and people whose prescriber did not exit the workforce (n=48 079). MAIN OUTCOMES: Discontinuation from long term opioid treatment, drug overdose, mental health crises, admissions to hospital or emergency department visits, and death. Long term opioid treatment was defined as at least 60 days of opioids per quarter for four consecutive quarters, attributed to the plurality opioid prescriber. A difference-in-differences analysis was used to compare individuals who received long term opioid treatment and who had a prescriber leave the workforce to propensity-matched patients on long term opioid treatment who did not lose a prescriber, before and after prescriber exit. RESULTS: Discontinuation of long term opioid treatment increased from 132 to 229 per 10 000 patients who had prescriber exit from the quarter before to the quarter after exit, compared with 97 to 100 for patients who had a continuation of prescriber (adjusted difference 1.22 percentage points, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.42). In the first quarter after provider exit, when discontinuation rates were highest, a transient but significant elevation was noted between the two groups of patients in suicide attempts (adjusted difference 0.05 percentage points (95% confidence interval 0.01 to 0.09)), opioid or alcohol withdrawal (0.14 (0.01 to 0.27)), and admissions to hospital or emergency department visits (0.04 visits (0.01 to 0.06)). These differences receded after one to two quarters. No significant change in rates of overdose was noted. Across all four quarters after prescriber exit, an increase was reported in the rate of mental health crises (0.39 percentage points (95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.69)) and opioid or alcohol withdrawal (0.31 (0.014 to 0.58)), but no change was seen for drug overdose (-0.12 (-0.41 to 0.18)). CONCLUSIONS: The loss of a prescriber was associated with increased occurrences of discontinuation of long term opioid treatment and transient increases in adverse outcomes, such as suicide attempts, but not other outcomes, such as overdoses. Long term opioid treatment discontinuation may be associated with a temporary period of adverse health impacts after accounting for unobserved confounding.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the excess health care expenditures due to US primary care physician (PCP) turnover, both overall and specific to burnout. METHODS: We estimated the excess health care expenditures attributable to PCP turnover using published data for Medicare patients, calculated estimates for non-Medicare patients, and the American Medical Association Masterfile. We used published data from a cross-sectional survey of US physicians conducted between October 12, 2017, and March 15, 2018, of burnout and intention to leave one's current practice within 2 years by primary care specialty to estimate excess expenditures attributable to PCP turnover due to burnout. A conservative estimate from the literature was used for actual turnover based on intention to leave. Additional publicly available data were used to estimate the average PCP panel size and the composition of Medicare and non-Medicare patients within a PCP's panel. RESULTS: Turnover of PCPs results in approximately $979 million in excess health care expenditures for public and private payers annually, with $260 million attributable to PCP burnout-related turnover. CONCLUSION: Turnover of PCPs, including that due to burnout, is costly to public and private payers. Efforts to reduce physician burnout may be considered as one approach to decrease US health care expenditures.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

We study the welfare effects of offering choice over coverage levels-"vertical choice"-in regulated health insurance markets. We emphasize that heterogeneity in efficient coverage level is not sufficient to motivate choice. When premiums cannot reflect individuals' costs, it may not be in consumers' best interest to select their efficient coverage level. We show that vertical choice is efficient only if consumers with higher willingness-to-pay have a higher efficient level of coverage. We investigate this condition empirically and find that as long as a minimum coverage level can be enforced, the welfare gains from vertical choice are either zero or economically small.

RESUMEN

Objectives. To evaluate the effectiveness of a novel health care access program (ActionHealthNYC) for uninsured immigrants. Methods. The evaluation was conducted as a randomized controlled trial in New York City from May 2016 through June 2017. Using baseline and follow-up survey data, we assessed health care access, patient experience, and health status. Results. At baseline, 25% of participants had a regular source of care; two thirds had visited a doctor in the past year and reported 2.5 visits in the past 12 months, on average. Nine to 12 months later, intervention participants were 1.2 times more likely to report having a primary care provider (58% vs 46%), were 1.2 times more likely to have seen a doctor in the past 9 months (91% vs 77%), and had 1.5 times more health care visits (4.1 vs 2.9) compared with control participants. Conclusions. ActionHealthNYC increased health care access among program participants. Public Health Implications. State and local policymakers should build on the progress that has been made over the last decade to expand and improve access to health care for uninsured immigrants.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the introduction of prescription drug coverage under Medicare Part D increased opioid prescriptions, patient care-seeking for pain, and pain diagnoses among elderly Medicare-eligible adults. STUDY SETTING: Office visits by adults aged 18 years or older from the 2000-2016 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (12 375 207 253 office visits), and respondents from the 2000-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (4 023 418 681 individuals). STUDY DESIGN: We compared care-seeking for pain, provider-assigned pain diagnoses, and opioid prescriptions before and after the Medicare eligibility age of 65, and before and after Part D's implementation using a regression discontinuity, difference-in-differences design. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, race, and year. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Patient care-seeking for pain increased by 11.4 office visits per 100 people (95% confidence interval 2.0-20.8), or 29%, in response to the implementation of Part D. Opioid prescriptions and diagnoses of pain-related conditions did not change significantly, but the financing of opioid prescriptions shifted from private to public payers at age 65. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of Medicare Part D was not associated with increased opioid use among older adults. Rather, opioid use among the elderly has been driven by high levels of opioid use among commercially insured adults who subsequently age into Medicare. Our findings raise the question of whether more judicious prescribing to younger adults coupled with concerted efforts to deprescribe opioids when appropriate may prevent problematic opioid use among the elderly.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Importance: Disruptions of continuity of care may harm patient outcomes, but existing studies of continuity disruption are limited by an inability to separate the association of continuity disruption from that of other physician-related factors. Objectives: To examine changes in health care use and outcomes among patients whose primary care physician (PCP) exited the workforce and to directly measure the association of this primary care turnover with patients' health care use and outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used nationally representative Medicare billing claims for a random sample of 359 470 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with at least 1 PCP evaluation and management visit from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2017. Primary care physicians who stopped practicing were identified and matched with PCPs who remained in practice. A difference-in-differences analysis compared health care use and clinical outcomes for patients who did lose PCPs with those who did not lose PCPs using subgroup analyses by practice size. Subgroup analyses were done on visits from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2017. Exposure: Patients' loss of a PCP. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary care, specialty care, urgent care, emergency department, and inpatient visits, as well as overall spending for patients, were the primary outcomes. Receipt of appropriate preventive care and prescription fills were also examined. Results: During the study period, 9491 of 90 953 PCPs (10.4%) exited Medicare. We matched 169 870 beneficiaries whose PCP exited (37.2% women; mean [SD] age, 71.4 [6.1] years) with 189 600 beneficiaries whose PCP did not exit (36.9% women; mean [SD] age, 72.0 [5.0] years). The year after PCP exit, beneficiaries whose PCP exited had 18.4% (95% CI, -19.8% to -16.9%) fewer primary care visits and 6.2% (95% CI, 5.4%-7.0%) more specialty care visits compared with beneficiaries who did not lose a PCP. This outcome persisted 2 years after PCP exit. Beneficiaries whose PCP exited also had 17.8% (95% CI, 6.0%-29.7%) more urgent care visits, 3.1% (95% CI, 1.6%-4.6%) more emergency department visits, and greater spending ($189 [95% CI, $30-$347]) per beneficiary-year after PCP exit. These shifts were most pronounced for patients of exiting PCPs in solo practice, whose beneficiaries had 21.5% (95% CI, -23.8% to -19.3%) fewer primary care visits, 8.8% (95% CI, 7.6%-10.0%) more specialty care visits, 4.4% more emergency department visits (95% CI, 2.1%-6.7%), and $260 (95% CI, $12-$509) in increased spending. Conclusions and Relevance: Loss of a PCP was associated with lower use of primary care and increased use of specialty, urgent, and emergency care among Medicare beneficiaries. Interrupting primary care relationships may negatively impact health outcomes and future engagement with primary care.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)