LIVIVO - The Search Portal for Life Sciences

zur deutschen Oberfläche wechseln
Advanced search

Search results

Result 1 - 10 of total 49

Search options

  1. Article ; Online: Integrated interventions and supporting activities to increase uptake of multiple cancer screenings: conceptual framework, determinants of implementation success, measurement challenges, and research priorities.

    Subramanian, Sujha / Tangka, Florence K L / Hoover, Sonja / DeGroff, Amy

    Implementation science communications

    2022  Volume 3, Issue 1, Page(s) 105

    Abstract: Background: Screening for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer has been shown to reduce mortality; however, not all men and women are screened in the USA. Further, there are disparities in screening uptake by people from racial and ethnic minority ... ...

    Abstract Background: Screening for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer has been shown to reduce mortality; however, not all men and women are screened in the USA. Further, there are disparities in screening uptake by people from racial and ethnic minority groups, people with low income, people who lack health insurance, and those who lack access to care. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funds two programs-the Colorectal Cancer Control Program and the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program-to help increase cancer screenings among groups that have been economically and socially marginalized. The goal of this manuscript is to describe how programs and their partners integrate evidence-based interventions (e.g., patient reminders) and supporting activities (e.g., practice facilitation to optimize electronic medical records) across colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings, and we suggest research areas based on implementation science.
    Methods: We conducted an exploratory assessment using qualitative and quantitative data to describe implementation of integrated interventions and supporting activities for cancer screening. We conducted 10 site visits and follow-up telephone interviews with health systems and their partners to inform the integration processes. We developed a conceptual model to describe the integration processes and reviewed screening recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force to illustrate challenges in integration. To identify factors important in program implementation, we asked program implementers to rank domains and constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.
    Results: Health systems integrated interventions for all screenings across single and multiple levels. Although potentially efficient, there were challenges due to differing eligibility of screenings by age, gender, frequency, and location of services. Program implementers ranked complexity, cost, implementation climate, and engagement of appropriate staff in implementation among the most important factors to success.
    Conclusion: Integrating interventions and supporting activities to increase uptake of cancer screenings could be an effective and efficient approach, but we currently do not have the evidence to recommend widescale adoption. Detailed multilevel measures related to process, screening, and implementation outcomes, and cost are required to evaluate integrated programs. Systematic studies can help to ascertain the benefits of integrating interventions and supporting activities for multiple cancer screenings, and we suggest research areas that might address current gaps in the literature.
    Language English
    Publishing date 2022-10-05
    Publishing country England
    Document type Journal Article
    ISSN 2662-2211
    ISSN (online) 2662-2211
    DOI 10.1186/s43058-022-00353-8
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  2. Article ; Online: Role of an Implementation Economics Analysis in Providing the Evidence Base for Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening.

    Subramanian, Sujha / Tangka, Florence K L / Hoover, Sonja

    Preventing chronic disease

    2020  Volume 17, Page(s) E46

    Abstract: Purpose and objectives: Since 2005 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has funded organizations across the United States to promote screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) to detect early CRC or precancerous polyps that can be treated to ... ...

    Abstract Purpose and objectives: Since 2005 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has funded organizations across the United States to promote screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) to detect early CRC or precancerous polyps that can be treated to avoid disease progression and death. The objective of this study was to describe how findings from economic evaluation approaches of a subset of these awardees and their implementation sites (n = 9) can drive decision making and improve program implementation and diffusion.
    Intervention approach: We described the framework for the implementation economics evaluation used since 2016 for the Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) Learning Collaborative.
    Evaluation methods: We compared CRC interventions implemented across health systems, changes in screening uptake, and the incremental cost per person of implementing an intervention. We also analyzed data on how implementation costs changed over time for a CRC program that conducted interventions in a series of rounds.
    Results: Implementation of the interventions, which included provider and patient reminders, provider assessment and feedback, and incentives, resulted in increases in screening uptake ranging from 4.9 to 26.7 percentage points. Across the health systems, the incremental cost per person screened ranged from $18.76 to $144.55. One awardee's costs decreased because of a reduction in intervention development and start-up costs.
    Implications for public health: Health systems, CRCCP awardees, and CDC can use these findings for quality improvement activities, incorporation of information into trainings and support activities, and future program design.
    MeSH term(s) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. ; Colorectal Neoplasms/prevention & control ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Early Detection of Cancer/economics ; Early Detection of Cancer/methods ; Humans ; Mass Screening/economics ; Mass Screening/methods ; Program Development/methods ; Quality Improvement ; United States
    Language English
    Publishing date 2020-06-25
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article ; Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
    ZDB-ID 2135684-1
    ISSN 1545-1151 ; 1545-1151
    ISSN (online) 1545-1151
    ISSN 1545-1151
    DOI 10.5888/pcd17.190407
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  3. Article ; Online: Developing a Web-Based Cost Assessment Tool for Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs.

    Hoover, Sonja / Subramanian, Sujha / Tangka, Florence

    Preventing chronic disease

    2019  Volume 16, Page(s) E54

    Abstract: Introduction: We developed a web-based cost assessment tool (CAT) to collect cost data as an improvement from a desktop instrument to perform economic evaluations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Colorectal Cancer Control ... ...

    Abstract Introduction: We developed a web-based cost assessment tool (CAT) to collect cost data as an improvement from a desktop instrument to perform economic evaluations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) grantees. We describe the development of the web-based CAT, evaluate the quality of the data obtained, and discuss lessons learned.
    Methods: We developed and refined a web-based CAT to collect 5 years (2009-2014) of cost data from 29 CRCCP grantees. We analyzed funding distribution; costs by budget categories; distribution of costs related to screening promotion, screening provision, and overarching activities; and reporting of screenings for grantees that received funding from non-CDC sources compared with those grantees that did not.
    Results: CDC provided 85.6% of the resources for the CRCCP, with smaller amounts from in-kind contributions (7.8%), and funding from other sources (6.6%) (eg, state funding). Grantees allocated, on average, 95% of their expenditures to specific program activities and 5% to other activities. Some non-CDC funds were used to provide screening tests to additional people, and these additional screens were captured in the CAT.
    Conclusion: A web-based tool can be successfully used to collect cost data on expenditures associated with CRCCP activities. Areas for future refinement include how to collect and allocate dollars from other sources in addition to CDC dollars.
    MeSH term(s) Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis ; Colorectal Neoplasms/economics ; Cost-Benefit Analysis/statistics & numerical data ; Early Detection of Cancer/economics ; Early Detection of Cancer/statistics & numerical data ; Health Promotion/economics ; Health Promotion/statistics & numerical data ; Humans ; Internet ; Mass Screening/economics ; Mass Screening/statistics & numerical data ; Software ; United States
    Language English
    Publishing date 2019-05-02
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article ; Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
    ZDB-ID 2135684-1
    ISSN 1545-1151 ; 1545-1151
    ISSN (online) 1545-1151
    ISSN 1545-1151
    DOI 10.5888/pcd16.180336
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  4. Article: Late-Stage Diagnosis and Cost of Colorectal Cancer Treatment in Two State Medicaid Programs.

    Hoover, Sonja / Subramanian, Sujha / Sabatino, Susan A / Khushalani, Jaya S / Tangka, Florence K L

    Journal of registry management

    2021  Volume 48, Issue 1, Page(s) 20–27

    Abstract: Introduction: To assess timing of Medicaid enrollment with late-stage colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis and estimate treatment costs by stage at diagnosis.: Methods: We analyzed 2000-2009 California and Texas Medicaid data linked with cancer registry ...

    Abstract Introduction: To assess timing of Medicaid enrollment with late-stage colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis and estimate treatment costs by stage at diagnosis.
    Methods: We analyzed 2000-2009 California and Texas Medicaid data linked with cancer registry data. We assessed the association of Medicaid enrollment timing with late-stage colorectal cancer and estimated total and incremental 6-month treatment costs to Medicaid by stage using a noncancer comparison group matched on age group and sex.
    Results: Compared with Medicaid enrollment before diagnosis, enrolling after diagnosis was associated with late-stage diagnosis. Incremental per-person treatment costs were $31,063, $39,834, and $47,161 for localized, regional, and distant stage in California, respectively; and $28,701, $38,212, and $49,634 in Texas, respectively.
    Discussion: In California and Texas, Medicaid enrollment after CRC diagnosis was associated with later-stage disease and higher treatment costs. Facilitating timely and continuous Medicaid enrollment may lead to earlier stage at diagnosis, reduced costs, and improved outcomes.
    MeSH term(s) Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology ; Humans ; Medicaid ; Neoplasm Staging ; Registries ; United States
    Language English
    Publishing date 2021-06-24
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article
    ISSN 1945-6123
    ISSN 1945-6123
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  5. Article: Factors That Support Sustainability of Health Systems Change to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care Clinics: A Longitudinal Qualitative Study.

    Schlueter, Dara / DeGroff, Amy / Soloe, Cindy / Arena, Laura / Melillo, Stephanie / Tangka, Florence / Hoover, Sonja / Subramanian, Sujha

    Health promotion practice

    2022  Volume 24, Issue 4, Page(s) 755–763

    Abstract: Background: From 2015 to 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) supported 30 awardees in partnering with primary care clinics to implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting ... ...

    Abstract Background: From 2015 to 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) supported 30 awardees in partnering with primary care clinics to implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities (SAs) to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. This study identified factors that facilitated early implementation and sustainability within partner clinics.
    Methods: We conducted longitudinal qualitative case studies of four CRCCP awardees and four of their partner clinics. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to frame understanding of factors related to implementation and sustainability. A total of 41 semi-structured interviews were conducted with key staff and stakeholders exploring implementation practices and facilitators to sustainability. Qualitative thematic analysis of interview transcripts identified emerging themes across awardees and clinics.
    Results: Qualitative themes related to six CFIR inner setting constructs-structural characteristics, readiness for implementation, networks and communication, culture, and implementation climate-were identified. Themes related to early implementation included conducting readiness assessments to tailor implementation, providing moderate funding to clinics, identifying clinic champions, and coordinating EBIs and SAs with existing clinic practices. Themes related to sustainability included the importance of ongoing electronic health record (EHR) support, clinic leadership support, team-based care, and EBI and SA integration with clinic policies, workflows, and procedures.
    Implications: Findings help to inform future scale-up of and decision-making within CRC screening programs and other chronic disease prevention programs implementing EBIs and SAs within primary care clinics and also highlight factors that maximize sustainability within these programs.
    MeSH term(s) Humans ; Early Detection of Cancer/methods ; Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis ; Colorectal Neoplasms/prevention & control ; Qualitative Research ; Communication ; Primary Health Care
    Language English
    Publishing date 2022-05-18
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article ; Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
    ZDB-ID 2036801-X
    ISSN 1552-6372 ; 1524-8399
    ISSN (online) 1552-6372
    ISSN 1524-8399
    DOI 10.1177/15248399221091999
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  6. Article ; Online: Factors that support readiness to implement integrated evidence-based practice to increase cancer screening.

    Soloe, Cindy / Arena, Laura / Schlueter, Dara / Melillo, Stephanie / DeGroff, Amy / Tangka, Florence / Hoover, Sonja / Subramanian, Sujha

    Implementation science communications

    2022  Volume 3, Issue 1, Page(s) 106

    Abstract: Background: In 2015, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded the Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP), which partners with health care systems and primary care clinics to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake. We ... ...

    Abstract Background: In 2015, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded the Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP), which partners with health care systems and primary care clinics to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake. We interviewed CRCCP stakeholders to explore the factors that support readiness for integrated implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities to promote CRC screening with other screening and chronic disease management activities in primary care clinics.
    Methods: Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted a literature review and identified constructs to guide data collection and analysis. We purposively selected four CRCCP awardees that demonstrated ongoing engagement with clinic partner sites, willingness to collaborate with CDC and other stakeholders, and availability of high-quality data. We gathered background information on the selected program sites and conducted primary data collection interviews with program site staff and partners. We used NVivo QSR 11.0 to systematically pilot-code interview data, achieving a kappa coefficient of 0.8 or higher, then implemented a step-wise process to identify site-specific and cross-cutting emergent themes. We also included screening outcome data in our analysis to examine the impact of integrated cancer screening efforts on screening uptake.
    Results: We identified four overarching factors that contribute to clinic readiness to implement integrated EBIs and supporting activities: the funding environment, clinic governance structure, information sharing within clinics, and clinic leadership support. Sites reported supporting clinic partners' readiness for integrated implementation by providing coordinated funding application processes and braided funding streams and by funding partner organizations to provide technical assistance to support efficient incorporation of EBIs and supporting activities into existing clinic workflows. These actions, in turn, support clinic readiness to integrate the implementation of EBIs and supporting activities that promote CRC screening along with other screening and chronic disease management activities.
    Discussion: The selected CRCCP program sites supported clinics' readiness to integrate CRC EBIs and supporting activities with other screening and chronic disease management activities increasing uptake of CRC screening and improving coordination of patient care.
    Conclusions: We identified the factors that support clinic readiness to implement integrated EBIs and supporting activities including flexible funding mechanisms, effective data sharing systems, coordination across clinical staff, and supportive leadership. The findings provide insights into how public health programs and their clinic partners can collectively support integrated implementation to promote efficient, coordinated patient-centered care.
    Language English
    Publishing date 2022-10-06
    Publishing country England
    Document type Journal Article
    ISSN 2662-2211
    ISSN (online) 2662-2211
    DOI 10.1186/s43058-022-00347-6
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  7. Article ; Online: Modifications in Primary Care Clinics to Continue Colorectal Cancer Screening Promotion During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

    Arena, Laura / Soloe, Cindy / Schlueter, Dara / Ferriola-Bruckenstein, Kate / DeGroff, Amy / Tangka, Florence / Hoover, Sonja / Melillo, Stephanie / Subramanian, Sujha

    Journal of community health

    2022  Volume 48, Issue 1, Page(s) 113–126

    Abstract: COVID-19 caused significant declines in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Health systems and clinics, faced with a new rapidly spreading infectious disease, adapted to maintain patient safety and address the effects of the pandemic on healthcare ... ...

    Abstract COVID-19 caused significant declines in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Health systems and clinics, faced with a new rapidly spreading infectious disease, adapted to maintain patient safety and address the effects of the pandemic on healthcare delivery. This study aimed to understand how CDC-funded Colorectal Cancer Control Program recipients and their partner health systems and clinics may have modified evidence-based intervention (EBI) implementation to promote CRC screening during the COVID-19 pandemic; to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing modifications; and to extract lessons that can be applied to support CRC screening, chronic disease management, and clinic resilience in the face of future public health crises. Nine recipients were selected to reflect the diversity inherent among all CRCCP recipients. Recipient and clinic partner staff answered unique sets of pre-interview questions to inform tailoring of interview guides that were developed using constructs from the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The study team then interviewed recipient, health system, and clinic partner staff incorporating pre-interview responses to focus each conversation. We employed a rapid qualitative analysis approach then conducted virtual focus groups with recipient representatives to validate emergent themes. Three modifications that emerged from thematic analysis include: (1) offering mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits for CRC screening with mail or drop off return; (2) increasing the use of patient education and engagement strategies; and (3) increasing the use of or improving automated patient messaging systems. With improved tracking and automated reminder systems, mailed FIT kits paired with tailored patient education and clear instructions for completing the test could help primary care clinics catch up on the backlog of missed screenings during COVID-19. Future research can assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of offering mailed FIT kits on maintaining or improving CRC screening, especially among people who are medically underserved.
    MeSH term(s) Humans ; Pandemics ; COVID-19/diagnosis ; Early Detection of Cancer ; Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis ; Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology ; Primary Health Care ; Mass Screening ; Occult Blood
    Language English
    Publishing date 2022-10-29
    Publishing country Netherlands
    Document type Journal Article ; Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
    ZDB-ID 426631-6
    ISSN 1573-3610 ; 0094-5145
    ISSN (online) 1573-3610
    ISSN 0094-5145
    DOI 10.1007/s10900-022-01154-9
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  8. Article ; Online: Mail-Based Self-Sampling to Complete Colorectal Cancer Screening: Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-up Through Implementation Science.

    Gupta, Samir / Barnes, Autumn / Brenner, Alison T / Campbell, Janis / Davis, Melinda / English, Kevin / Hoover, Sonja / Kim, Karen / Kobrin, Sarah / Lance, Peter / Mishra, Shiraz I / Oliveri, Jill M / Reuland, Daniel S / Subramanian, Sujha / Coronado, Gloria D

    Preventing chronic disease

    2023  Volume 20, Page(s) E112

    Abstract: Introduction: Leveraging cancer screening tests, such as the fecal immunochemical test (FIT), that allow for self-sampling and postal mail for screening invitations, test delivery, and return can increase participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) ... ...

    Abstract Introduction: Leveraging cancer screening tests, such as the fecal immunochemical test (FIT), that allow for self-sampling and postal mail for screening invitations, test delivery, and return can increase participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The range of approaches that use self-sampling and mail for promoting CRC screening, including use of recommended best practices, has not been widely investigated.
    Methods: We characterized self-sampling and mail strategies used for implementing CRC screening across a consortium of 8 National Cancer Institute Cancer Moonshot Initiative Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-up through Implementation Science (ACCSIS) research projects. These projects serve diverse rural, urban, and tribal populations in the US.
    Results: All 8 ACCSIS projects leveraged self-sampling and mail to promote screening. Strategies included organized mailed FIT outreach with mailed invitations, including FIT kits, reminders, and mailed return (n = 7); organized FIT-DNA outreach with mailed kit return (n = 1); organized on-demand FIT outreach with mailed offers to request a kit for mailed return (n = 1); and opportunistic FIT-DNA with in-clinic offers to be mailed a test for mailed return (n = 2). We found differences in patient identification strategies, outreach delivery approaches, and test return options. We also observed consistent use of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Summit consensus best practice recommendations by the 7 projects that used mailed FIT outreach.
    Conclusion: In research projects reaching diverse populations in the US, we observed multiple strategies that leverage self-sampling and mail to promote CRC screening. Mail and self-sampling, including mailed FIT outreach, could be more broadly leveraged to optimize cancer screening.
    MeSH term(s) Humans ; Early Detection of Cancer ; Postal Service ; Implementation Science ; Follow-Up Studies ; Mass Screening ; Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis ; Occult Blood ; DNA
    Chemical Substances DNA (9007-49-2)
    Language English
    Publishing date 2023-12-07
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 2135684-1
    ISSN 1545-1151 ; 1545-1151
    ISSN (online) 1545-1151
    ISSN 1545-1151
    DOI 10.5888/pcd20.230083
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  9. Article ; Online: Personalized medicine for prevention: can risk stratified screening decrease colorectal cancer mortality at an acceptable cost?

    Subramanian, Sujha / Bobashev, Georgiy / Morris, Robert J / Hoover, Sonja

    Cancer causes & control : CCC

    2017  Volume 28, Issue 4, Page(s) 299–308

    Abstract: Purpose: Tailored health care interventions are expected to transform clinical practice. The objective of this study was to develop an innovative model to assess the effectiveness, cost, and harms of risk stratified colorectal cancer screening.: ... ...

    Abstract Purpose: Tailored health care interventions are expected to transform clinical practice. The objective of this study was to develop an innovative model to assess the effectiveness, cost, and harms of risk stratified colorectal cancer screening.
    Methods: We updated a previously validated microsimulation model consisting of three interlinked components: risk assessment, natural history, and screening/treatment modules. We used data from representative national surveys and the literature to create a synthetic population that mimics the family history and genetic profile of the US population. We applied risk stratification based on published risk assessment tools to triage individuals into five risk categories: high, increased, medium, decreased, and low.
    Results: On average, the incremental cost of risk stratified screening for colorectal cancer compared to the current approach at 60% and 80% compliance rates is $18,342 and $23,961 per life year gained. The harms in terms of false positives and perforations are consistently lower for personalized scenarios across all compliance rates. False positives are reduced by more than 47.0% and perforations by at least 9.9%. There is considerable uncertainty in the life years gained, but the reduction in harms remains stable under all scenarios.
    Conclusion: A key finding is that risk stratified screening can reduce harms at all levels of compliance. Therefore, selection of screening scenarios should include comprehensive comparisons of mortality, harms from screening, and cost. This study provides guidance for evaluating risk stratified cancer screening and further research is required to identify optimal implementation approaches in the real-world setting.
    MeSH term(s) Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis ; Colorectal Neoplasms/economics ; Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology ; Colorectal Neoplasms/mortality ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Early Detection of Cancer/economics ; Humans ; Precision Medicine/economics ; Risk Assessment
    Language English
    Publishing date 2017-02-21
    Publishing country Netherlands
    Document type Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 1064022-8
    ISSN 1573-7225 ; 0957-5243
    ISSN (online) 1573-7225
    ISSN 0957-5243
    DOI 10.1007/s10552-017-0864-4
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  10. Article ; Online: Access to Care for Medicare-Medicaid Dually Eligible Beneficiaries: The Role of State Medicaid Payment Policies.

    Zheng, Nan Tracy / Haber, Susan / Hoover, Sonja / Feng, Zhanlian

    Health services research

    2017  Volume 52, Issue 6, Page(s) 2219–2236

    Abstract: Study objectives: Medicaid programs are not required to pay the full Medicare coinsurance and deductibles for Medicare-Medicaid dually eligible beneficiaries. We examined the association between the percentage of Medicare cost sharing paid by Medicaid ... ...

    Abstract Study objectives: Medicaid programs are not required to pay the full Medicare coinsurance and deductibles for Medicare-Medicaid dually eligible beneficiaries. We examined the association between the percentage of Medicare cost sharing paid by Medicaid and the likelihood that a dually eligible beneficiary used evaluation and management (E&M) services and safety net provider services.
    Data sources: Medicare and Medicaid Analytic eXtract enrollment and claims data for 2009.
    Study design: Multivariate analyses used fee-for-service dually eligible and Medicare-only beneficiaries in 20 states. A comparison group of Medicare-only beneficiaries controlled for state factors that might influence utilization.
    Principal findings: Paying 100 percent of the Medicare cost sharing compared to 20 percent increased the likelihood (relative to Medicare-only) that a dually eligible beneficiary had any E&M visit by 6.4 percent. This difference in the percentage of cost sharing paid decreased the likelihood of using safety net providers, by 37.7 percent for federally qualified health centers and rural health centers, and by 19.8 percent for hospital outpatient departments.
    Conclusions: Reimbursing the full Medicare cost-sharing amount would improve access for dually eligible beneficiaries, although the magnitude of the effect will vary by state and type of service.
    Language English
    Publishing date 2017-12
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 410435-3
    ISSN 1475-6773 ; 0017-9124
    ISSN (online) 1475-6773
    ISSN 0017-9124
    DOI 10.1111/1475-6773.12591
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

To top