Change in health status and mortality as indicators of outcomes: comparison between the Medicare Advantage Program and the Veterans Health Administration

The History and Applications of the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12)

There has been an increasing emphasis on placing patients at the center of clinical care and health care research and, in particular, assessing outcomes and experiences from the patient's perspective. One of the most widely used patient-reported outcome instruments is the Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey (VR-12). This article reviews the VR-12 development and its applications over the last 2 decades, including research and potential uses in clinical care.

Better with age? A comparison of geriatric and non-geriatric trauma patients' psychological outcomes 6 months post-injury

This is the first study to compare both physical and psychological outcomes in geriatric and non-geriatric patients (n = 268) at baseline and 6 months post-trauma. Demographic, clinical, and psychological data, including screens for alcohol use, depressive symptoms, and post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) were collected from 67 geriatric patients (70.7 ± 8.0 years) and 201 non-geriatric patients (40.2 ± 12.8 years) admitted to a Level I trauma center for ≥ 24 h. Geriatric patients were significantly less likely to screen positive for alcohol use at baseline, and depression, PTSS, and alcohol use at follow-up. When not controlling for discharge to rehabilitation or nursing facility, geriatric patients had significantly lower odds of alcohol use at follow-up. There was no significant difference in injury severity, resilience, or pre-trauma psychological status between the two groups. Results indicate that geriatric trauma patients fare better than their younger counterparts at 6 months post-trauma on measures of alcohol use, depression, and PTSS. Screenings and interventions for both age groups could improve psychological health post-trauma, but younger patients may require additional attention.

Comparing VA and Non-VA Quality of Care: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system aims to provide high-quality medical care to veterans in the USA, but the quality of VA care has recently drawn the concern of Congress. The objective of this study was to systematically review published evidence examining the quality of care provided at VA health care facilities compared to quality of care in other facilities and systems.

METHODS

Building on the search strategy and results of a prior systematic review, we searched MEDLINE (from January 1, 2005, to January 1, 2015) to identify relevant articles on the quality of care at VA facilities compared to non-VA facilities. Articles from the prior systematic review published from 2005 and onward were also included and re-abstracted. Studies were classified, analyzed, and summarized by the Institute of Medicine's quality dimensions.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine articles were identified (including 31 articles from the prior systematic review and 38 new articles) that address one or more Institute of Medicine quality dimensions: safety (34 articles), effectiveness (24 articles), efficiency (9 articles), patient-centeredness (5 articles), equity (4 articles), and timeliness (1 article). Studies of safety and effectiveness indicated generally better or equal performance, with some exceptions. Too few articles related to timeliness, equity, efficiency, and patient-centeredness were found from which to reliably draw conclusions about VA care related to these dimensions.

DISCUSSION

The VA often (but not always) performs better than or similarly to other systems of care with regard to the safety and effectiveness of care. Additional studies of quality of care in the VA are needed on all aspects of quality, but particularly with regard to timeliness, equity, efficiency, and patient-centeredness.

The impact of the affordable care Act (ACA) on favorable risk selection and Beneficiaries' health status in Medicare advantage: a preliminary assessment

BACKGROUND

In response to increasing fiscal pressures, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) sought to reduce Medicare Advantage plan expenses by restructuring the bidding and payment processes. The purpose of this study is to assess the effects of the ACA's payment freeze and restructuring of the bidding and payment processes on favorable risk selection in Medicare Advantage plan enrollment (objective 1) and changes in the health status of beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans over time (objective 2).

METHODS

We used the Medicare Health Outcome Survey baseline data (2007→2013) for analyses of the first objective (7 cohorts, 1.7 million beneficiaries) and the linked baseline and follow-up data (2007-2009→2011-2013) for analyses of the second objective (5 cohorts, 0.5 million beneficiaries). To examine favorable risk selection we used the following outcomes: self-rated health, falls, balance problems, falls management, frailty, and morbidity. To examine changes in beneficiary health status over time, we examined changes (over time) in these same outcomes. The focal independent variable is the policy implementation measure, which is time dependent and measures the accumulation of changes to Medicare Advantage payment policies resulting from the ACA. Multiple regression models were developed to examine the relationship between ACA implementation and outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

In terms of favorable selection, individuals enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans post-ACA have, on average, better self-rated health (b = 0.003, p < 0.01), lower odds of falls (AOR = 0.981, p < 0.001), higher odds of falls management (AOR = 1.040, p < 0.001), lower frailty risks (IRR = 0.983, p < 0.001), and lower risks of comorbidities (IRR = 0.989, p < 0.001). In terms of health status changes over time, the results indicate that in the post-ACA period, beneficiaries reported better self-rated health (b = 0.028, p < 0.001), lower odds of falls (AOR = 0.965, p < 0.001), lower odds of balance problems (AOR = 0.958, p < 0.001), lower odds of falls management (AOR = 0.981, p < 0.05), lower frailty risks (IRR = 0.944, p < 0.001), and lower risks of comorbidity (IRR = 0.986, p < 0.001) at follow up compared to the same risks at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that as the Medicare Advantage payment policies in the ACA were being implemented, plans may have engaged in favorable selection activities, yet beneficiaries exhibited more favorable health outcomes.

Comparison of health outcomes for male seniors in the Veterans Health Administration and Medicare Advantage plans

OBJECTIVES

To compare the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) with the Medicare Advantage (MA) plans with regard to health outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

The Medicare Health Outcome Survey, the 1999 Large Health Survey of Veteran Enrollees, and the Ambulatory Care Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients (Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003).

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

EXTRACTION METHODS

Men 65+ receiving care in MA (N=198,421) or in VHA (N=360,316). We compared the risk-adjusted probability of being alive with the same or better physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) health at 2-years follow-up. We computed hazard ratio (HR) for 2-year mortality.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Veterans had a higher adjusted probability of being alive with the same or better PCS compared with MA participants (VHA 69.2 versus MA 63.6 percent, p<.001). VHA patients had a higher adjusted probability than MA patients of being alive with the same or better MCS (76.1 versus 69.6 percent, p<.001). The HRs for mortality in the MA were higher than in the VHA (HR, 1.26 [95 percent CI 1.23-1.29]).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that the VHA has better patient outcomes than the private managed care plans in Medicare. The VHA's performance offers encouragement that the public sector can both finance and provide exemplary health care.

Differences in clinical trial patient attributes and outcomes according to enrollment setting

PURPOSE

During the last 25 years, National Cancer Institute (NCI) cooperative trial groups have extended trial networks from academic centers to include certain community and Veterans Health Administration (VHA) centers. We compared trial patients' attributes and outcomes by these enrollment settings.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Studying 2,708 patients on one of 10 cooperative group, randomized lung trials at 272 institutions, we compared patient attributes by enrollment setting (ie, academic, community, and VHA affiliates). We used adjusted Cox regression to evaluate for survival differences by setting.

RESULTS

Main member institutions enrolled 44% of patients; community affiliates enrolled 44%; and VHAs enrolled 12%. Patient attributes (ie, case-mix) of age, ethnicity, sex, and performance status varied by enrollment setting. After analysis was adjusted for patient case-mix, no mortality differences by enrollment setting were noted.

CONCLUSION

Although trial patients with primarily advanced-stage lung cancer from nonacademic centers were older and had worse performance statuses than those from academic centers, survival did not differ by enrollment setting after analysis accounted for patient heterogeneity. An answer for whether long-term outcomes for patients at community and VHA centers affiliated with cooperative trial groups are equivalent to those at academic centers when care is delivered through NCI trials requires additional research among patients with longer survival horizons.