Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Patrick Long's avatar

While it’s akin to picking a favorite child, this Breakdown may be the bestest of the bunch. Nicely done, Preston. Your wit and wisdom are appreciated. Cheers from Chapel Hill

Expand full comment
Kevin Agatstein's avatar

While there are always opportunity to fine tune health spending, there are some meaningful failures of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) that need to be acknowledged, for which Medicare Advantage (MA) has outperformed.

First, disease prevention. As summarized in a Sep 16, 2022 KFF report[1], MA patients were more likely than traditional Medicare patients to receive annual wellness exams, screenings, and vaccinations. Similar results we cited in that article for more consistent guideline-based control of heart disease and diabetes among MA members than Medicare FFS for patients. Per this report, MA was not a panacea on all metrics, but rarely did it underperform FFS.

The "coding intensity" issue, which contributes to the higher per-capita spend, is not necessarily bad. Medicare fee-for-service providers, paid by CPT code, disproportionally fail to code a full patient's disease burden. This creates unfortunate long-term issues, and associated cost. For example, a large percent of patients that "crash" into dialysis without ever having a diagnosis of kidney disease. Risk-based coding like that used with MA helps catch these patients earlier. The patients with serious depression that is both uncoded and untreated is similarly scary. Here again, risk-coding helps. Similarly, providers simply failing to recode an active diabetic who they are treating may not directly affect outcomes, they are being treated after all, but the lack of data means it is harder to monitor these patients with secondary disease prevention measures (e.g., foot exams, eye exams) that their conditions warrant.

While the author of the above post has certainly cast light on an important issue, and I applaud him for doing so, alas, no system is perfect, I think MedPAC Chair Michael Chernew summed up the issue nicely in his Jan 25, 2024 interview with MedPage Today, “I believe the Medicare Advantage program has successfully changed patterns of care in ways that have reduced overall utilization. They have enabled plans to offer better benefits to beneficiaries, financed by the plans' efficiencies as well as the payments they've received. And there's a range of technical things -- changing the risk adjustment models, which we have already done -- and making changes to the quality bonus program. There's a lot of strategies one could take if one wanted to improve the balance of payments between Medicare Advantage and fee-for-service.” [2]

[1] Beneficiary Experience, Affordability, Utilization, and Quality in Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare: A Review of the Literature. KFF

https://www.kff.org/medicare/report/beneficiary-experience-affordability-utilization-and-quality-in-medicare-advantage-and-traditional-medicare-a-review-of-the-literature/

[2] Will All Seniors Eventually Have No Choice but Medicare Advantage?. MedPage Today

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/108423?xid=nl_mostcommented_2024-02-02&mh=9ff565ecc8ff83ac5cbca5d23c29dc5d

Expand full comment
13 more comments...

No posts