Home › Research › Health systems and care delivery
Health Care Utilization, Care Satisfaction, and Health Status for Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare Beneficiaries With and Without Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias
Sungchul Park, Lindsay L. Y. White, Paul Arthur Fishman, Eric B.B. Larson, Norma B. Coe. JAMA Network Open, 2020-03-30
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The sample included 47 100 Medicare beneficiaries (25 900 women [54.9%]; mean [SD] age, 72.2 [11.4] years). Compared with TM beneficiaries with ADRD, MA beneficiaries with ADRD had lower utilization across the board, including a mean of -22.3 medical practitioner visits (95% CI, -24.9 to -19.8 medical practitioner visits), -2.3 outpatient hospital visits (95% CI, -3.6 to -1.1 outpatient hospital visits), -0.2 inpatient hospital admissions (95% CI, -0.3 to -0.1 inpatient hospital admissions), and -0.1 long-term care facility stays (95% CI, -0.2 to -0.1 long-term care facility stays). A similar trend was observed among beneficiaries without ADRD, but the difference was greater between MA and TM beneficiaries with ADRD than between MA and TM beneficiaries without ADRD (mean, -15.0 medical practitioner visits [95% CI, -18.7 to -11.3 medical practitioner visits], -1.7 outpatient hospital visits [95% CI, -3.0 to -0.3 outpatient hospital visits], and -0.1 inpatient hospital admissions [95% CI, -1.0 to 0.0 inpatient hospital admissions]). Overall, no or negligible differences were detected in care satisfaction and health status between MA and TM beneficiaries with and without ADRD. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with TM beneficiaries, MA beneficiaries had lower health care utilization without compromising care satisfaction and health status. This difference was more pronounced among beneficiaries with ADRD. These findings suggest that MA plans may be delivering health care more efficiently than TM, especially for beneficiaries with ADRD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Park, S., White, L. L. Y., Fishman, P. A., Larson, E. B., & Coe, N. B. (2020). Health Care Utilization, Care Satisfaction, and Health Status for Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare Beneficiaries With and Without Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias. JAMA Network Open. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1809
Vancouver
Park S, White LLY, Fishman PA, Larson EB, Coe NB. Health Care Utilization, Care Satisfaction, and Health Status for Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare Beneficiaries With and Without Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias. JAMA Network Open. 2020. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1809. PMID: 32227181.
BibTeX
@article{park2020-32227181,
author = {Park, Sungchul and White, Lindsay L. Y. and Fishman, Paul Arthur and Larson, Eric B.B. and Coe, Norma B.},
title = {{Health Care Utilization, Care Satisfaction, and Health Status for Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare Beneficiaries With and Without Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias}},
journal = {JAMA Network Open},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1809},
pmid = {32227181},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1809}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- The sample included 47 100 Medicare beneficiaries (25 900 women [54.9%]; mean [SD] age, 72.2 [11.4] years).
- Compared with TM beneficiaries with ADRD, MA beneficiaries with ADRD had lower utilization across the board, including a mean of -22.3 medical practitioner visits (95% CI, -24.9 to -19.8 medical practitioner visits), -2.3 outpatient hospital visits (95% CI, -3.6 to -1.1 outpatient hospital visits), -0.2 inpatient hospital admissions (95% CI, -0.3 to -0.1 inpatient hospital admissions), and -0.1 long-term care facility stays (95% CI, -0.2 to -0.1 long-term care facility stays).
- A similar trend was observed among beneficiaries without ADRD, but the difference was greater between MA and TM beneficiaries with ADRD than between MA and TM beneficiaries without ADRD (mean, -15.0 medical practitioner visits [95% CI, -18.7 to -11.3 medical practitioner visits], -1.7 outpatient hospital visits [95% CI, -3.0 to -0.3 outpatient hospital visits], and -0.1 inpatient hospital admissions [95% CI, -1.0 to 0.0 inpatient hospital admissions]).
- Overall, no or negligible differences were detected in care satisfaction and health status between MA and TM beneficiaries with and without ADRD.
- Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with TM beneficiaries, MA beneficiaries had lower health care utilization without compromising care satisfaction and health status.
Why it matters
Among Medicare beneficiaries with Alzheimer disease and related dementias, those in Medicare Advantage had lower health care utilization than those in traditional Medicare, without worse care satisfaction or health status. This difference was more pronounced for beneficiaries with dementia than those without.
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Participants47
- Effect size54.9%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (JAMA Network Open) |
| Journal's citation record | 2 / 4 | JAMA Network Open: journal h-index 235 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A cohort study following people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 47 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 4 / 7 | Cited 58 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 2 / 5 | 7.2 citations a year over 8 year(s) since 2020 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 7.9× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 3 / 6 | Cited by 22 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 2 / 4 | Cited 20 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Norma B. Coe: h-index 31 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 3 / 3 | University of Washington: institution h-index 3,540 (OpenAlex) |
| Multicenter collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 5 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 32227181) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 64 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1809
- PubMed: 32227181
- Original source →
- Free full text: JAMA Network Open →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Later studies that cite this one
21 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
Related studies in Health systems and care delivery
Also tagged “prevalence”
1,223 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,223 tagged studies.