IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v77y2022i12pe279-e287..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Variations in Medicare Advantage Switching Rates Among African American and Hispanic Medicare Beneficiaries With Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias, by Sex and Dual Eligibility
[Choice inconsistencies among the elderly: Evidence from plan choice in the Medicare Part D program]

Author

Listed:
  • Maricruz Rivera-Hernandez
  • David J Meyers
  • Daeho Kim
  • Sungchul Park
  • Amal N Trivedi
  • Jessica Kelley

Abstract

ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to identify rates of switching to Medicare Advantage (MA) among fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD) by race/ethnicity and whether these rates vary by sex and dual-eligibility status for Medicare and Medicaid.MethodsData came from the Medicare Master Beneficiary Summary File from 2017 to 2018. The outcome of interest for this study was switching from FFS to MA during any month in 2018. The primary independent variable was race/ethnicity including non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic African American, and Hispanic beneficiaries. Two interaction terms among race/ethnicity and dual eligibility, and race/ethnicity and sex were included. The model adjusted for age, year of ADRD diagnosis, the number of chronic/disabling conditions, total health care costs, and ZIP code fixed effects.ResultsThe study included 2,284,175 FFS Medicare beneficiaries with an ADRD diagnosis in 2017. Among dual-eligible beneficiaries, adjusted rates of switching were higher among African American (1.91 percentage points [p.p.], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.68–2.15) and Hispanic beneficiaries (1.36 p.p., 95% CI: 1.07–1.64) compared to non-Hispanic White beneficiaries. Among males, adjusted rates were higher among African American (3.28 p.p., 95% CI: 2.97–3.59) and Hispanic beneficiaries (2.14 p.p., 95% CI: 1.86–2.41) compared to non-Hispanic White beneficiaries.DiscussionAmong persons with ADRD, African American and Hispanic beneficiaries are more likely than White beneficiaries to switch from FFS to MA. This finding underscores the need to monitor the quality and equity of access and care for these populations.

Suggested Citation

  • Maricruz Rivera-Hernandez & David J Meyers & Daeho Kim & Sungchul Park & Amal N Trivedi & Jessica Kelley, 2022. "Variations in Medicare Advantage Switching Rates Among African American and Hispanic Medicare Beneficiaries With Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias, by Sex and Dual Eligibility [Choice incon," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 77(12), pages 279-287.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:77:y:2022:i:12:p:e279-e287.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbac132
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jason Abaluck & Jonathan Gruber, 2011. "Choice Inconsistencies among the Elderly: Evidence from Plan Choice in the Medicare Part D Program," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1180-1210, June.
    2. Jason Abaluck & Jonathan Gruber, 2011. "Heterogeneity in Choice Inconsistencies among the Elderly: Evidence from Prescription Drug Plan Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 377-381, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liran Einav & Amy Finkelstein & Maria Polyakova, 2018. "Private Provision of Social Insurance: Drug-Specific Price Elasticities and Cost Sharing in Medicare Part D," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 122-153, August.
    2. Michele Fioretti & Hongming Wang, 2023. "Performance Pay in Insurance Markets: Evidence from Medicare," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(5), pages 1128-1144, September.
    3. Padmaja Ayyagari & Daifeng He, 2017. "The Role of Medical Expenditure Risk in Portfolio Allocation Decisions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(11), pages 1447-1458, November.
    4. Determann, Domino & Lambooij, Mattijs S. & de Bekker-Grob, Esther W. & Hayen, Arthur P. & Varkevisser, Marco & Schut, Frederik T. & Wit, G. Ardine de, 2016. "What health plans do people prefer? The trade-off between premium and provider choice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 10-18.
    5. Nathaniel Hendren & Camille Landais & Johannes Spinnewijn, 2021. "Choice in Insurance Markets: A Pigouvian Approach to Social Insurance Design," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 457-486, August.
    6. Genakos, Christos & Roumanias, Costas & Valletti, Tommaso, 2023. "Is having an expert “friend” enough? An analysis of consumer switching behavior in mobile telephony," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 359-372.
    7. Adams, Paul & Hunt, Stefan & Palmer, Christopher & Zaliauskas, Redis, 2021. "Testing the effectiveness of consumer financial disclosure: Experimental evidence from savings accounts," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 122-147.
    8. Houde, Sébastien & Myers, Erica, 2021. "Are consumers attentive to local energy costs? Evidence from the appliance market," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    9. Camille Landais & Arash Nekoei & Peter Nilsson & David Seim & Johannes Spinnewijn, 2021. "Risk-Based Selection in Unemployment Insurance: Evidence and Implications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(4), pages 1315-1355, April.
    10. Kurt Lavetti & Thomas DeLeire & Nicolas R. Ziebarth, 2023. "How do low‐income enrollees in the Affordable Care Act marketplaces respond to cost‐sharing?," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 90(1), pages 155-183, March.
    11. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/2ioennpq5m90holakkatq7cmms is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Keith Marzilli Ericson & Philipp Kircher & Johannes Spinnewijn & Amanda Starc, 2021. "Inferring Risk Perceptions and Preferences Using Choice from Insurance Menus: Theory and Evidence," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(634), pages 713-744.
    13. Woodard, Joshua, 2016. "Estimation of Insurance Deductible Demand under Endogenous Premium Rates," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236151, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Deck, Cary & Jahedi, Salar, 2015. "The effect of cognitive load on economic decision making: A survey and new experiments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 97-119.
    15. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    16. Kowalski, Amanda E., 2015. "Estimating the tradeoff between risk protection and moral hazard with a nonlinear budget set model of health insurance," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 122-135.
    17. Anell, Anders & Dietrichson, Jens & Ellegård, Lina Maria & Kjellsson, Gustav, 2021. "Information, switching costs, and consumer choice: Evidence from two randomised field experiments in Swedish primary health care," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    18. Powell, David & Pacula, Rosalie Liccardo & Taylor, Erin, 2020. "How increasing medical access to opioids contributes to the opioid epidemic: Evidence from Medicare Part D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    19. Lee, Ajin & Vabson, Boris, 2024. "The value of improving insurance quality: Evidence from long-run Medicaid attrition," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    20. Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Kokot, Johanna & Vomhof, Markus & Weßling, Jens, 2017. "Health insurance choice and risk preferences under cumulative prospect theory – an experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 374-397.
    21. Bünnings, Christian & Schmitz, Hendrik & Tauchmann, Harald & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2015. "How health plan enrollees value prices relative to supplemental benefits and service quality," FAU Discussion Papers in Economics 02/2015, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute for Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:77:y:2022:i:12:p:e279-e287.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.