| Summary: | IMPORTANCE:Medicare beneficiaries with high medical needs can benefit from Advance Care Planning (ACP). Medicare reimburses clinical providers for ACP discussions, but it is unknown whether high-need beneficiaries are receiving this service. OBJECTIVE:To compare rates of billed ACP discussions among a cohort of high-need Medicare beneficiaries with the non-high-needs Medicare population. DESIGN:Retrospective analysis of Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) claims in 2017 comparing high-need beneficiaries (seriously ill, frail, ESRD, and disabled) with non-high need beneficiaries. SETTING:Nationally representative FFS Medicare 20% sample. PARTICIPANTS:Medicare beneficiaries were assigned to one of the following classifications: seriously ill (65+), frail (65+), seriously ill & frail (65+); non-high need (65+); end stage renal disease (ESRD) or disabled (<65). All participants had data available for years 2016-2017. EXPOSURE:Receipt of a billed ACP discussion, CPT codes 99497 or 99498. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE:Rates of billed ACP visits were compared between high-need patients and non-high-need patients. Rates were adjusted for the 65+ population for sex, age, race/ethnicity, Charlson comorbidity index, Medicare/Medicaid dual eligibility status, and Hospital Referral Region. RESULTS:Among the 65+ groups, those most likely to have a billed ACP discussion included seriously ill & frail (5.2%), seriously ill (4.2%), and frail (3.3%). Rates remained consistent after adjusting (4.5%, 4.0%, 3.1%, respectively). Each subgroup differed significantly (p < .05) from non-high need beneficiaries (2.3%) in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Among the <65 high need groups, the rates were 2.7% for ESRD and 1.3% for the disabled (the latter p < .05 compared with non-high needs). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:While rates of billed ACP discussions varied among patient groups with high medical needs, overall they were relatively low, even among a cohort of patients for whom ACP may be especially relevant.
|
|---|
