The impact of Dual Eligible Special Need Plan regulations on healthcare utilization

• Main Authors: Kimberly Danae Cauley Narain, Jessica Harwood, Carol Mangione, O. Kenrik Duru, Susan Ettner
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2021-03-01
• Series: BMC Health Services Research
• Subjects: Dual-eligible beneficiaries; Healthcare utilization; Medicare
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06228-3

Abstract Background To determine if requiring Dual Eligible Special Need Plans (D-SNPs) to receive approval from the National Committee of Quality Assurance and contract with state Medicaid agencies impacts healthcare utilization. Methods We use a Multiple Interrupted Time Series to examine the association of D-SNP regulations with dichotomized measures of emergency room (ER) and hospital utilization. Our treatment group is elderly D-SNP enrollees. Our comparison group is near-elderly (ages 60–64) beneficiaries enrolled in Medicaid Managed Care plans (N = 360,405). We use segmented regression models to estimate changes in the time-trend and slope of the outcomes associated with D-SNP regulations, during the post-implementation (2012–2015) period, relative to the pre-implementation (2010–2011) period. Models include a treatment-status indicator, a monthly time-trend, indicators and splines for the post-period and the interactions between these variables. We conduct the following sensitivity analyses: (1) Re-estimating models stratified by state (2) Estimating models including interactions of D-SNP implementation variables with comorbidity count to assess for differential D-SNP regulation effects across comorbidity level. (3) Re-estimating the models stratifying by race/ethnicity and (4) Including a transition period (2012–2013) in the model. Results We do not find any statistically significant changes in ER or hospital utilization associated with D-SNP regulation implementation in the broad D-SNP population or among specific racial/ethnic groups; however, we do find a reduction in hospitalizations associated with D-SNP regulations in New Jersey (DD level = − 3.37%; p = 0.02)/(DD slope = − 0.23%; p = 0.01) and among individuals with higher, relative to lower levels of co-morbidity (DDD slope = − 0.06%; p = 0.01). Conclusions These findings suggest that the impact of D-SNP regulations varies by state. Additionally, D-SNP regulations may be particularly effective in reducing hospital utilization among beneficiaries with high levels of co-morbidity.