Title |
The Association between Medicare Advantage Market Penetration and Diabetes in the United States
|
---|---|
Published in |
Frontiers in Public Health, October 2015
|
DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00229 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Steven W. Howard, Stephanie Lazarus Bernell, Jennifer Wilmott, M. Faizan Casim, Jing Wang, Lindsey Pearson, Caitlin M. Byler, Zidong Zhang |
Abstract |
The objective of this study is to explore the extent to which managed care market penetration in the United States is associated with the presence of chronic disease. Diabetes was selected as the chronic disease of interest due to its increasing prevalence as well as the disease management protocols that can lessen disease complications. We hypothesized that greater managed care market penetration would be associated with (1) lower prevalence of diabetes and (2) lower prevalence of diabetes-related comorbidities (DRCs) among diabetics. Data for this analysis came from two sources. We merged Medicare Advantage (MA) market penetration data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) with data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) (2004-2008). Results suggest that county-level MA market penetration is not significantly associated with prevalence of diabetes or DRCs. That finding is quite interesting in that managed care market penetration has been shown to have an effect on utilization of inpatient services. It may be that managed care protocols do not offer the same benefits beyond the inpatient setting. |
X Demographics
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 1 | 50% |
Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 2 | 40% |
Student > Bachelor | 1 | 20% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 20% |
Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 40% |
Decision Sciences | 1 | 20% |
Unknown | 2 | 40% |