Does Medicare Advantage Enrollment Affect Home Healthcare Use?

Published in: American Journal of Managed Care, v. 22, no. 11, Nov. 2016, p. 714-720

Posted on on January 25, 2017

by Daniel A. Waxman, Lillian Min, Claude Messan Setodji, Mark Alan Hanson, Neil S. Wenger, David A. Ganz

Read More

Access further information on this document at

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVES: To compare home health utilization andclinical outcomes between Medicare beneficiaries in the feefor-service (FFS) and Medicare Advantage (MA) programs,and to compare regional variation.STUDY DESIGN: We used the 2010 and 2011 Outcome andAssessment Information Set to identify all home healthepisodes begun in 2010 and to measure 7 clinical home healthoutcomes that are defined by CMS for public reporting.METHODS: We modeled the probability of home healthuse, the duration of home health episodes, and eachclinical outcome measure as a function of MA versus FFSenrollment and model-specific risk adjustors. EmpiricalBayes predictions from generalized linear mixed modelswere aggregated by hospital referral region (HRR) to createstandardized regional measures of home health utilizationand mean episode duration.RESULTS: We identified 30,837,130 FFS and 10,594,658 MAbeneficiaries (excluding those dually eligible for Medicaid).After adjusting for demographic and clinical patientcharacteristics, the odds of receiving home health amongFFS enrollees were 1.83 times those of MA (95% CI, 1.82-1.84). Adjusted home health duration was 34% longer forFFS (95% CI, 32%-34%). Outcomes differences were smallin magnitude and inconsistent across measures. Regionalvariations in use and duration were substantial for both FFSand MA enrollees. Within HRRs, correlations between FFSand MA utilization rates and between FFS and MA episodedurations were 0.51 and 0.94, respectively.CONCLUSIONS: MA beneficiaries use less home healththan their FFS counterparts, but regional factors affectutilization, independent of insurance status.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.