Article

What can Medicaid data add to research on VA patients?

Health Care Financing and Economics, Department of Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, 150 South Huntington Avenue (152H), Boston, MA 02130, USA.
The Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development (Impact Factor: 1.78). 01/2010; 47(8):773-80.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This article is the first to describe Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) patients' use of Medicaid at a national level. We obtained 1999 national VA enrollment and utilization data, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services enrollment and claims, and Medicare information from the VA Information Resource Center. The research team created files for program characteristics and described the VA-Medicaid dually enrolled population, healthcare utilization, and costs. In 1999, VA-Medicaid dual enrollees comprised 10.2% of VA's annual patient load (350,000/3,450,000); 304,000 were veterans. These veterans differed marginally from VA's veteran patients, being on average half a year younger and having 1% fewer males. Dual enrollees with mental health diagnoses and care were almost three times as numerous as long-term care patients; these two groups accounted for ~60% of dual enrollees. Dual enrollees disproportionately included housebound veterans and veterans needing aid and assistance. Half the dual enrollees had 12 months of Medicaid eligibility, and total Federal expenditures per patient not in managed care programs averaged >$18,000 (median >$6,000). Dually enrolled women veterans cost ~55% less than men. Medicaid benefits complement VA and are more accessible in many states. VA researchers need to consider including Medicaid utilization and costs in their studies if they target populations or programs related to long-term care or mental disorders.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
68 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a subset of breast cancer. Health care cost and utilization data for TNBC are lacking. Objective We examined differences between metastatic TNBC and metastatic non-TNBC in survival and health care costs and utilization. Methods This retrospective analysis of metastatic TNBC (n = 134) and metastatic non-TNBC (n = 445) used a proprietary oncology registry, the Impact Intelligence Oncology Management registry database, linked with health insurance claims and social security mortality data. Results We found metastatic patients whose breast cancer is triple negative to be younger (56.49 vs 59.24 years), to be more likely to have recurrent disease (64.93 vs 45.39%), and to have greater mortality vs metastatic non-TNBC patients (67.16 vs 50.79%) (all P < .05). Recurrent patients with metastatic TNBC have the highest risk of death (HR = 1.9; P < .001), whereas survival was greatest for de novo metastatic non-TNBC. Patients with metastatic TNBC had more all-cause annual hospitalizations, more hospitalized days, and higher total costs vs metastatic non-TNBC. Annual payer's total costs, annual payer's inpatient costs, cancer-related hospitalizations, and cancer-related inpatient costs also were greater among patients with metastatic TNBC. Limitations While the study spans slightly more than 2 years, 5-10 years would have been preferable to achieve a full clinical profile of indexed patients. The database also omitted factors that potentially confound the results, such as race and socioeconomic status. Conclusions Metastatic TNBC is associated with significant burden of disease and higher health care utilization vs metastatic non-TNBC, which may be due in part to the aggressive clinical course of the disease.
    Community Oncology 01/2012; 9(1):8–14.

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
20 Downloads
Available from
May 17, 2014