Our findings suggest that MTM eligibility criteria are not optimally targeted to capture underuse of and poor adherence to evidence-based medications. Policymakers should weigh the pros and cons of loosening restrictive MTM eligibility criteria to target patients with potentially greater needs.

Adherence to antipsychotics among Medicare Part D enrollees with schizophrenia was associated with significantly lower probability of psychiatric hospitalization and lower hospital expenditures.

Targeting efforts to improve medication adherence, especially among people with high health needs, can improve health and lower health care spending. To this end, Medicare requires that insurance plans that provide prescription drug (Part D) coverage offer specialized medication therapy management services to optimize medication use for enrollees with high drug costs, multiple chronic diseases, and multiple covered drugs. We analyzed a large random sample of Part D enrollees with diabetes, heart failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, to see whether poor adherence to recommended drugs was associated with higher Medicare costs. We found that beneficiaries with poor adherence had higher costs, ranging from $49 to $840 per month for patients with diabetes, for example. However, such beneficiaries were not uniformly more likely than others to be eligible for medication therapy management services. Aligning medication therapy management eligibility with a metric such as potentially preventable future costs holds promise for both improving the quality of care and reducing spending.

Researchers who rely on Medicare claims to analyze spending outcomes for beneficiaries with serious mental illness should be aware of the potential for bias due to nonrandom redaction of substance abuse data.

This paper analyzes how voluntary enrollment in the fee-for-service (FFS) system versus a partially capitated managed care plan affects changes in access to care over time for special needs children who receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) due to a disability. Four indicators of access are evaluated, including specialty care, hospital care, emergency care, and access to a regular doctor. We employ the Heckman two-step estimation procedure to correct for the potential nonrandom selection bias linked to plan choice. The findings show that relative to their counterparts in the partially capitated managed care plan, SSI children enrolled in the FFS plan are significantly more likely to encounter an access problem during either of the time periods studied. Similarly, FFS enrollees are significantly more likely than partially capitated managed care participants to experience persistent access problems across three of the four dimensions of care. Possible explanations for the deterioration in access associated with FFS include the lack of case management services, lower reimbursement relative to the partially capitated managed care plan, and provider availability.