Sex differences in Medicare beneficiaries' experiences by low-income status

Medicare beneficiaries dually eligible for Medicaid are a low-income group who are often in poor health. Little research has examined sex differences in patient experience by dual/low-income subsidy (LIS) status. Cross-sectional comparison by sex and low-income status. We used linear regression to c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American journal of managed care 2022-09, Vol.28 (9), p.465-471
Main Authors: MacCarthy, Sarah, Mizel, Matthew L, Burkhart, Q, Haviland, Amelia M, Dembosky, Jacob W, Gaillot, Sarah, Tamayo, Loida, Elliott, Marc N
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aged
Cardiovascular disease
Chronic illnesses
Cross-Sectional Studies
Female
Gender differences
Health care
Health education
Health literacy
Humans
Low income groups
Male
Medicaid
Medicare
Non-binary gender
Patient-centered care
Poverty
Self report
Sex Characteristics
Social networks
Socioeconomic Factors
Subsidies
United States
Womens health
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Medicare beneficiaries dually eligible for Medicaid are a low-income group who are often in poor health. Little research has examined sex differences in patient experience by dual/low-income subsidy (LIS) status. Cross-sectional comparison by sex and low-income status. We used linear regression to compare 6 case mix-adjusted patient experience measures (on a 0-100 scale) by sex within non-dual/LIS and dual/LIS beneficiary groups among 549,603 respondents 65 years and older to the 2016-2017 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems surveys of beneficiary experience with Medicare (mail with telephone follow-up of nonrespondents, 42% response rate). Dual/LIS male beneficiaries reported worse patient experiences on all 6 measures than female beneficiaries, with scores 1 to 2 percentage points lower for 3 measures and less than 1 percentage point lower for the other 3 measures. For 4 of the 6 measures, sex differences among dual/LIS beneficiaries were significantly larger than those among non-dual/LIS beneficiaries. In all 4 instances, the gaps between men and women among dual/LIS beneficiaries favored women; P 
ISSN:1088-0224
1936-2692
DOI:10.37765/ajmc.2022.89222