Change in health status and mortality as indicators of outcomes: comparison between the Medicare Advantage Program and the Veterans Health Administration.

Selim AJ, Kazis LE, Rogers W, Qian SX, Rothendler JA, Spiro A, Ren XS, Miller DR, Selim BJ, Fincke BG. Change in health status and mortality as indicators of outcomes: comparison between the Medicare Advantage Program and the Veterans Health Administration. Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation. 2007 Sep 1; 16(7):1179-91.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

• IIR 02-109 – Risk-Adjusted Mortality Rates as an Indicator for Outpatient Quality

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Comparing health outcomes with adequate methodology is central to performance assessments of health care systems. We compared the Medicare Advantage Program (MAP) and the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) with regard to changes in health status and mortality. METHODS: We used the Death-Master-File for vital status and the Short-Form 36 to determine physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) health at baseline and at 2 years. We compared the probability of being alive with the same or better (than would be expected by chance) PCS (or MCS) at 2 years and mortality, while adjusting for case-mix. Given the geographic variations in MAP enrollment, we did a regional sub-analysis. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the probability of being alive with the same or better PCS except for the South (VHA 65.8% vs. MAP 62.5%, P = .0014). VHA patients had a slightly higher probability than MAP patients of being alive with the same or better MCS (71.8% vs. 70.1%, P = .002) but no significant regional variations. The hazard ratios for mortality in the MAP were higher than in the VHA across all regions. CONCLUSION: With the use of appropriate methodology, we found small differences in 2-year health outcomes that favor the VHA.