Cited by 35Healthcare Policy and ManagementDiabetes Management and EducationHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention

New Medicare Diabetes Prevention Coverage May Limit Beneficiary Access and Widen Health Disparities

Ritchie, Natalie D., Gritz, Robert M.·2018·Medical Care

Abstract

Background: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services recently issued final rules for the Medicare Diabetes Prevention Program (MDPP), offering an unprecedented opportunity to provide lifestyle intervention to Medicare beneficiaries with prediabetes via a pay-for-performance model. The MDPP is based on the widely disseminated, yearlong National Diabetes Prevention Program (NDPP), which has lesser but still beneficial risk-reduction outcomes among minority and low-income participants. Objectives: We compare projected payments based on outcomes of a diverse sample of Medicare beneficiaries to service delivery costs, and explore resulting implications for MDPP access and sustainability. Methods: We delivered NDPP in a safety-net health care system from 2013 to 2017 and conducted an analysis of service cost, beneficiary performance, and projected MDPP reimbursement. Results: Among 1165 total participants, 213 (18.3%) were Medicare beneficiaries. Participating beneficiaries were 40.6% Hispanic, 31.6% non-Hispanic black, and 26.9% non-Hispanic white and 69.5% low-income. Overall beneficiary performance would result in an average reimbursement of $138.52 (interquartile range=162.50). Program delivery costs were $800 per participant, leaving an average gap of $661 per beneficiary. Conclusions: Findings from delivering the NDPP to diverse and undeserved patients show a large gap between service costs and projected reimbursement. Although many MDPP suppliers are needed to reach all Medicare beneficiaries with prediabetes, insufficient reimbursement may be a deterrent. Health disparities may also widen as suppliers serving diverse and low-income populations will likely receive especially low payments, threatening access. Higher payments are supported by strong return-on-investment findings and seem needed to reduce diabetes prevalence and related disparities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/mlr.0000000000000981

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ritchie, N. D., & Gritz, R. M.
Affiliations
  • Denver Health Medical Center (US)
  • University of Colorado Anschutz (US)
Corresponding author
Ritchie, Natalie D.
Venue
Medical Care
Published
2018-11
Volume
56
Issue
11
Pages
908-911
ISSN
0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2897708337
Cited by
35
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1
FWCI
4.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medical Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (U58 DP004157)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Keywords
prediabetes, lifestyle intervention, performance-based pay, reimbursement, health disparities, health care access, National Diabetes Prevention Program, safety net health care, low-income populations, program sustainability, service delivery costs
MeSH terms
Healthy Lifestyle, Aged, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Diabetes Mellitus, Health Expenditures, Female, Medicare, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Minority Groups, Poverty, Prediabetic State, Reimbursement, Incentive, United States, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S., Health Status Disparities, Weight Reduction Programs, Safety-net Providers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review