Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Insurance, Medigap”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

Coordination of health coverage for Medicare enrollees: living with HIV/AIDS in California.

Because Medicare does not cover a large part of the health care that its enrollees living with HIV/AIDS require, they need other coverage to supplement Medicare. Medicaid is a major source of that supplemental coverage. In California, Medicare enrollees with HIV/AIDS who were also enrolled in Medi-Cal (California's Medicaid program) had total payments from both programs of $177 million, or an average of $28,956 per person in the fee-for-service-system in 1998. Of that total, Medicare paid for 38 percent, mainly for inpatient visits and ambulatory care, while Medi-Cal paid 62 percent, mainly for prescription drugs. For these dual enrollees, many of Medicare's benefit gaps--including a large share of prescription drugs, nursing facility services and home care--are being filled by Medi-Cal. Data in this Medicare Brief indicate that the incremental cost to the federal government of filling gaps in the Medicare benefits package would be considerably less than the full cost of the additional benefits. Through Medicaid and other programs, the federal government is already paying a substantial part of public program expenditures for dual enrollees with HIV/AIDS. Other issues to consider are how the dual Medicare-Medicaid funding streams affect the programs' cost efficiency, and from the perspective of Medicare enrollees and providers, how well the dual programs coordinate to meet the needs of people with HIV/AIDS and other chronic conditions.

California↗

Medicare: the basics.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Deductibles and Coinsurance↗

Preferred provider organizations: options for Medicare.

Preferred Provider Organizations (PPOs) offer purchasers of care several benefits, including expenditure reduction, utilization control, improved quality of care, and efficient management. Although Medicare could benefit from these outcomes, the program lags behind the private sector in PPO development. The Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) must address several policy issues and constraints as it develops PPOs for Medicare beneficiaries. The agency must identify services and providers to include in the PPO, develop program sponsorship and administration methods, create viable provider and beneficiary incentives to participate, identify sources of PPO cost savings, and examine the role of medigap insurance policies in PPO development. In this article we discuss three possible PPO models for Medicare: a service or population specific PPO, an integrated PPO/medigap policy, and a Medicare Part A/B PPO. We conclude by identifying several issues that require further research before these PPO models can be tested.

Cost Control↗

Retiree health benefits in the United States: a strategic critical management review.

This article provides a critical review of studies associated with retiree health benefits in the United States. An attempt is made to determine if logical conclusions or trends could be identified regarding this issue of health care policy debate. The forms of retiree health benefits are covered, as is a discussion of Medigap policies and insurance coverage for the elderly. Employer-sponsored retiree benefits and the effects of supplemental coverage on the use of services are also reviewed. Lastly, a discussion and conclusion regarding this research agenda is presented with a critical analysis of the health care policy management debate for the future.

Aged↗

Can regulation improve long-term care insurance? Lessons from the Medigap experience.

This article uses recent experiences from the Medigap market to draw conclusions about the advisability of alternative methods of regulating the market for long-term care insurance. The analysis is based in part on interviews of state insurance regulators, insurance companies, and interest-group representatives. The authors conclude that some regulation of the market is appropriate, but that the structure and extent of regulation found in the Medigap market would likely be inappropriate for the long-term care insurance market at this time.

Aged↗

Medicare program; HHS' recognition of NAIC Model Standards (National Association of Insurance Commissioners) for regulation of Medigap policies--HCFA. Notice.

This notice contains a list of the ten standardized Medicare supplemental insurance benefit packages that may be offered to Medicare beneficiaries consistent with the requirements of section 1882 of the Social Security Act (the Act), as amended by sections 4351 through 4358 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. This list is included in section 9 of the Model Regulation adopted by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) on July 30, 1991, which is reprinted at the end of the notice. Until the publication of this list, certain provisions of section 1882 of the Act relating to this type of insurance were inapplicable to sellers who are not also the issuers of health insurance policies being sold to Medicare beneficiaries.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S.↗

Medigap regulation: lessons for health care reform.

Congress enacted legislation in 1990 that dramatically changed the rules for selling supplemental health insurance, or "Medigap" policies, to the elderly. Most notably, policy coverage was standardized. Insurance carriers are allowed to sell only the ten specified packages of benefits, which reduces consumer choice but facilitates comparison shopping. This legislation is important in its own right and also offers lessons for U.S. health care reform. To examine the changes brought about by this legislation and analyze their implications for health care reform, we conducted site visits to nine states and interviewed insurer representatives, executive branch officials, congressional staff, and various interest groups for two years.

Aged↗