You would expect Medicare to spend about the same for a man
with heart, lung, or kidney disease as it does for a woman. And if you looked at the actual numbers, you
would not be surprised. On average, it
does.
So why does Medicare spend so much more on men when you
couple these disease with depression? That is a question that deserves an
answer.
The startling numbers, which show just how wide the
disparity is, are in the chart accompanying this column. They are very similar to some others that I
shared in
my column last week.
They all come from the 2010
CMS Medicare public use data files, the most recent ones available. The CMS file includes information on all 48
million Medicare recipients.
Last week, I wrote that men
with depression in the 65-69 year old age group enjoyed an 11% Medicare
spending advantage over women in the same age group. (The men were those on Medicare only, not both
Medicare and Medicaid.) I also wrote
that the disparity persisted both as they aged and when they were diagnosed as
having both depression and dementia.
That column raised at
least one troubling question – why are women with depression being undertreated
relative to men, when they are two to three times more likely to be diagnosed
with it?
I received a number of possible answers to that question,
but the most common one was that perhaps men’s needs are more intensive. Because they are diagnosed less frequently,
they may simply be sicker by the time they are, and therefore need more treatment.
The Medicare data do not include a severity measure, so
there is no way to tell for sure. But there
is at least some indirect empirical evidence for this. The Medicare spending gap in favor of men is wider for hospital care (Part A) than it is for outpatient treatment of drugs (Parts B/D).
If there were an
intensity advantage, however, it should disappear as people get sicker.
But it doesn’t. If anything, it may get a little wider.
This week, I looked at some groups with greater health needs
– Medicare recipients in the 65-69 year old age group who were dually diagnosed
with depression plus heart disease, depression plus lung disease, depression
plus kidney disease, or depression plus cancer.
In every case, being sicker (i.e., having a second diagnosis of
depression on top of the other chronic disease) led to a wider gap in spending.
Three of the examples are captured in the chart. As expected, there’s very little gender bias
in Medicare spending on heart disease (2% more on men), lung disease (1% more
on men), or kidney disease (4% more on men).
There is a gender bias in spending on cancer, but it favors women (Medicare
pays 26% less on men with cancer).
When you add depression to these
conditions, the spending tilts in favor of men again.
- The 2 percent difference in spending favoring men with heart disease grew to 9 percent when the men and the women had both heart disease and depression.
- The 1 percent difference in spending on lung disease expanded to 13 percent when both lung disease and depression were present.
- And the 4 percent difference in spending favoring men with kidney disease ballooned to 30 percent when both kidney disease and depression were present.
And the cancer spending gap dropped from 26 percent down to
just 15 percent.
The difference is clearly
the depression.
Medicare simply spends less on women with depression, even
when they have other serious chronic conditions. You can decide for yourself about the
reason. Are men underdiagnosed? Are women
overdiagnosed? Are men overtreated? Are
women undertreated?
The CMS data set does not answer those questions.
But it does tell us this – Medicare-eligible men and women
with depression, at least in this age group, are clearly being treated
differently. For whatever reason, the
men are getting more, and the women are getting less.
Today is the start of Mental Health Month. This year’s theme is “Pathways to Wellness.” So here’s my question, similar to last week’s. Is Medicare
clearing better pathways to wellness for men with depression than it is for women?
To reach Paul
Gionfriddo via email: gionfriddopaul@gmail.com. Twitter: @pgionfriddo.
Facebook: www.facebook.com/paul.gionfriddo. LinkedIn:
www.linkedin.com/in/paulgionfriddo/
That’s really a good one and fantastic post and also full of information regarding to health care.
ReplyDeleteThis thing will only be happen when the physicians didn’t take the patients seriously. Timely treatment plays an effective role in the wellness of the patients. For this government should also have to take serious step against such Medicare’s because life is much important and it required a complete sort of solution about wellness. Doctors and Medicare’s are angelic person for the patients and they should have to recognize their duties. For best solution and more satisfactory result Click here