I saw this item yesterday afternoon and thought it was worth reading. It is a press release announcing the results of a recent study performed by The American Association for Long Term Care Insurance, and a large multi-national home health company. (You don't see that phrase very often, do you.)
The study seems to be primarily focused on long term care insurance and its benefits, but it also determined that three times as many people are receiving long term care at home than in nursing facilities or assisted living facilities. Of course, it is hard to say exactly what this means, given that the press release does not contain a link to the actual study. (If anyone finds the study, I would be interested in seeing it.) For example, are the numbers of people receiving care only people with some form of long term care insurance or are these numbers a broader sample of the populace. (In other words, does this study include Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries?)
Even if the study is a narrow population, it still reinforces the notion that skilled home health care and unskilled home care are more popular than facilities. This is not news to any of my readers, but to see a study of the population that indicates the ratio is close to three to one provides some compelling evidence that cutting home health reimbursement is not a good idea.
As the Senate debates the Medicare cuts, perhaps Senators should be reminded that your patients (and their constituents) prefer home health care to other forms of long term care . Slashing home health reimbursement in light of its cost effectiveness and popularity is a _____ (feel free to choose any adjective, I'll go with "bad") idea. People may prefer home care to institutionalization by a wide margin, but if there are no Medicare home health agencies in an area due to the draconian cuts, Medicare beneficiaries may be forced into a facilities in the future.
Comments