TABLE 3.

Individual-level characteristics associated with AWV use differences across patients with same provider and clinic.

Characteristics	Estimated difference in the proportion of patients with low AWV use and proportion with regular AWV use	Estimated difference in the proportion of patients with moderate AWV use and proportion with regular AWV use
Reference Cohort	18.7% [17.2%, 20.3%]	26.7% [24.8%, 28.7%]
Age (reference = 66–74)
75–84	−1.1% [−2.1%, −0.1%]	0.5% [−0.8%, 1.7%]
85+	4.2% [2.2%, 6.2%]	7.7% [5.2%, 10.1%]
Female	−2.1% [−3.1%, −1.1%]	−0.2% [−1.5%, 1.0%]
Race/ethnicity (reference = non-Hispanic White)
Hispanic	17.8% [11.6%, 24.0%]	15.9% [9.1%, 22.7%]
Black, non-Hispanic	0.7% [−1.2%, 2.5%]	1.9% [−0.3%, 4.2%]
Number of comorbidities (reference = 0 or 1 condition)
2 or 3 conditions	0.6% [−0.6%, 1.8%]	1.9% [0.4%, 3.3%]
4 or more conditions	2.7% [1.4%, 4.1%]	5.8% [4.1%, 7.4%]
Baseline annual no. primary E&M visits (reference = 0 to 2 visits)
3–5 visits	−4.0% [−5.1%, −2.9%]	−1.0% [−2.4%, 2.8%]
6 or more visits	−3.0% [−4.4%, −1.5%]	2.0% [2.6%, 3.8%]
Baseline annual no. specialty E&M visits (reference = 0 visits)
1–3 visits	1.8% [0.6% 2.9%]	1.8% [0.3%, 3.2%]
4 or more visits	3.7% [2.3%, 5.1%]	3.0% [1.3%, 4.6%]
Medicare Advantage (reference = Fee for Service)	1.2% [0.2%, 2.2%]	0.5% [−0.7%, 1.7%]

Note: (1) We examined two subcohorts. The first subcohort included those with low AWV and regular AWV use, and was used to examine the dichotomous indicator of low AWV use (1) treating regular AWV use as the reference cohort (0). The second subcohort included those with moderate AWV and regular AWV use, and was used to examine the dichotomous indicator of moderate AWV use (1) treating regular AWV use as the reference cohort (0). (2) We used a linear probability regression model with fixed effects for providers and clinics, in addition to the individual-level characteristics. (3) The regression models included all individual and area-level characteristics listed in Table 1. The characteristics listed above in the table are those with a statistically significant estimate. We found no significant differences associated with area-level differences in socioeconomic status, indicating lack of intra-provider and intra-clinic differences across patients with different area-level socioeconomic status. (4) The reference cohort is individuals aged 66–74, male, non-Hispanic White, with Fee for Service coverage, no comorbidities, and no adverse zipcode-level socioeconomic status. The estimate of 18.7% reported above indicates that among the reference cohort, the proportion with low AWV use was 18.7% higher than the proportion with regular AWV use.

Abbreviations: AWV, Annual Wellness Visit; E &M, evaluation and management.