Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Econ Behav Organ. 2015 Nov 1;119:72–83. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2015.07.009

Table A.3.

Out-of-pocket cost estimates, physician spending, for MA PFFS plans offered in 2007.

Age group and health status Mean, TM Mean, MA PFFS 1st percentile 25th percentile 50th percentile 75th percentile 99th percentile
Ages 65–69
  Excellent 17 8 0 7 10 10 12
  Very good 17 9 0 8 11 11 12
  Good 20 13 0 11 16 16 18
  Fair 28 18 0 15 21 22 23
  Poor 35 23 0 18 26 28 31
Ages 70–74
  Excellent 16 9 0 7 11 11 12
  Very good 20 12 0 10 15 15 16
  Good 24 15 0 13 18 19 21
  Fair 33 20 0 16 24 25 26
  Poor 31 21 0 17 24 26 27
Ages 75–79
  Excellent 20 12 0 10 14 15 16
  Very good 22 14 0 12 17 17 19
  Good 27 18 0 15 22 23 24
  Fair 32 21 0 17 24 26 27
  Poor 47 25 0 20 28 31 41
Ages 80–84
  Excellent 21 13 0 11 15 15 17
  Very good 23 14 0 12 17 18 19
  Good 28 18 0 14 21 22 23
  Fair 31 20 0 17 24 25 26
  Poor 37 22 0 18 25 27 29
Ages [85-plus
  Excellent 21 12 0 10 14 15 16
  Very good 24 14 0 12 17 18 19
  Good 26 17 0 14 20 21 22
  Fair 26 19 0 16 22 23 24
  Poor 27 18 0 14 20 22 22

Note: This table presents enrollment-weighted descriptive statistics on physician out-of-pocket cost for the 338 MA PFFS plans that were offered in 2007, separated by age group and health status group. The first column of the table presents the OOPC estimate for TM enrollees. For every age-health status cell, the OOPC associated with the 99th percentile MA PFFS plan is lower than the TM OOPC.