Skip to main content
. 2019 Feb 25;179(4):524–532. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.7639

Table 2. Enrollment Decisions by Plan Star Rating, High Need, and Dual-Eligibility Statusa.

High-Need Dual-Eligibility Status Plan Rating
Overall 2.0-2.5 Stars 3.0-3.5 Stars 4.0-4.5 Stars 5.0 Stars
Non–high need, non–dual eligible
No. of enrollees 11 583 849 154 553 3 812 742 6 367 449 1 249 105
Disenrolled to TM, % (95% CI) 3.3 (3.3-3.3) 25.4 (25.1-25.8) 4.6 (4.9-5.0) 2.4 (2.4-2.4) 1.8 (1.8-1.9)
Same plan, % (95% CI) 77.4 (77.3-77.4) 65.9 (65.5-66.2) 61.8 (61.7-61.9) 84.2 (84.2-84.3) 85.8 (85.6-85.9)
Different plan, % (95% CI) 19.3 (19.3-19.3) 8.7 (8.6-8.9) 33.2 (33.2-33.3) 13.4 (13.4-13.4) 12.4 (12.3-12.6)
High-need, non–dual-eligible
No. of enrollees 722 443 8726 223 184 423 553 66 980
Disenrolled to TM, % (95% CI) 4.6 (4.5-4.6) 23.0 (22.3-23.9) 5.4 (5.3-5.4) 3.5 (3.5-3.6) 4.9 (4.6-5.2)
Same plan, % (95% CI) 74.9 (74.8-74.9) 69.4 (68.7-70.3) 63.1 (62.9-63.3) 82.4 (82.3-82.6) 81.9 (81.3-82.6)
Different plan, % (95% CI) 20.5 (20.4-20.6) 7.5 (7.1-7.8) 31.5 (31.3-31.7) 14.1 (14.0-14.2) 13.2 (12.6-13.8)
Non–high-need, dual-eligible
No. of enrollees 1 344 746 32 312 672 250 583 326 56 858
Disenrolled to TM, % (95% CI) 4.6 (4.5-4.7) 28.0 (26.6-29.4) 7.3 (7.1-7.5) 3.3 (3.2-3.4) 2.4 (2.1-2.7)
Same plan, % (95% CI) 77.9 (77.8-78.1) 65.7 (64.2-67.2) 61.7 (61.4-62.1) 84.3 (84.1-84.5) 85.6 (84.8-86.3)
Different plan, % (95% CI) 17.4 (17.2-17.6) 6.3 (5.7-6.8) 31.0 (30.7-31.3) 12.4 (12.2-12.5) 12.0 (11.3-12.7)
High-need, dual-eligible
No. of enrollees 250 778 6182 120 250 113 327 11 019
Disenrolled to TM, % (95% CI) 14.8 (14.5-15.0) 42.8 (40.5-45.1) 16.0 (15.6-16.3) 12.9 (12.7-13.2) 11.3 (10.2-12.5)
Same plan, % (95% CI) 67.2 (66.9-67.5) 51.8 (49.5-54.1) 55.6 (55.1-56.1) 74.4 (74.0-74.8) 75.1 (73.3-76.9)
Different plan, % (95% CI) 18.0 (17.8-18.3) 5.4 (4.6-6.1) 28.5 (28.0-28.9) 12.7 (12.4-12.9) 13.6 (12.0-15.1)

Abbreviation: TM, traditional Medicare.

a

All percentages are adjusted marginal means from multinomial logit models adjusted for plan and patient characteristics and fully interacted with high-need status. We fit 2 models, one with non–dual eligibility only, and the other with dual-eligibility only. An unadjusted version is available in the eTable 2 in the Supplement.