Dataset Information

Association between medical home enrollment and health care utilization and costs among breast cancer patients in a state Medicaid program.

ABSTRACT: The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is increasingly being implemented in an effort to improve and coordinate primary care, but its effect on health care utilization among breast cancer patients remains unclear. The objective of this study was to examine health care utilization and expenditures as a function of PCMH enrollment among breast cancer patients in North Carolina's Medicaid program.North Carolina Medicaid claims linked to North Carolina Central Cancer Registry records (2003-2007) were used to examine monthly patterns of health care use and expenditures. Controlling for a selection bias for time-invariant characteristics, fixed effects regression models analyzed associations between PCMH enrollment and utilization of outpatient, inpatient, and emergency department (ED) services and Medicaid expenditures during the 15 months after the diagnosis of breast cancer.Among 758 breast cancer patients, 381 (50%) were enrolled in a PCMH at some time in the 15 months after diagnosis. After controlling for individual fixed effects, PCMH enrollment was significantly associated with greater outpatient service use, but there was no difference in the probability of inpatient hospitalizations or ED visits. Enrollment in a PCMH was associated with increased average expenditures of $429 per month during the first 15 months.Greater outpatient care utilization and increased average expenditures among breast cancer patients enrolled in a PCMH may suggest that these women have improved access to primary and specialty care. Expanding PCMHs may change patterns of service utilization for Medicaid breast cancer patients but may not be associated with lower costs.

SUBMITTER: Kohler RE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5004988 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association between medical home enrollment and health care utilization and costs among breast cancer patients in a state Medicaid program.

Kohler Racquel E RE Goyal Ravi K RK Lich Kristen Hassmiller KH Domino Marisa Elena ME Wheeler Stephanie B SB

Cancer 20150819 22

<h4>Background</h4>The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is increasingly being implemented in an effort to improve and coordinate primary care, but its effect on health care utilization among breast cancer patients remains unclear. The objective of this study was to examine health care utilization and expenditures as a function of PCMH enrollment among breast cancer patients in North Carolina's Medicaid program.<h4>Methods</h4>North Carolina Medicaid claims linked to North Carolina Central Ca ...[more]

PMID: 26287506

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceMedicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program cover almost 50% of children with special health care needs (CSHCN). CSHCN often require specialty services and have been increasingly enrolled in Medicaid managed care (MMC) plans, but there is a dearth of recent national studies on specialty care access among publicly insured children and particularly CSHCN.ObjectiveTo provide recent, nationwide evidence on the association of MMC penetration with specialty care access among publicly insured children, with a special focus on CSHCN.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used nationally representative data from the 2016 to 2019 National Survey of Children's Health to identify publicly insured children in 41 states that administered comprehensive managed care organizations for Medicaid. Data analysis was performed from May 2022 to March 2023.ExposureForm CMS-416 data were used to measure state-year level share of Medicaid-enrolled children who were covered by MMC (ie, MMC penetration).Main outcomes and measuresMeasures of specialty care access included whether, in the past year, the child had (1) any visit to non-mental health (MH) specialists, (2) any visit to MH professionals, and (3) any unmet health care needs and (4) whether the caregiver ever felt frustrated getting services for their child. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association of MMC penetration with specialty care access among all publicly insured children, and separately for CSHCN and non-CSHCN.ResultsAmong 20 029 publicly insured children, 7164 (35.8%) were CSHCN, 9537 (48.2%) were female, 4110 (37.2%) were caregiver-reported Hispanic, and 2812 (21.4%) were caregiver-reported non-Hispanic Black (all percentages are weighted). MMC was not associated with significant changes in any visit to non-MH specialists and unmet health care needs. In addition, MMC penetration was positively associated with caregiver frustration among all children (adjusted odds ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.03-1.48; P = .02) and was negatively associated with any visit to MH professionals among CSHCN (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.98; P = .04).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study evaluating MMC and specialty care access for publicly insured children, increased MMC enrollment was not associated with improved specialty care access for publicly insured children, including CSHCN. MMC was associated with less access to specialties like MH and increased frustrations among caregivers seeking services for their children.

Project description:ImportanceInterventions to transform primary care practices into medical homes are increasingly common, but their effectiveness in improving quality and containing costs is unclear.ObjectiveTo measure associations between participation in the Southeastern Pennsylvania Chronic Care Initiative, one of the earliest and largest multipayer medical home pilots conducted in the United States, and changes in the quality, utilization, and costs of care.Design, setting, and participantsThirty-two volunteering primary care practices participated in the pilot (conducted from June 1, 2008, to May 31, 2011). We surveyed pilot practices to compare their structural capabilities at the pilot's beginning and end. Using claims data from 4 participating health plans, we compared changes (in each year, relative to before the intervention) in the quality, utilization, and costs of care delivered to 64,243 patients who were attributed to pilot practices and 55,959 patients attributed to 29 comparison practices (selected for size, specialty, and location similar to pilot practices) using a difference-in-differences design.ExposuresPilot practices received disease registries and technical assistance and could earn bonus payments for achieving patient-centered medical home recognition by the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA).Main outcomes and measuresPractice structural capabilities; performance on 11 quality measures for diabetes, asthma, and preventive care; utilization of hospital, emergency department, and ambulatory care; standardized costs of care.ResultsPilot practices successfully achieved NCQA recognition and adopted new structural capabilities such as registries to identify patients overdue for chronic disease services. Pilot participation was associated with statistically significantly greater performance improvement, relative to comparison practices, on 1 of 11 investigated quality measures: nephropathy screening in diabetes (adjusted performance of 82.7% vs 71.7% by year 3, P < .001). Pilot participation was not associated with statistically significant changes in utilization or costs of care. Pilot practices accumulated average bonuses of $92,000 per primary care physician during the 3-year intervention.Conclusions and relevanceA multipayer medical home pilot, in which participating practices adopted new structural capabilities and received NCQA certification, was associated with limited improvements in quality and was not associated with reductions in utilization of hospital, emergency department, or ambulatory care services or total costs over 3 years. These findings suggest that medical home interventions may need further refinement.

Project description:ImportanceCareFirst, the largest commercial insurer in the mid-Atlantic Region of the United States, runs a medical home program focusing on financial incentives for primary care practices and care coordination for high-risk patients. From 2013 to 2015, CareFirst extended the program to Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries in participating practices. If the model extension improved quality while reducing spending, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services could expand the program to Medicare beneficiaries broadly.ObjectiveTo test whether extending CareFirst's program to Medicare FFS patients improves care processes and reduces hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and spending.Design, setting, and participantsThis difference-in-differences analysis compared outcomes for roughly 35 000 Medicare FFS patients attributed to 52 intervention practices (grouped by CareFirst into 14 "medical panels") to outcomes for 69 000 Medicare patients attributed to 42 matched comparison panels during a 1-year baseline period and 2.5-year intervention at Maryland primary care practices.Main outcomes and measuresHospitalizations (all-cause and ambulatory-care sensitive), emergency department visits, Medicare Part A and B spending, and 3 quality-of-care process measures: ambulatory care within 14 days of a hospital stay, cholesterol testing for those with ischemic vascular disease, and a composite measure for those with diabetes.InterventionsCareFirst hired nurses who worked with patients' usual primary care practitioners to coordinate care for 3656 high-risk Medicare patients. CareFirst paid panels rewards for meeting cost and quality targets for their Medicare patients and advised panels on how to meet these targets based on analyses of claims data.ResultsOn average, each of the 14 intervention panels had 9.3 primary care practitioners and was attributed 2202 Medicare FFS patients in the baseline period. The panels' attributed Medicare patients were, on average, 73.8 years old, 59.2% female, and 85.1% white. The extension of CareFirst's program to Medicare patients was not statistically associated with improvements in any outcomes, either for the full Medicare population or for a high-risk subgroup in which impacts were expected to be largest. For the full population, the difference-in-differences estimates were 1.4 hospitalizations per 1000 patients per quarter (P = .54; 90% CI, -2.1 to 5.0), -2.5 outpatient ED visits per 1000 patients per quarter (P = .26; 90% CI, -6.2 to 1.1), and -$1 per patient per month in Medicare Part A and B spending (P = .98; 90% CI, -$40 to $39). For hospitalizations and Medicare spending, the 90% CIs did not span CareFirst's expected impacts. Hospitalizations for the intervention group declined by 10% from baseline year to the final 18 months of the intervention, but this was matched by similar declines in the comparison group.Conclusion and relevanceThe extension of CareFirst's program to Medicare did not measurably improve quality-of-care processes or reduce service use or spending for Medicare patients. Further program refinement and testing would be needed to support scaling the program more broadly to Medicare patients.

Dataset Information

Association between medical home enrollment and health care utilization and costs among breast cancer patients in a state Medicaid program.

Publications

Association between medical home enrollment and health care utilization and costs among breast cancer patients in a state Medicaid program.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets