Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The patient-centered medical home (PCMH)
is widely promoted as a model to improve the quality of
primary care and lead to more efficient use of health care
services. Few studies have examined the relationship between
PCMH implementation at the practice level and health care utilization by children. Existing studies show mixed results.
METHODS: Using practice-reported PCMH assessments and
Medicaid claims from child-serving practices in 3 states participating in the Childrens Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 Quality Demonstration Grant Program, this
study estimates the association between medical homeness (tertiles) and receipt of well-child care and nonurgent, preventable,
or avoidable emergency department (ED) use. Multilevel logistic regression models are estimated on data from 32 practices in
Illinois (IL) completing the National Committee for Quality Assurances (NCQA) medical home self-assessment and 32 practices in North Carolina (NC) and South Carolina (SC)
completing the Medical Home Index (MHI) or Medical Home
IndexRevised Short Form (MHI-RSF).
RESULTS: Medical homeness was not associated with receipt of
age-appropriate well-child visits in either sample. Associations be-
WHATS NEW
Committee for Quality Assurances (NCQA) PCMH recognition program4 and the Medical Home Index (MHI), often
used for internal quality improvement and practice transformation.5 However, little research has examined the relationship between PCMH implementation, as reflected in
these practice-level PCMH measures, and childrens use
of health services. Studies that examine parent-reported
medical homeness and health care utilization are more
common and are often based on data from a few large national surveys.6 These studies have had mixed findings. In
the general pediatric population, parent-reported care in a
medical home has been associated with increased receipt
of well-child care,79 decreased emergency department
(ED) use,7,8 and no differences in hospitalizations.8 In children with chronic conditions, parent-reported care in a
medical home has been associated with no differences in
receipt of preventive care,10,11 mixed results for ED
visits,10,12,13 and no differences in hospitalizations.10
267
268
CHRISTENSEN ET AL
Two published studies that have examined the relationship between practice-reported PCMH measures and
health care utilization by children also show mixed results.
In a study of children with chronic conditions in 43 primary
care practices in multiple states, Cooley et al14 found that
children were less likely to be hospitalized if their primary
care practice scored higher on the MHI, but there was no
reduction in ED use, a key target of many PCMH efforts.5
In a study of 296 primary care practices in Michigan, Paustian et al15 found that children were more likely to receive
preventive services but had no differences in overall costs
when receiving care in practices that scored higher on an
insurer-specific practice-level PCMH measure.
The aim of the present analysis was to assess the relationship between practice-reported medical homeness
and health service use by children enrolled in Medicaid
in 3 states. We hypothesized that children would be more
likely to attend preventive care visits and less likely to
use the ED for nonurgent, potentially avoidable, and primary caretreatable conditions when receiving care in primary care practices with higher levels of medical
homeness. A secondary aim was to assess whether the association between medical homeness and health care use
differed for children with chronic conditions and disabilities versus all other children. Given the widespread promotion and implementation of the PCMH model, more
information is needed to understand the association between practice-level measures of the PCMH and health
care utilization for children in a variety of populations.
This analysis helps fill the gap in the current literature.
METHODS
DATA
We performed a cross-sectional analysis assessing the
relationship between practice-reported medical homeness
and health service use by children enrolled in Medicaid
in 64 practices in 3 states participating in the Childrens
Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA)
Quality Demonstration Grant Program: Illinois (IL), North
Carolina (NC), and South Carolina (SC).16 The 2009 CHIPRA legislation authorized $100 million in grants to states
to test various approaches to improve the quality of health
care for children in the United States, particularly publicly
insured children. As part of this effort, several states pursued projects to promote the implementation of the
PCMH model in primary care practices serving children.
The 3 states in this analysis have varied histories with primary care transformation and represent different state
Medicaid contexts, including managed care penetration.
Intervention practices in all 3 states volunteered to participate with the aim of primary care practice transformation.
NC and SC also recruited comparison practices. This analysis uses baseline data that were collected for the national
evaluation of the program, funded by the Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).16
Medical homeness was assessed via standardized
practice-reported surveys. Each state selected the medical
home assessment that was most appropriate for its demon-
ACADEMIC PEDIATRICS
ACADEMIC PEDIATRICS
269
RESULTS
The IL sample included 33,895 publicly insured children
attributed to 32 practices (Table 1). The NC/SC sample
included 57,553 children in 32 practices, primarily in
NC. In both samples, the number of children in FFS or
PCCM Medicaid per practice ranged widely, from 34 to
over 10,700. Over half of the children in both samples
CHRISTENSEN ET AL
270
ACADEMIC PEDIATRICS
State
No. of Children
(018 y)
in Medicaid
No. of Children
Attributed to
Demonstration
Practices
No. of Children
in Analytic
Sample*
No. of Demonstration
Practices With
Complete Data
1,599,800
1,632,819
40,353
92,882
33,895
57,553
32
32
469 (349,803)
846 (3610,714)
1,055,162
577,657
73,715
19,167
46,632
10,921
18
14
1,819 (26110,714)
583 (362,596)
Illinois
North Carolina/
South Carolina
North Carolina
South Carolina
*Children were included in the sample if they were continuously enrolled in fee for service or primary care case management Medicaid, had
no other source of coverage, had full benefits not through a waiver program, were not institutionalized, and the practice they were attributed to
completed a medical home assessment.
North Carolina
South Carolina
Characteristic
Total
Age group
05 y
612 y
1318 y
Sex
Male
Female
Race/ethnicity
Black
White
Other
Chronic condition or disability (yes)
Health care utilization
Appropriate receipt of well-child
visits
Any nonurgent, preventable, or
avoidable ED visit
33,895
100
57,553
100
46,632
100
10,921
100
18,081
10,498
5,316
53
31
16
32,510
17,362
7,681
56
30
14
26,810
13,936
5,886
57
30
13
5,700
3,426
1,795
52
31
16
17,197
16,698
51
49
29,584
27,969
51
49
23,943
22,689
51
49
5,641
5,280
52
48
15,204
10,644
8,047
10,384
45
31
24
31
18,886
26,059
12,608
19,360
33
45
22
34
14,316
21,643
10,673
15,695
31
46
23
34
4,570
4,416
1,935
3,665
42
40
18
34
25,659
76
36,455
64
29,831
65
6,624
62
10,103
30
15,914
28
12,808
27
3,106
28
ACADEMIC PEDIATRICS
%
100
34
34
31
100
NA
34
66
31
34
34
DISCUSSION
This study contributes to the small but growing body of
evidence on the association between medical homeness
and childrens health care utilization. In this crosssectional baseline analysis of practices participating in
the CHIPRA Quality Demonstration Grant Program, medical home level was not associated with age-appropriate
receipt of WCV among practices completing either the
MHI/MHI-RSF or the NCQA self-assessment. These results differ from findings by Paustian et al.15 There may
be a methodological explanation for null results: children
are only included in the sample if they had a well-child
or other ambulatory visit during the measurement year.
Although we are able to attribute approximately 70% to
80% of children in FFS or PCCM Medicaid, depending
on the state, it is possible that if we were able to attribute
children with no visits to practices there might be significant variation across medical home levels.
The association between nonurgent, preventable, or
avoidable ED visits and medical homeness varied depending on the sample and PCMH measure. Among practices in
IL that completed the NCQA 2011 medical home selfassessment, children who received care in practices with
high medical home scores were less likely to have a nonurgent, preventable, or avoidable ED visit than practices with
271
Low MH
Medium MH
High MH
Illinois (NCQA
Self-Assessment)
n 7,507
n 8,917
n 17,471
58
30
12
53
30
16
51
32
17
52
48
51
49
50
50
27
49
24
29
21
50
29
30
65
14
21
31
n 10,687
n 15,055
n 31,811
53
31
15
55
31
14
58
29
12
52
48
51
49
51
49
34
40
26
37
27
57
16
31
35
42
23
34
53
47
14
86
23
77
40
60
82
18
95
5
Age group
05 y
612 y
1318 y
Sex
Male
Female
Race/ethnicity
Black
White
Other
Chronic condition or
disability (yes)
North Carolina/South
Carolina (MHI/MHI-RSF)
Age group
05 y
612 y
1318 y
Sex
Male
Female
Race/ethnicity
Black
White
Other
Chronic condition or
disability (yes)
Practice geography*
Urban/suburban
Rural
State
North Carolina
South Carolina
272
CHRISTENSEN ET AL
ACADEMIC PEDIATRICS
Unadjusted
%
Regression
Adjusted %
Adjusted
OR
77
74
76
1.02
0.91
(ref)
63
69
69
Regression
Adjusted %
Adjusted
OR
0.711.46
0.641.30
30
27
31
23
26
29
0.65*
0.90
(ref)
0.470.92
0.651.27
0.77
1.03
(ref)
0.471.26
0.681.55
25
31
29
27
29
29
0.92
0.99
(ref)
0.701.20
0.791.25
63
73
73
0.62
0.99
(ref)
0.341.15
0.511.91
25
33
29
28
29
31
0.86
0.91
(ref)
0.591.25
0.611.36
75
60
61
1.88
0.95
(ref)
0.754.74
0.581.57
27
26
30
25
26
26
0.96
1.04
(ref)
0.551.66
0.771.41
95% CI
95% CI
OR indicates odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; NCQA, National Committee for Quality Assurance; MH, medical home; MHI/MHI-RSF,
Medical Home Index/Medical Home IndexRevised Short Form.
*P < .05.
All models adjusted for: child age, race/ethnicity, and chronic conditions/disability status. NC/SC models further adjusted for number of
providers in the practice, practice geography (urban/suburban, rural), and state.
MHI-RSF includes only one item for Communication/Access, which does not specifically reference after-hours access or electronic access. It is possible that variation in
access to care was not well measured in the NC/SC sample.
Alternatively, given that these tools were used in
different states, the state Medicaid context and prior incentives for medical home implementation may also explain
the differences. For example, the racial composition of
children in the high medical homeness group varies across
the NC/SC and the IL samples. Although we controlled for
race in our models, these differences may be indicative of
other unobserved variations that could contribute to our results.
Variations in regression modeling across samples are unlikely to account for the difference in inferences. Although
we controlled for practice characteristics in the NC/SC
model but not the IL model (due to lack of data), the inferences regarding medical homeness did not change when we
removed practice characteristics from the NC/SC model in
sensitivity testing.
Several limitations of our study are important to note.
Medical homeness scores were self-reported by practices
and not verified against documentation. Practices volunteered to participate in the demonstration program and
may not be representative of child-serving practices statewide. Like many studies of Medicaid service use, our findings might not be generalizable to publicly insured children
who are enrolled in managed care (other than PCCM)
because we were unable to include those children in our analyses. In 2010, 71% of children with Medicaid in SC were
enrolled in traditional managed care (vs 0% of children in
NC and 9% of children in IL), making generalizability
ACADEMIC PEDIATRICS
CONCLUSIONS
With the CHIPRA Quality Demonstration Grant Program and other PCMH demonstrations currently underway, the evidence base on pediatric PCMH impacts will
expand over the next several years. Although our findings
suggest a potential association between medical homeness
and nonurgent, preventable, or avoidable ED use, the
mixed results of this and previous studies imply a need to
recognize the effects that differences in PCMH measurement tools and state policy context may have on the
research findings.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
All phases of this study were supported by a contract with the US
Department
of
Health
and
Human
Services,
AHRQ
(HHSA290200900019I/HHSA29032004T). The authors wish to
acknowledge Carl Cooley, MD, co-chair of the National Center for Medical Home Implementation; Sarah Scholle, PhD, of the National Committee for Quality Assurance; Genevieve Kenney, PhD, of the Urban Institute;
Catherine McLaughlin, PhD, of Mathematica Policy Research; and Cindy
Brach, MPP, and Linda Bergofsky, MSW, MBA, of the AHRQ for
providing valuable comments. We also thank the demonstration project
staff and state Medicaid agency staff who provided data and guidance.
Preliminary results from this study were presented at the Academy Health
Annual Research Meeting, June 23, 2013, in Baltimore, Md.
REFERENCES
1. Patient-Centered Primary Care Collaborative. Joint principles of
the patient-centered medical home. Available at: http://www.aafp.
org/dam/AAFP/documents/practice_management/pcmh/initiatives/
PCMHJoint.pdf. Accessed October 14, 2013.
273
274
CHRISTENSEN ET AL
ACADEMIC PEDIATRICS
28. Johnson WG, Rimsza ME. The effects of access to pediatric care and
insurance coverage on emergency department utilization. Pediatrics.
2004;113:483487.
29. Zickafoose JS, DeCamp LR, Prosser LA. Association between
enhanced access services in pediatric primary care and utilization
of emergency departments: a national parent survey. J Pediatr.
2013;163:13891395.
30. Wang C, Villar ME, Mulligan DA, et al. Cost and utilization analysis
of a pediatric emergency department diversion project. Pediatrics.
2005;116:10751079.
31. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Medicaid Statistical Information System (MSIS) state summary datamarts, 2010. Available at:
http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/ComputerData-and-Systems/MedicaidDataSourcesGenInfo/MSIS-Mart-Home.
html. Accessed October 16, 2013.
32. Peikes D, Dale S, Lundquist E, et al. Building the Evidence Base for
the Medical Home: What Sample and Sample Size Do Studies Need?.
Rockville, Md: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2011.
AHRQ Publication No. 11-0100-EF. White paper prepared by Mathematica Policy Research under contract HHSA290200900019I TO2.