Differences in Health Care Utilization of High-Need and High-Cost Patients of Federally Funded Health Centers Versus Other Primary Care Providers.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Medical Care Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-08 DOI:10.1097/MLR.0000000000001947
Nadereh Pourat, Xiao Chen, Connie Lu, Weihao Zhou, Helen Yu-Lefler, Troyana Benjamin, Hank Hoang, Alek Sripipatana
{"title":"Differences in Health Care Utilization of High-Need and High-Cost Patients of Federally Funded Health Centers Versus Other Primary Care Providers.","authors":"Nadereh Pourat, Xiao Chen, Connie Lu, Weihao Zhou, Helen Yu-Lefler, Troyana Benjamin, Hank Hoang, Alek Sripipatana","doi":"10.1097/MLR.0000000000001947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Primary care providers (PCP) differ in their ability to address the needs and reduce use of costly services among complex Medicaid beneficiaries. Among PCPs, Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)-funded health centers (HCs) are shown to provide high-value care.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We compared health care utilization of complex Medicaid managed care beneficiaries whose PCPs were HCs versus 3 other groups.</p><p><strong>Research design: </strong>Cross-sectional study using propensity score matching comparing health care use by provider type, controlling for demographics, health status, and other covariates.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>California Medicaid administrative data for complex adult managed care beneficiaries with at least 1 primary care visit in 2018.</p><p><strong>Measures: </strong>Primary and specialty care evaluation & management visits and services; emergency department (ED) visits; and hospitalizations. PCPs included HCs, clinics not funded by HRSA, solo, and group practice providers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>HRSA-funded HCs had lower predicted rates of specialty evaluation & management and other services than all others; lower predicted probability of any ED visits than clinics not funded by HRSA [54% (95% CI: 53%-55%) vs. 56% (95% CI: 55%-57%)] and group practice providers [51% (95% CI: 51%-52%) vs. 52% (95% CI: 52%-53%)]; and lower PP of any hospitalizations than solo [20% (95% CI: 19%-20%) vs. 23% (95% CI: 22%-24%)] and group practice providers [21% (95% CI: 20%-21%) vs. 24% (95% CI: 23%-24%)].</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Differences in HC care delivery and practices were associated with lower use of specialty, ED, and hospitalization visits compared with other PCPs for complex Medicaid managed care beneficiaries. Understanding the underlying reasons for these utilization differences may promote better outcomes among these patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":18364,"journal":{"name":"Medical Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001947","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Primary care providers (PCP) differ in their ability to address the needs and reduce use of costly services among complex Medicaid beneficiaries. Among PCPs, Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)-funded health centers (HCs) are shown to provide high-value care.

Objective: We compared health care utilization of complex Medicaid managed care beneficiaries whose PCPs were HCs versus 3 other groups.

Research design: Cross-sectional study using propensity score matching comparing health care use by provider type, controlling for demographics, health status, and other covariates.

Subjects: California Medicaid administrative data for complex adult managed care beneficiaries with at least 1 primary care visit in 2018.

Measures: Primary and specialty care evaluation & management visits and services; emergency department (ED) visits; and hospitalizations. PCPs included HCs, clinics not funded by HRSA, solo, and group practice providers.

Results: HRSA-funded HCs had lower predicted rates of specialty evaluation & management and other services than all others; lower predicted probability of any ED visits than clinics not funded by HRSA [54% (95% CI: 53%-55%) vs. 56% (95% CI: 55%-57%)] and group practice providers [51% (95% CI: 51%-52%) vs. 52% (95% CI: 52%-53%)]; and lower PP of any hospitalizations than solo [20% (95% CI: 19%-20%) vs. 23% (95% CI: 22%-24%)] and group practice providers [21% (95% CI: 20%-21%) vs. 24% (95% CI: 23%-24%)].

Conclusions: Differences in HC care delivery and practices were associated with lower use of specialty, ED, and hospitalization visits compared with other PCPs for complex Medicaid managed care beneficiaries. Understanding the underlying reasons for these utilization differences may promote better outcomes among these patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
联邦资助的医疗中心与其他初级保健提供者的高需求和高成本患者的医疗保健利用差异。
背景:初级保健提供者(PCP)在解决复杂医疗补助受益人的需求和减少使用昂贵服务的能力上存在差异。在pcp中,卫生资源和服务管理局(HRSA)资助的卫生中心(hc)提供了高价值的护理。目的:我们比较了pcp为hc的复杂医疗补助管理医疗受益人与其他3组的医疗保健利用情况。研究设计:横断面研究使用倾向评分匹配比较医疗保健使用的提供者类型,控制人口统计,健康状况和其他协变量。主题:2018年至少有1次初级保健就诊的复杂成人管理医疗受益人的加州医疗补助管理数据。措施:基层和专科护理评估和管理就诊和服务;急诊室(ED)就诊;和住院治疗。pcp包括hc、非HRSA资助的诊所、单独和集体执业提供者。结果:hrsa资助的健康中心的专业评估管理和其他服务的预测率低于其他所有健康中心;任何急诊科就诊的预测概率低于没有HRSA资助的诊所[54% (95% CI: 53%-55%)对56% (95% CI: 55%-57%)]和团体执业提供者[51% (95% CI: 51%-52%)对52% (95% CI: 52%-53%)];并且任何住院治疗的PP低于单独住院治疗[20% (95% CI: 19%-20%)对23% (95% CI: 22%-24%)]和集体执业提供者[21% (95% CI: 20%-21%)对24% (95% CI: 23%-24%)]。结论:对于复杂的医疗补助管理医疗受益人,与其他pcp相比,HC护理交付和实践的差异与专科、急诊科和住院就诊的使用较低有关。了解这些利用差异的潜在原因可能会促进这些患者获得更好的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Care
Medical Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
228
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Rated as one of the top ten journals in healthcare administration, Medical Care is devoted to all aspects of the administration and delivery of healthcare. This scholarly journal publishes original, peer-reviewed papers documenting the most current developments in the rapidly changing field of healthcare. This timely journal reports on the findings of original investigations into issues related to the research, planning, organization, financing, provision, and evaluation of health services.
期刊最新文献
Associations of Homelessness With Primary Care and Acute Care Utilization Among Medicaid-Enrolled Youth. Clinical Outcomes Among High-Risk Primary Care Patients With Diabetic Kidney Disease: Methodological Challenges and Results From the STOP-DKD Study. Children and Youth Are a Critical Part of the American Story of Homelessness. Trajectories and Transitions in Service Use Among Older Veterans at High Risk of Long-Term Institutional Care. Conduct of Large, Multisite, Comparative Clinical Effectiveness Research Studies: Learnings From the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute's Palliative Care Learning Network.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1