PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 8591928

Ambulatory care practice variation within a Medicaid program.

Abstract

STUDY QUESTIONS: What is the extent of variation in patterns of ambulatory care practice across one state's Medicaid program once case mix is controlled for? How much of this variation in resource consumption is explained by factors linked to the provider, patient, and geographic subarea? DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Practices of all providers delivering care to persons who were continuously enrolled in the Maryland Medicaid program during FY 1988 were studied. A computerized summary of all services received during this year for 134,725 persons was developed using claims data. We also obtained data from the state's beneficiary and provider files and the American Medical Association's masterfile. Each patient was assigned a "usual source of care" (primary provider) based on the actual patterns of service. The Ambulatory Care Group (ACG) measure was used to help control for case mix. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study based on the universe of continuously enrolled Medicaid enrollees in one state. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: After controlling for case mix, the variation in patient resource use by type of primary provider was 19 percent for ambulatory visits, 46 percent for ancillary testing, 61 percent for prescriptions, and 81 percent for hospitalizations. Across Maryland counties, comparing the low- to high-use jurisdiction, there was 41 percent variation in case mix-adjusted visit rates, 72 percent variation in pharmacy use, and 325 percent variation in hospital days. At the individual practice level, physician characteristics explain up to 17 percent of ambulatory resource use and geographic area explains only a few percent, while patient characteristics explain up to 60 percent of variation. CONCLUSIONS: Since a large proportion of variation was explained by patient case mix, it is evident that risk adjustment is essential for these types of analyses. However, even after adjustment, resource use varies considerably across types of ambulatory care provider and region, with consequent implications for efficiency of health services delivery.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J P Weiner, B H Starfield, N R Powe, M E Stuart, D M Steinwachs. 1996. Ambulatory care practice variation within a Medicaid program.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8591928/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

The Assessment of Depression Inventory (ADI): an appraisal of validity in an outpatient sample.

In this study we examined the validity of the Assessment of Depression Inventory (ADI) using outpatient participants. The ADI Depression scale (Dep) was compared to three other measures used to assess depression: Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (ZSDS), and Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). Correlations between the ADI and these three measures were significant. An analysis of the discriminant ability of the ADI Dep scale resulted in sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive power, negative predictive power, hit rate, and area under the curve (92.3%) that were supportive of the scale's effectiveness. The ADI Feigning scale (Fg) was compared to the six PAI validity scales. The Fg scale correlated significantly with the PAI Negative Impression Management (NIM) and Positive Impression Management (PIM) scales, and the Malingering (MAL) and Defensive (DEF) indexes. Directionality was as would be predicted. The ADI did not correlate with the two PAI validity scales derived by discriminant analysis function.

Ambulatory Care↗

How normalised is HIV care in the UK? A survey of current practice and opinion.

OBJECTIVES: The prognosis for individuals infected with HIV has changed dramatically over the past 10 years, with patients living longer and requiring other specialist services. It is apparent that access of other healthcare professionals to clinical information about a patient's HIV care differs between centres in the UK. Lack of awareness of an individual's HIV status may compromise their clinical care. AIM: To establish current practice and identify the views of clinicians caring for patients infected with HIV. METHODS: Lead consultants in all genitourinary medicine departments in the UK were invited to complete a questionnaire regarding use of combined HIV and hospital notes and ability of general practitioners and other hospital specialists to access information about individual patient's HIV care. Clinician's opinions on the "normalisation" of HIV management were also sought. RESULTS: Combined notes (outpatient and inpatient) were used by 12% (16/130) of respondents. The patient's identifying number was used to request blood tests in 86%. Of the respondents, 42% had encountered difficulties in communication that affected delivery of care for an HIV-positive patient. CONCLUSIONS: Centres using combined notes identified a higher frequency of communication with other doctors and specialties, suggesting a higher standard of care. Physicians involved in HIV care should consider combining patients' HIV and hospital notes for improved clinical care.

Ambulatory Care↗