Telehealth Impact in Frontier Critical Access Hospitals: Mixed Methods Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Frontier areas are sparsely populated counties in states where 65% of the counties have 6 or fewer residents per square mile. Residents access primary care at critical access hospitals (CAHs) located in these rural communities but must travel great distances for specialty care. Telehealth could address access challenges; however, there are barriers to broader use, including reimbursement and the need for practical implementation support. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services implemented the Frontier Community Health Integration Project (FCHIP) Demonstration to assess the impact of telehealth payment change and technical assistance to adopt and sustainably use telehealth for CAHs treating Medicare fee-for-service patients in frontier regions. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the impact of the FCHIP Demonstration telehealth payment change and technical assistance on telehealth adoption and ongoing use using a mixed methods approach. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods evaluation of the 8 CAHs in Montana, Nevada, and North Dakota that participated in the FCHIP program. Key informant interviews and FCHIP program document review were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis to understand how CAHs implemented their telehealth programs and the facilitators of program adoption and maintenance. Medicare fee-for-service claims were analyzed from August 2013 to July 2019 relative to a group of CAHs that did not participate in the demonstration project to understand the frequency of telehealth use for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries receiving care at the participating CAHs before and during the Demonstration program. RESULTS: CAH staff noted several key factors for establishing and sustaining a telehealth program: clinical and administrative staff champions, infrastructure changes, training on telehealth processes, and establishing strong relationships with specialists at distant facilities to deliver telehealth services to patients of CAH. There was a modest increase in telehealth services billed to Medicare during the FCHIP Demonstration that were limited to a handful of CAHs. CONCLUSIONS: The frontier setting is characterized by a low population; and thus, the volumes of telehealth services provided in both the CAHs and comparison sites are low. Overall, CAHs reported that patient satisfaction was high and expressed the desire for more virtual services. Telehealth service selection was informed by perceived community needs and specialist availability. CAHs made infrastructure changes to support telehealth and expressed the desire for more virtual services. Implementation support services helped CAHs integrate telehealth into clinical and operational workflows. There was some increase in telehealth services billed to Medicare, but the volume billed was low and not enough to substantially improve hospital revenue. Future work to inform policy and practice could include standardized, formal community need assessments and assistance finding distant providers to meet those needs and further technical assistance around billing, service selection, and ongoing use to support sustainability.

Health Care Impacts Of Resource Navigation For Health-Related Social Needs In The Accountable Health Communities Model.

Social determinants of health can adversely affect health and therefore lead to poor health care outcomes. When it launched in 2017, the Accountable Health Communities (AHC) Model was at the forefront of US health policy initiatives seeking to address social determinants of health. The AHC Model, sponsored by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, screened Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries for health-related social needs and offered eligible beneficiaries assistance in connecting with community services. This study used data from the period 2015-21 to test whether the model had impacts on health care spending and use. Findings show statistically significant reductions in emergency department visits for both Medicaid and fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries. Impacts on other outcomes were not statistically significant, but low statistical power may have limited our ability to detect model effects. Interviews with AHC Model participants who were offered navigation services to help them find community-based resources suggested that navigation services could have directly affected the way in which beneficiaries engage with the health care system, leading them to be more proactive in seeking appropriate care. Collectively, findings provide mixed evidence that engaging with beneficiaries who have health-related social needs can affect health care outcomes.

Factors Influencing Telehealth Implementation and Use in Frontier Critical Access Hospitals: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth has potential to help individuals in rural areas overcome geographical barriers and to improve access to care. The factors that influence the implementation and use of telehealth in critical access hospitals are in need of exploration. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to understand the factors that influenced telehealth uptake and use in a set of frontier critical access hospitals in the United States. METHODS: This work was conducted as part of a larger evaluation of a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services-funded demonstration program to expand cost-based reimbursement for services for Medicare beneficiaries for frontier critical access hospitals. Our sample was 8 critical access hospitals in Montana, Nevada, and North Dakota that implemented the telehealth aspect of that demonstration. We reviewed applications and progress reports for the demonstration program and conducted in-person site visits. We used a semistructured discussion guide to facilitate conversations with clinical, administrative, and information technology staff. Using NVivo software (QSR International), we coded the notes from the interviews and then analyzed the themes. RESULTS: Several factors influenced the implementation and use of telehealth in critical access hospitals, including making changes to workflow and infrastructure as well as practitioner acceptance and availability. Participants also cited technical assistance and support for implementation as supportive factors. CONCLUSIONS: Frontier critical access hospitals may adopt telehealth to overcome challenges such as distance from specialty practitioners and workforce challenges. Telehealth can be used for provider-to-patient and provider-to-provider interactions to improve access to care, remove barriers, and improve quality. However, the ability of telehealth to improve outcomes is limited by factors such as workflow and infrastructure changes, practitioner acceptance and availability, and financing.

Medicaid Behavioral Health Homes: Lessons Learned and Early Findings From Maine.

OBJECTIVE: Individuals with serious mental illnesses represent a high-need, high-cost population. To address this population's needs under the State Innovation Models Initiative, Maine assisted Medicaid-participating behavioral health providers in changing to behavioral health homes (BHHs). The authors explored BHHs' experiences in transforming care from 2014 to 2017 and investigated changes in utilization, care coordination, and Medicaid expenditures before and after Medicaid-covered individuals enrolled in a BHH. METHODS: The authors interviewed stakeholders, conducted focus groups with BHH consumers and providers, and used pre-post analyses of Medicaid fee-for-service claims. Program features such as capitated payments, connection to the state's health information exchange, and one-on-one technical assistance altered delivery of behavioral health care. RESULTS: Interviewees reported some challenges, such as understanding team roles, sharing clinical data, and integrating care with primary care providers. Analyses of data for 7,560 BHH enrollees with serious and persistent mental illness (adults) or serious emotional disturbance (children) indicated no changes in inpatient admissions, 30-day inpatient readmissions, emergency department visits, behavioral health-related expenditures, and professional expenditures after the switch to the BHH model. Total Medicaid expenditures increased by $170 per beneficiary per month. The BHH model did not change several measures of utilization and expenditures, but it was well received by behavioral health providers. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid programs experimenting with new care delivery models for individuals with complex conditions may look to the Maine experience for guidance in program design.

Use of Primary Care and Specialty Providers: Findings from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

BACKGROUND: A comprehensive picture of how the US population engages in specialty care use is lacking, even though redesign models focused on specialty care are becoming more popular. OBJECTIVE: To describe the type of provider, primary care or specialist, most often seen by individuals, to test associations between type of provider most often seen and insurance coverage, and to test associations between the number of generalist and specialist visits and insurance coverage. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of 2013-2016 Medicaid Expenditure Panel Survey. Logistic and negative binomial models were used in multivariate regression modeling. PARTICIPANTS: Depending on the analysis, the study samples include between 71,402 and 79,518 US residents. MAIN MEASURES: Individuals' provider type most often seen, primary care visits, and specialist visits were reported. KEY RESULTS: More than half of the sample (55%) predominantly visited primary care providers (or generalists), and 36% predominantly visited specialists. Among individuals primarily visiting generalists, 80% visited only one type of primary care provider, and 24% also visited one or more specialists. Among individuals primarily visiting specialists, 48% visited only one type of specialist, and 47% did not visit any generalists in the year. Among Medicare enrollees, 50% predominantly visited specialists, and 40% predominantly visited generalists. Medicare enrollment was associated with greater odds of predominantly visiting specialists (p < 0.05), and Medicare-Medicaid enrollment and having no insurance were associated with lower odds of predominantly visiting specialists (p < 0.05). Medicare enrollment was associated with 13% more generalist visits and 35% more specialist visits, and Medicare-Medicaid enrollment was associated with 38% more generalist visits and 15% more specialist visits (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Given the overall frequency of specialty care use and the reliance on multiple specialists in any given year, particularly among Medicare enrollees, public payers are uniquely positioned to promote specialty care redesign and champion improved coordination between specialists.

Multi-Payer Advanced Primary Care Practice Demonstration on quality of care.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated whether primary care practices in the Medicare Multi-Payer Advanced Primary Care Practice (MAPCP) Demonstration improved the quality of care and patient outcomes for beneficiaries. STUDY DESIGN: For our quantitative analyses, we employed a pre-post study design with a comparison group using enrollment data, Medicare fee-for-service claims data, and Medicaid managed care and fee-for-service claims data, covering the period 2 to 4 years before Medicare joined the state patient-centered medical home initiatives through December 2014. We used difference-in-differences (DID) regression analysis to compare quality and outcomes in the period before and after the demonstration began. METHODS: We examined the extent to which MAPCP and comparison group beneficiaries received up to 11 process and preventive care measures, as well as 4 measures of potentially avoidable hospitalizations to assess patient outcomes. RESULTS: Analyses of Medicare and Medicaid data did not consistently reflect the positive impacts intended by the demonstration. Our descriptive and DID analysis found an inconsistent pattern among the process-of-care results, and there were some significant unfavorable associations between participation in MAPCP and avoidable hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses showed few statistically significant, favorable impacts on quality metrics among Medicare or Medicaid beneficiaries receiving care from MAPCP practices.

Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations in Four States: Implementation and Early Impacts.

Policy Points Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Vermont leveraged State Innovation Model awards to implement Medicaid accountable care organizations (ACOs). Flexibility in model design, ability to build on existing reforms, provision of technical assistance to providers, and access to feedback data all facilitated ACO development. Challenges included sustainability of transformation efforts and the integration of health care and social service providers. Early estimates showed promising improvements in hospital-related utilization and Vermont was able to reduce or slow the growth of Medicaid costs. These states are sustaining Medicaid ACOs owing in part to provider support and early successes in generating shared savings. The states are modifying their ACOs to include greater accountability and financial risk. CONTEXT: As state Medicaid programs consider alternative payment models (APMs), many are choosing accountable care organizations (ACOs) as a way to improve health outcomes, coordinate care, and reduce expenditures. Four states (Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Vermont) leveraged State Innovation Model awards to create or expand Medicaid ACOs. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods design to assess achievements and challenges with ACO implementation and the impact of Medicaid ACOs on health care utilization, quality, and expenditures in three states. We integrated findings from key informant interviews, focus groups, document review, and difference-in-difference analyses using data from Medicaid claims and an all-payer claims database. FINDINGS: States built their Medicaid ACOs on existing health care reforms and infrastructure. Facilitators of implementation included allowing flexibility in design and implementation, targeting technical assistance, and making clinical, cost, and use data readily available to providers. Barriers included provider concerns about their ability to influence patient behavior, sustainability of provider practice transformation efforts when shared savings are reinvested into the health system and not shared with participating clinicians, and limited integration between health care and social service providers. Medicaid ACOs were associated with some improvements in use, quality, and expenditures, including statistically significant reductions in emergency department visits. Only Vermont's ACO demonstrated slower growth in total Medicaid expenditures. CONCLUSIONS: Four states demonstrated that adoption of ACOs for Medicaid beneficiaries was both possible and, for three states, associated with some improvements in care. States revised these models over time to address stakeholder concerns, increase provider participation, and enable some providers to accept financial risk for Medicaid patients. Lessons learned from these early efforts can inform the design and implementation of APMs in other Medicaid programs.

Behavioral Health Integration With Primary Care: Implementation Experience and Impacts From the State Innovation Model Round 1 States.

Policy Points Individuals with behavioral health (BH) conditions comprise a medically complex population with high costs and high health care needs. Considering national shortages of BH providers, primary care providers serve a critical role in identifying and treating BH conditions and making referrals to BH providers. States are increasingly seeking ways to address BH conditions among their residents. States funded by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services under the first round of the State Innovation Models (SIM) Initiative all invested in BH integration. States found sharing data among providers, bridging professional divides, and overcoming BH provider shortages were key barriers. Nonetheless, states made significant strides in integrating BH care. Beyond payment models, a key catalyst for change was facilitating informal relationships between BH providers and primary care physicians. Infrastructure investments such as promoting data sharing by connecting BH providers to a health information exchange and providing tailored technical assistance for both BH and primary care providers were also important in improving integration of BH care. CONTEXT: Increasing numbers of states are looking for ways to address behavioral health (BH) conditions among their residents. The first round of the State Innovation Models (SIM) Initiative provided financial and technical support to six states since 2013 to test the ability of state governments to lead health care system transformation. All six SIM states invested in integration of BH and primary care services. This study summarizes states' progress, challenges, and lessons learned on BH integration. Additionally, the study reports impacts on expenditure, utilization, and quality-of-care outcomes for persons with BH conditions across four SIM states. METHODS: We use a mixed-methods design, drawing on focus groups and key informant interviews to reach conclusions on implementation and quantitative analysis using Medicaid claims data to assess impact. For three Medicaid accountable care organization (ACO) models funded under SIM, we used a difference-in-differences regression model to compare outcomes for model participants with BH conditions and an in-state comparison group before-and-after model implementation. For the behavioral health home (BHH) model in Maine, we used a pre-post design to assess how outcomes for model participants changed over time. FINDINGS: Informal relationship building, tailored technical assistance, and the promotion of data sharing were key factors in making progress. After three years of implementation, the growth in total expenditures was less than the comparison group by $128 (-$253, -$3; p < 0.10) and $62 (-$87, -$36; p < 0.001) per beneficiary per month for beneficiaries with BH conditions attributed to an ACO in Minnesota and Vermont, respectively. Likewise, there were reductions in emergency department use for ACO participants in all three states after two to four years of implementation. However, there was no improvement in BH-related quality metrics for ACO beneficiaries in all three states. Although participants in the BHH model had increased expenditures after two years of implementation, use of primary care and specialty care services increased by 3% and 8%, respectively, and antidepressant medication adherence also improved. CONCLUSIONS: The SIM Round 1 states made considerable progress in integrating BH and primary care services, and there were promising findings for all models. Taken together, there is some evidence that Medicaid payment models can improve patterns of care for beneficiaries with BH conditions.

Impact of Financial Incentives on Diabetes Prevention Class Attendance and Program Completion: Evidence From Minnesota, Montana, and New York.

PURPOSE: To test the role of financial incentives to motivate engagement in diabetes prevention programs (DPPs). DESIGN: Minnesota, Montana, and New York randomized 3 different approaches to providing incentives: incentivizing class attendance and weight loss (all states), class attendance only (NY), and weight loss only (NY). We used New York to test how different approaches to providing incentives influence DPP completion and attendance. SETTING: Health-care facilities and local young men's Christian association. PARTICIPANTS: Eight hundred thirty one Medicaid enrollees in Minnesota, 204 in Montana, and 560 in New York. INTERVENTION MEASURE: Impact of the financial incentives on DPP program completion rates. We measured completion of DPP classes in 2 ways: completing 9 or more or 16 or more DPP classes. ANALYSIS: Multivariate logistic model to compare completion of DPP classes between participants randomized into receiving financial incentives and controls. RESULTS: Receipt of incentives was associated with higher odds at attending 9 or more classes (odds ratio [OR]: 2.2; P < .01) in Minnesota, Montana (OR: 2.2; P < .05), and New York (OR: 1.9; P < .01) as well as attending 16 or more classes in Minnesota (OR: 3.1; P < .01), Montana (OR: 2.1; P < .01), and New York (OR: 2.9; P < .01). In New York, individuals paid to attend classes attended more classes than individuals paid based on results only. CONCLUSION: Among Medicaid beneficiaries, financial incentives improve DPP class attendance.

Impact of Financial Incentives on Service Use, Spending, and Health in Medicaid.

INTRODUCTION: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services provided grants to Medicaid programs through the Medicaid Incentives for Prevention of Chronic Diseases program to test whether financial incentives changed the use of healthcare services, Medicaid spending, and health outcomes. Six states implemented programs related to diabetes prevention, weight management, diabetes management, and hypertension management. The purpose of this study is to examine whether receipt of financial incentives increased use of services incentivized by the program; reduced expenditures, inpatient admissions, emergency department visits; and improved health outcomes. METHODS: State data on program participation and incentives (between 2011 and 2015) and 2 years of Medicaid claims data pre-Medicaid Incentives for Prevention of Chronic Diseases enrollment and >2 years of claims data after enrollment were analyzed using covariate-adjusted regression analyses. Negative binomial, logistic, and linear regressions were used, depending on the outcome variable of interest (services, inpatient admissions and emergency department visits, and total expenditures). Analyses were conducted in 2015 and 2016. RESULTS: Incentive recipients attended, on average, one to two more diabetes prevention classes than control participants, but incentives did not significantly improve uptake of other types of services, such as meetings with a health coach or doctor, gym visits, or attendance at Weight Watchers meetings. Modest improvements in health outcomes, such as weight loss, were observed, yet there were very few significant changes in inpatient admissions, emergency department visits, and Medicaid expenditures. CONCLUSIONS: Financial incentives are useful for engaging Medicaid enrollees in disease prevention programs, but program engagement may not necessarily lead to changing patterns of healthcare utilization and expenditures in the short run.

Changes in Utilization and Expenditures for Medicare Beneficiaries in Patient-centered Medical Homes: Findings From the Multi-Payer Advanced Primary Care Practice Demonstration.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered medical homes are expected to reduce expenditures by increasing the use of primary care services, shifting care from inpatient to outpatient settings, and reducing avoidable utilization. Under the Multi-Payer Advanced Primary Care Practice (MAPCP) Demonstration, Medicare joined Medicaid and commercial payers in 8 states to support ongoing patient-centered medical home initiatives. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of the MAPCP Demonstration on health care utilization and expenditures for Medicare beneficiaries. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used difference-in-differences regression modeling to estimate changes in utilization and expenditures before and after the start of the MAPCP Demonstration, comparing beneficiaries engaged with MAPCP Demonstration practices to beneficiaries engaged with primary care practices that were not medical homes. Qualitative data collected during annual site visits provided contextual information on participating practices to inform interpretations of the demonstration outcomes. SUBJECTS: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries attributed to MAPCP Demonstration practices or to comparison group practices. MEASURES: Medicare claims were used to measure total Medicare expenditures and utilization and expenditures for inpatient, emergency room, primary care, and specialist services. RESULTS: Despite the transformation of practices over the demonstration period, there was minimal evidence of a shift to more efficient utilization of health care services, and only 1 state saw a statistically significant reduction in total per-beneficiary expenditures. CONCLUSIONS: Although the MAPCP Demonstration did not have strong, consistent impacts on utilization and expenditures, this evaluation provides insights that may be useful for the design of future health care transformation models.

Medicaid Incentives for Preventing Chronic Disease: Effects of Financial Incentives for Smoking Cessation.

OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of financial incentives for smoking cessation in the Medicaid population. DATA SOURCES: Secondary data from the Medicaid Incentives for Prevention of Chronic Disease (MIPCD) program and Medicaid claims/encounter data from 2010 to 2015 for five states. STUDY DESIGN: Beneficiaries were randomized into receipt or no receipt of financial incentives. We ran multivariate regression models testing the impact of financial incentives on the use of counseling services, smoking behavior, and Medicaid expenditures and utilization. DATA EXTRACTION: Participating states provided Medicaid eligibility, claims and encounters, program enrollment, and incentivized service use data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Participants who received incentives were more likely to call the Quitline and complete counseling sessions. Incentive receipt was positively associated with self-reported quit attempts, self-reported quits, or passing cotinine tests of smoking cessation in most programs, although results were only statistically significant in a subset. There was no systematic evidence that incentives affected health care use or spending. CONCLUSIONS: Financial incentives are a promising policy lever to motivate behavioral change in the Medicaid population, but more evidence is needed regarding optimal incentive size, effectiveness of process-versus outcome-based incentives, targeting of incentives, and long-run cost-effectiveness.

Impact of Medical Homes on Expenditures and Utilization for Beneficiaries With Behavioral Health Conditions.

OBJECTIVE: Individuals with behavioral health conditions may benefit from enhanced care management provided by a patient-centered medical home (PCMH). In late 2011 and early 2012 Medicare began participating in PCMH initiatives in eight states through the Multi-Payer Advanced Primary Care Practice (MAPCP) demonstration. This study examined how the initiatives addressed the needs of patients with behavioral health conditions and the impacts of the demonstration on expenditures and utilization for this population. METHODS: Semistructured interviews provided insight into states' approaches to improving care, and multivariate difference-in-difference regressions of Medicare and Medicaid claims data were used to model changes in utilization and expenditures, comparing Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries with behavioral health conditions in MAPCP demonstration practices with similar beneficiaries in non-PCMH primary care practices. Utilization included inpatient admissions and emergency department visits for all causes and for behavioral health conditions and outpatient visits for behavioral health conditions. Expenditure outcomes included expenditures for all services and those with a principal diagnosis of a behavioral health condition. RESULTS: Practices reported screening more patients for behavioral health conditions, linking patients to community-based behavioral health resources, and hiring behavioral health specialists to provide care. Several states embarked on unique initiatives to improve access to behavioral health services. However, few significant associations were found between participation in the MAPCP demonstration and utilization and expenditures for behavioral health services. CONCLUSIONS: Even though PCMHs made concerted efforts to improve access to care for their patients with behavioral health conditions, few substantial changes in patterns of care were noted.

Primary care and specialty providers: an assessment of continuity of care, utilization, and expenditures.

BACKGROUND: Little is known as to whether medical home principles, such as continuity of care (COC), would have the same effect on health service use for individuals whose primary (or predominant) provider is a specialist instead of a primary care provider (PCP). OBJECTIVE: To test associations between health service use and expenditures and (1) beneficiaries' predominant provider type (PCP or specialist) and (2) COC among beneficiaries who primarily see a PCP and those who primarily see a specialist. RESEARCH DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional analysis of Medicare fee-for-service claims data from July 2007 to June 2009. Negative binomial and generalized linear models were used in multivariate regression modeling. SUBJECTS: The study cohort comprised 613,471 community-residing Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. MEASURES: Beneficiaries' predominant provider type and COC index during a baseline period (July 2007-June 2008) were studied. All-cause and ambulatory care sensitive condition (ACSC) hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits and related expenditures and total expenditures in a 1-year follow-up period (July 2008-June 2009) were also reported. RESULTS: Twenty-five percent of beneficiaries primarily saw a specialist. Having a specialist predominant provider was associated with 9% fewer ED visits, 14% fewer ACSC ED visits, and 8% fewer ACSC hospitalizations (all P<0.001). Regardless of whether the beneficiary's predominant provider was a specialist or a PCP, higher continuity was associated with fewer all-cause hospitalizations and ED visits and lower expenditures for these services. Higher continuity was also associated with lower total expenditures. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of the predominant provider's specialty, greater continuity was associated with less use of high-cost services and lower expenditures for these services.

Impact of state-specific Medicaid reimbursement and eligibility policies on receipt of cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Although state Medicaid programs cover cancer screening, Medicaid beneficiaries are less likely to be screened for cancer and are more likely to present with tumors of an advanced stage than are those with other insurance. The current study was performed to determine whether state Medicaid eligibility and reimbursement policies affect the receipt of breast, cervical, and colon cancer screening among Medicaid beneficiaries. METHODS: Cross-sectional regression analyses of 2007 Medicaid data from 46 states and the District of Columbia were performed to examine associations between state-specific Medicaid reimbursement/eligibility policies and receipt of cancer screening. The study sample included individuals aged 21 years to 64 years who were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicaid for at least 4 months. Subsamples eligible for each screening test were: Papanicolaou test among 2,136,511 patients, mammography among 792,470 patients, colonoscopy among 769,729 patients, and fecal occult blood test among 753,868 patients. State-specific Medicaid variables included median screening test reimbursement, income/financial asset eligibility requirements, physician copayments, and frequency of eligibility renewal. RESULTS: Increases in screening test reimbursement demonstrated mixed associations (positive and negative) with the likelihood of receiving screening tests among Medicaid beneficiaries. In contrast, increased reimbursements for office visits were found to be positively associated with the odds of receiving all screening tests examined, including colonoscopy (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.06-1.08), fecal occult blood test (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.08-1.10), Papanicolaou test (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.02-1.03), and mammography (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.02-1.03). Effects of other state-specific Medicaid policies varied across the screening tests examined. CONCLUSIONS: Increased reimbursement for office visits was consistently associated with an increased likelihood of being screened for cancer, and may be an important policy tool for increasing screening among this vulnerable population.

The Partnership Access Line: evaluating a child psychiatry consult program in Washington State.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a telephone-based child mental health consult service for primary care providers (PCPs). DESIGN: Record review, provider surveys, and Medicaid database analysis. SETTING: Washington State Partnership Access Line (PAL) program. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2285 PAL consultations by 592 PCPs between April 1, 2008, and April 30, 2011. INTERVENTIONS: Primary care provider-initiated consultations with PAL service. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The PAL call characteristics, PCP feedback surveys, and Medicaid claims between April 2007 and December 2009 for fee-for-service Medicaid children before and after a PAL call. RESULTS: Sixty-nine percent of calls were about children with serious emotional disturbances, and 66% of calls were about children taking psychiatric medications. Primary care providers nearly always received new psychosocial treatment advice (87% of calls) and were more likely to receive advice to start rather than stop a medication (46% vs 24% of calls). Primary care provider feedback surveys reported uniformly positive satisfaction with the program. Among Medicaid children, there was significant increases in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and antidepressant medication use after the PAL call but no significant change in reimbursements for mental health medications (P < .05). Children with a history of foster care experienced a 132% increase in outpatient mental health visits after the PAL call (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care providers used PAL for psychosocial and medication treatment assistance for particularly high-needs children and were satisfied with the service. Furthermore, PAL was associated with increased use of outpatient mental health care for some children.

Variations in children's dental service use based on four national health surveys.

OBJECTIVE: To compare estimates of dental service use and delayed dental care across 4 national surveys of children's health. METHODS: Among children 2 to 17 years of age, prevalence estimates of the use of any dental services, preventive dental services, and delayed dental care in the past year were obtained from the 2003 and 2007 National Survey of Children's Health, the 2003-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), the 2003 and 2007 National Health Interview Survey, and the 2003 and 2007 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Trends in parent-reported dental use, including delayed care, by sociodemographic characteristics were assessed by using logistic regression and odds ratios. RESULTS: Data collection methodologies varied across the 4 surveys, and estimates of dental service use varied accordingly. Surveys differed in the survey items used, recall time frames, and protocols for eliciting visit history. As a result, estimates of any dental use ranged from 52% to 81%, whereas estimates of preventive dental use ranged from 67% to 78%. Rates of delayed dental care were low, ranging from 3% to 8%; however, surveys showed consistent sociodemographic disparities in use of dental services and delayed dental care. CONCLUSIONS: Each survey has a unique approach to defining and eliciting parents' reports of children's dental service use, which could result in under- or overestimation of the number and nature of children's dental services. Each survey's methodology must be considered when accepting population-based estimates of dental service use to monitor progress in achieving national oral health goals.

Comparative effectiveness of mailed reminder letters on mammography screening compliance.

OBJECTIVE: Reminder letters are effective at prompting women to schedule mammograms. Less well studied are reminders addressing multiple preventive service recommendations. We compared the effectiveness of a mammogram-specific reminder sent when a woman was due for a mammogram to a reminder letter addressing multiple preventive services and sent on a woman's birthday on mammography receipt. METHODS: The study included 48,583 women 52-74 years enrolled in Group Health Cooperative, a health plan in Washington State. From 2005 to 2009, women were mailed 88,605 mammogram-specific or birthday letters. In this one group pretest-posttest study, we modeled the odds of obtaining a screening mammogram after receiving a letter by reminder type using logistic regression, controlling for demographic and healthcare use characteristics and stratifying by whether women were overdue or up-to-date with mammography at the mailing. RESULTS: Among women up-to-date with screening, birthday letters were negatively associated with mammography receipt compared to mammogram-specific letters (birthday letters with 1-2 recommendations: OR=0.73; 95% CI:0.68-0.79; 3 recommendations: OR=0.74; 95% CI:0.69-0.78; 4-8 recommendations: OR=0.62 95% CI:0.55-0.68) after. Among overdue women, birthday letters with 4-8 recommendations were negatively associated with mammography receipt. CONCLUSIONS: Transitioning from mammogram-specific reminder letters to multiple preventive service birthday letters was associated with decreased mammography receipt.

Health care use and expenditures associated with access to the medical home for children and youth.

BACKGROUND: The pediatric medical home is an approach to the delivery of family-centered health care. Policy-makers and payers are interested in potential changes to health care utilization and expenditures under this model. OBJECTIVE: To test associations between having a medical home and health service use and expenditures among US children and youth. RESEARCH DESIGN: Observational cross-sectional study. SUBJECTS: A total of 26,221 children aged 0 to 17 years surveyed in the 2005 to 2007 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys. MEASURES: Parent report of a child's access to a medical home was developed from multiple survey items in the Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys. Negative binomial regression examined the association between the medical home and parent-reported counts of annual outpatient, inpatient, emergency department, and dental visits. Two-part models examined associations between the medical home and parent-reported annual total, outpatient, inpatient, emergency department, and other health care expenditures. Models accounted for potential self-selection into a medical home using propensity scores. RESULTS: Children with a medical home had a greater incidence of preventive visits [incidence rate ratio (IRR)=1.11; (95% confidence intervals (CI), 1.03-1.20)] and dental visits [IRR=1.09 (95% CI, 1.02-1.17)] and a lower incidence of emergency department visits [IRR=0.87 (95% CI, 0.79-0.97)] compared with children without a medical home. Children with a medical home also had greater odds of incurring total, outpatient, prescription medication, and dental expenditures, OR's ranging from 1.09 to 1.38. Despite greater odds of incurring certain expenditures, expenditures were no different for children with and without a medical home. CONCLUSIONS: The medical home is associated with several domains of health service use, yet there is no evidence for its association with health care expenditures for children and youth.

Medical home access and health care use and expenditures among children with special health care needs.

OBJECTIVE: To test associations between having a medical home and health services use and expenditures among US children with special health care needs (CSHCN). DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: The 2003-2008 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 9816 CSHCN up to 17 years, including 1056 with a functional or sensory limitation and 8760 without a limitation. MAIN EXPOSURE: Parent or caregiver report of CSHCN having a medical home. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We examined CSHCN's annual use of outpatient, inpatient, emergency department, and dental visits, and annual outpatient, inpatient, emergency department, prescription medication, dental, and other health care expenditures. RESULTS: CSHCN with a medical home had 14% more dental visits compared with CSHCN without a medical home (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.25); this finding is significant for CSHCN without limitations but not for those with limitations. The medical home was associated with greater odds of incurring total, outpatient, prescription medication, and dental expenditures (odds ratio range, 1.25-1.92). Among CSHCN with a limitation, children with a medical home had lower annual inpatient expenditures compared with those without a medical home (mean, -$968; 95% CI, -$121 to -$1928), and among CSHCN without a limitation, children with a medical home had higher annual prescription medication expenditures compared with those without a medical home (mean, $87; 95% CI, $22-$153). CONCLUSIONS: There were few differences in annual health services use and expenditures between CSHCN with and without a medical home. However, the medical home may be associated with lower inpatient expenditures and higher prescription medication expenditures within subgroups of CSHCN.