The costs of registry-based immunization interventions.

BACKGROUND: Part of the payoff of immunization registries may be to lower costs of immunization intervention. However, registry-based intervention costs have not been evaluated in a community setting. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to prospectively measure the cost of three equally effective registry-based interventions, evaluate how the size of the targeted population affects cost estimates, and compare these results with previously reported studies. A total of 3050 children aged <12 months were randomized to one of four study arms: (1) computer-generated telephone messages (autodialer), (2) outreach worker, (3) autodialer with outreach worker backup, or (4) usual care. The cost data collected included capital equipment, supplies, travel, and personnel. RESULTS: Monthly costs of the three registry-based intervention types were (1) autodialer, $1.34 per child; (2) outreach worker, $1.87 per child, and (3) combination, $2.76 per child. Personnel costs represented the majority of incremental costs for all three interventions. Increasing the number of children targeted sharply decreased the cost per child for the autodialer but had only a modest effect on outreach costs. The monthly costs for outreach were substantially lower than previously reported for nonregistry-based interventions in part because of differences in the number of children who were followed up. Monthly costs for the autodialer intervention were slightly higher than previously reported, but several published studies excluded important costs. CONCLUSIONS: By facilitating the management of a larger cohort of children, some registry-based immunization interventions appear to be less costly than nonregistry interventions. Further work is needed to establish whether registry maintenance costs may be recouped in part by these savings.

Qualitative study of clinic staff members' experiences using an immunization registry.

OBJECTIVES: To examine individual clinic staff members' experiences with using an immunization registry and to compare staff members' perceptions of immunization registries across different provider sites. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey using in-depth interviews and direct observation. SETTINGS: The pediatric department of an urban community health center and 2 urban hospital-based pediatric primary care clinics. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five subjects were recruited using maximum variation sampling at each site. The subjects included clerks, clinic assistants, licensed practical nurses, a nurse practitioner, and registered nurses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinic staff members' perceptions of an immunization registry and frequency of registry use. RESULTS: Differences were observed in subjects' perceptions of an immunization registry across provider sites. Although most subjects had positive attitudes toward the registry, they did not necessarily believe that the registry decreased their workload. The ability to access immunization registry data and actual use of the registry seem to be related to training of clinic personnel, location of the registry terminal, and helpfulness and availability of registry staff. CONCLUSION: Obtaining the opinions of immunization registry users is an important strategy to evaluate the usefulness of a registry in a site and target possible areas for improvement.

Public insurance substituting for private insurance: new evidence regarding public hospitals, uncompensated care funds, and Medicaid.

This paper examines the impact of public health insurance programs, whether structured as subsidies to health care providers (public hospitals and uncompensated care reimbursement funds) or as direct insurance (Medicaid), on the purchase of private health insurance. The presence of a public hospital is associated with a lower likelihood of private insurance for those with incomes between 100-200% and 200-400% of the poverty level. Uncompensated care reimbursement funds were associated with less purchase of private health insurance and a higher likelihood of being uninsured across all income groups. More generous Medicaid programs showed both safety-net and crowd out effects.

The cost to providers of participating in an immunization registry.

INTRODUCTION: The medical and public health communities advocate immunization registries as one tool to achieve national immunization goals. Although substantial resources have been expended to establish registries across the nation, minimal research has been conducted to evaluate provider participation costs. METHODS: The objective of this study was to identify the direct costs to participate in an immunization registry. To estimate labor and equipment costs, we conducted interviews and direct observation at four sites that were participating in one of two immunization registries. We calculated mean data-entry times from direct observation of clinic personnel. RESULTS: The annual cost of participating in a registry varied extremely, ranging from $6083 to $24,246, with the annual cost per patient ranging from $0.65 to $7. 74. Annual per-patient costs were lowest in the site that used an automated data-entry interface. Of the sites requiring a separate data-entry step, costs were lowest for the site participating in the registry that provided more intensive training and had a higher proportion of the target population entered into the registry. CONCLUSIONS: Ease of registry interface, data-entry times, and target population coverage affect provider participation costs. Designing the registry to accept electronic transfers of records and to avoid duplicative data-entry tasks may decrease provider costs.

Measuring immunization registry costs: promises and pitfalls.

INTRODUCTION: The medical and public health communities advocate the use of immunization registries as one tool to achieve national goals for immunization. Despite the considerable investment of resources into registry development, little information is available about the costs of developing or maintaining a registry. METHODS: The objective of this study was to measure the direct costs of maintaining one immunization registry. Cost and resource-use data were collected by interviewing registry personnel and staff at participating pediatric practices, collecting available financial records, and direct observation. RESULTS: The estimated direct cost for maintaining the registry during the 3 calendar years 1995 through 1997 was $439,232. In 1997, this represented an annual cost of $5.26 per child immunized whose record was entered into the registry. In all years, personnel expenses represented at least three fourths of the total costs, with the majority of administrative effort donated. Yearly costs increased over time largely because of growing administrative personnel requirements as the registry became fully operational. CONCLUSION: Considerable resources are required to establish and maintain immunization registries. Because personnel costs, particularly nontechnical personnel, represent a large portion of total registry costs, it is important to accurately account for donated effort. Recommendations for future registry cost studies include prospective data collection and focusing upon the costs of providing specific outreach or surveillance functions rather than overall registry costs. In addition, registry effectiveness evaluations are needed to translate registry costs into cost-effectiveness ratios.

Lack of a regular source of care among children using a public hospital emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined risk factors for not having a regular source of care among children presenting to an urban public hospital for nonappointment care. Lack of a regular source of care is associated with decreased use of appropriate health care services and preventive care among children. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted for all children less than 16 years of age attending an emergency department at an urban public hospital over a consecutive 7-day period. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: In 791 interviews available for analysis, 52% of preschool children and 66% of school-aged children did not have a regular source of care. Children without a regular source of care were more likely to present for nonurgent conditions (P < 0.0005). In multivariate analysis, older age of the child (OR = 1.6, 95% CI 1.132.25), lack of insurance (OR = 1.47, 95% CI 1.03-2.11), and lack of personal vehicle (OR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.05-1.97) were associated with not having a regular source of care. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of children using an urban emergency department were without a regular source of care. In this population, no single factor identified children without a regular source of care, but increased age and lack of insurance were associated with it. Addressing this situation will require a multifaceted approach that includes, but is not limited to, decreasing financial barriers.

The effect of primary care gatekeepers on the management of patients with chest pain.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients with chest pain referred to a cardiologist from a gatekeeper managed care organization differ from those referred from an open-access managed care organization. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study using clinical and claims data from a cardiac network database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed data from 1414 patients with chest pain or angina who were referred to a cardiologist between January 1, 1995, and June 30, 1996. We examined baseline clinical characteristics and subsequent physician practice patterns for these patients, who were referred from either a primary care gatekeeper model (n = 490) or an open-access model (n = 924). RESULTS: Although twice as many open-access patients were referred to a cardiologist, there were no differences in patient demographics or clinical characteristics at the time of referral. Cardiologists ordered similar diagnostic tests for patients from both types of managed care plans, and gatekeeper patients did not have a higher rate of abnormal tests. Rates of cardiac catheterization, coronary angioplasty, myocardial infarction, and hospitalization were similar in both groups. A significantly higher percentage of gatekeeper patients received a cardiac catheterization on the day of referral (7% versus 1%; P = .05). Open-access patients were significantly more likely to continue to be seen by a cardiologist (44% versus 28%; P < .01). Cardiology professional charges per patient were lower among gatekeeper patients ($972 +/- 1398 versus $1187 +/- 1897; P = .06), and total cardiology professional charges were significantly lower for the gatekeeper group because of the smaller number of patients seen. CONCLUSIONS: The type of cardiology services provided to patients with chest pain was not affected by the primary care administrative structure of the managed care organization, but the higher volume of patient referrals from the open-access plan may be an important consideration for cardiology practices participating in capitated contracts. The lower volume of referrals and coordination of care suggest potential cost advantages for the gatekeeper model.

Ambulatory health care use by patients in a public hospital emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: To describe primary care clinic use and emergency department (ED) use for a cohort of public hospital patients seen in the ED, identify predictors of frequent ED use, and ascertain the clinical diagnoses of those with high rates of ED use. DESIGN: Cohort observational study. SETTING: A public hospital in Atlanta, Georgia. PATIENTS: Random sample of 351 adults initially surveyed in the ED in May 1992 and followed for 2 years. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 351 patients from the initial survey, 319 (91%) had at least one ambulatory visit in the public hospital system during the following 2 years and one third of the cohort was hospitalized. The median number of subsequent ED visits was 2 (mean 6.4), while the median number of visits to a primary care appointment clinic was O (mean 1.1) with only 90 (26%) of the patients having any primary care clinic visits. The 58 patients (16.6%) who had more than 10 subsequent ED visits accounted for 65.6% of all subsequent ED visits. Overall, patients received 55% of their subsequent ambulatory care in the ED, with only 7.5% in a primary care clinic. In multivariate regression, only access to a telephone (odds ratio [OR] 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39, 0.60), hospital admission (OR 5.90; 95% CI 4.01, 8.76), and primary care visits (OR 1.68; 95% CI 1.34, 2.12) were associated with higher ED visit rates. Regular source of care, insurance coverage, and health status were not associated with ED use. From clinical record review, 74.1% of those with high rates of use had multiple chronic medical conditions, or a chronic medical condition complicated by a psychiatric diagnosis, or substance abuse. CONCLUSIONS: All subgroups of patients in this study relied heavily on the ED for ambulatory care, and high ED use was positively correlated with appointment clinic visits and inpatient hospitalization rates, suggesting that high resource utilization was related to a higher burden of illness among those patients. The prevalence of chronic medical conditions and substance abuse among these most frequent emergency department users points to a need for comprehensive primary care. Multidisciplinary case management strategies to identify frequent ED users and facilitate their use of alternative care sites will be particularly important as managed care strategies are applied to indigent populations who have traditionally received care in public hospital EDs.

Correlates of controlled hypertension in indigent, inner-city hypertensive patients.

OBJECTIVE: To identify correlates of controlled hypertension in a largely minority population of treated hypertensive patients. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: Urban, public hospital. PATIENTS: A consecutive sample of patients who were aware of their diagnosis of hypertension for at least 1 month and had previously filled an antihypertensive prescription. Control patients had a systolic blood pressure (SBP) < or = 140 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) < or = 90 mm Hg, and case patients had a SBP > or = 180 mm Hg or DBP > or = 110 mm Hg. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Control subjects had a mean blood pressure (BP) of 130/80 mm Hg and case subjects had a mean BP of 193/106 mm Hg. Baseline demographic characteristics between the 88 case and the 133 control subjects were not significantly different. In a logistic regression model, after adjusting for age, gender, race, education, owning a telephone, and family income, controlled hypertension was associated with having a regular source of care (odds ratio [OR] 7.93; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.86, 16.29), having been to a doctor in the previous 6 months (OR 4.81; 1.14, 20.31), reporting that cost was not a deterrent to buying their antihypertensive medication (OR 3.63; 1.59, 8.28), and having insurance (OR 2.15; 1.02, 4.52). Being compliant with antihypertensive medication regimens was of borderline significance (OR 1.96; 0.99, 3.88). A secondary analysis found that patients with Medicaid coverage were significantly less likely than the uninsured to report cost as a barrier to purchasing antihypertensive medications and seeing a physician. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of out-of-pocket expenditures under Medicaid for medications and physician care may contribute significantly to BP control. Improved access to a regular source of care and increased sensitivity to medication costs for all patients may lead to improved BP control in an indigent, inner-city population.

Emory University Center for Clinical Evaluation Sciences: a model for clinical practice evaluation in the changing environment of the academic health center.

Changes in the health care marketplace have had a profound effect on academic health centers and their traditional missions: teaching, patient care, and research. Many academic health centers have recognized the need to develop a capability for evaluating clinical practices and organizational restructuring. The Center for Clinical Evaluation Sciences at Emory University represents a model for the integration of evaluative capabilities into academic clinical practices.

Obstacles predicting lack of a regular provider and delays in seeking care for patients at an urban public hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the correlation among obstacles to medical care, lack of a regular source of care, and delays in seeking care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of patients presenting for ambulatory care during a 7-day period. Multiple logistic regression models were used to identify obstacles independently associated with outcome variables. SETTING: Urban public hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 3897 disadvantaged and predominantly minority patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Lack of a regular source of medical care and delay in seeking medical care for a new problem. RESULTS: The majority (61.6%) of patients reported no regular source of care. Of 2341 patients reporting a new medical problem, 48.4% waited more than 2 days before seeking medical care. No health insurance (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.89 to 2.61), no transportation (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.70), exposure to violence (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.45), and living in a supervised setting (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.00 to 2.25) were independent predictors of lack of a regular source of care. No insurance (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.51), no transportation (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.77), and less than a high school education (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.49) were independent predictors of delaying care for a new medical problem. CONCLUSIONS: Obstacles in addition to lack of insurance impede provision of medical care to disadvantaged patients. The adoption of universal health care coverage alone will not guarantee access to appropriate medical care.