Community Asthma Initiative to Improve Health Outcomes and Reduce Disparities Among Children with Asthma.

Black and Hispanic children are hospitalized with complications of asthma at much higher rates than white children. The Boston Children's Hospital Community Asthma Initiative (CAI) provides asthma case management and home visits for children from low-income neighborhoods in Boston, Massachusetts, to address racial/ethnic health disparities in pediatric asthma outcomes. CAI objectives were to evaluate 1) case management data by parent/guardian report for health outcomes and 2) hospital administrative data for comparison between intervention and comparison groups. Data from parent/guardian reports indicate that CAI decreased the number of children with any (one or more) asthma-related hospitalizations (decrease of 79% at 12 months) and any asthma-related emergency department visits (decrease of 56% at 12 months) among children served, most of whom were non-Hispanic black or Hispanic. Hospital administrative data also indicate that the number of asthma-related hospitalizations per child significantly decreased among CAI participants compared with a comparison group. The CAI model has been replicated in other cities and states with adaptations to local cultural and systems variations. Health outcome and cost data have been used to contribute to a business case to educate legislators and insurers about outcomes and costs for this enhanced approach to care. Strong partnerships with public health, community, and housing agencies have allowed CAI to leverage its outcomes to expand systemic changes locally and statewide to reduce asthma morbidity.

A cost analysis for a community-based case management intervention program for pediatric asthma.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the costs and benefits of the Boston Children's Hospital Community Asthma Initiative (CAI) program through reduction of Emergency Department (ED) visits and hospitalizations and quality of life (QOL) for patients and their families due to reduced missed school days and work days. METHODS: Cost-benefit analysis was used to determine an adjusted Return on Investment (ROI) for all 102 patients enrolled in the CAI program in the calendar year 2006 after controlling for changes in a comparable population without CAI intervention. A societal ROI (SROI) was also computed by including additional indirect benefits due to reduced missed school days for patients and work days for caregivers. RESULTS: Adjusted cost savings from fewer ED visits and hospitalizations resulted in an adjusted ROI of 1.33 (adjusted Net Present Value, (NPV) of savings = $83,863) during the first 3 years after controlling for factors other than the CAI intervention. When benefits due to reduced missed school days and missed work days were added to adjusted cost savings, the SROI increased to 1.85 (Societal NPV of savings = $215,100). CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary, coordinated disease management programs offer the opportunity to prevent costly complications and hospitalizations for chronic diseases, while improving QOL for patients and families. This cost analysis supports the business case for the provision of proactive community-based asthma services that are traditionally not reimbursed by the fee-for-service health care system.

Community asthma initiative: evaluation of a quality improvement program for comprehensive asthma care.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a quality improvement (QI) program in reducing asthma emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, limitation of physical activity, patient missed school, and parent missed work. METHODS: Urban, low-income patients with asthma from 4 zip codes were identified through logs of ED visits or hospitalizations, and offered enhanced care including nurse case management and home visits. QI evaluation focused on parent-completed interviews at enrollment, and at 6- and 12-month contacts. Hospital administrative data were used to assess ED visits and hospitalizations at enrollment, and 1 and 2 years after enrollment. Hospital costs of the program were compared with the hospital costs of a neighboring community with similar demographics. RESULTS: The program provided services to 283 children. Participants were 55.1% male; 39.6% African American, 52.3% Latino; 72.7% had Medicaid; 70.8% had a household income <$25 000. Twelve-month data show a significant decrease in any (≥1) asthma ED visits (68.0%) and hospitalizations (84.8%), and any days of limitation of physical activity (42.6%), patient missed school (41.0%), and parent missed work (49.7%) (all P < .0001). Patients with greatest functional impairment from ED visits, limitation of activity, and missed school were more likely to have any nurse home visit and greater number of home visits. There was a significant reduction in hospital costs compared with the comparison community (P < .0001), and a return on investment of 1.46. CONCLUSIONS: The program showed improved health outcomes and cost-effectiveness and generated information to guide advocacy efforts to finance comprehensive asthma care.