Access to specialty care and medical services in community health centers

Although community health centers (CHCs) provide primary health services to the medically underserved and poor, limited access to off-site specialty services may lead to poorer outcomes among underinsured CHC patients. This study evaluates access to specialty health services for patients receiving care in CHCs, using a survey of medical directors of all federally qualified CHCs in the United States in 2004. Respondents reported that uninsured patients had greater difficulty obtaining access to off-site specialty services, including referrals and diagnostic testing, than did patients with Medicaid, Medicare, or private insurance.     

Presence of a Community Health Center and Uninsured Emergency Department Visit Rates in Rural Counties

ABSTRACT: Context: Community health centers (CHCs) provide essential access to a primary care medical home for the uninsured, especially in rural communities with no other primary care safety net. CHCs could potentially reduce uninsured emergency department (ED) visits in rural communities. Purpose: We compared uninsured ED visit rates between rural counties in Georgia that have a CHC clinic site and counties without a CHC presence. Methods: We analyzed data from 100% of ED visits occurring in 117 rural (non‐metropolitan statistical area [MSA]) counties in Georgia from 2003 to 2005. The counties were classified as having a CHC presence if a federally funded (Section 330) CHC had a primary care delivery site in that county throughout the study period. The main outcome measure was uninsured ED visit rates among the uninsured (all‐cause ED visits and visits for ambulatory care sensitive conditions). Poisson regression models were used to examine the relationship between ED rates and the presence of a CHC. To ensure that the effects were unique to the uninsured population, we ran similar analyses on insured ED visits. Findings: Counties without a CHC primary care clinic site had 33% higher rates of uninsured all‐cause ED visits per 10,000 uninsured population compared with non‐CHC counties (rate ratio [RR] 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11‐1.59). Higher ED visit rates remained significant (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02‐1.42) after adjustment for percentage of population below poverty level, percentage of black population, and number of hospitals. Uninsured ED visit rates were also higher for various categories of diagnoses, but remained statistically significant on multivariate analysis only for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (adjusted RR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.01‐1.47). No such relationship was found for ED visit rates of insured patients (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.92‐1.22). Conclusions: The absence of a CHC is associated with a substantial excess in uninsured ED visits in rural counties, an excess not seen for ED visit rates among the insured.     

Exploring the limits of the safety net: community health centers and care for the uninsured

This paper explores the extent to which community health centers (CHCs) are able to manage their uninsured patient caseloads. We found that CHCs can provide primary care, medications, and medical supplies to most of their uninsured patients on site but are limited in their ability to provide diagnostic, specialty, and behavioral health services. Uninsured patients often fail to receive additional services for which they are referred, and it is much more difficult for CHC physicians to arrange specialty or nonemergency hospital care for their uninsured patients than for their insured patients.     

Community Health Center Use After Oregon’s Randomized Medicaid Experiment

PURPOSEThere is debate about whether community health centers (CHCs) will experience increased demand from patients gaining coverage through Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansions. To better understand the effect of new Medicaid coverage on CHC use over time, we studied Oregon’s 2008 randomized Medicaid expansion (the “Oregon Experiment”).METHODSWe probabilistically matched demographic data from adults (aged 19–64 years) participating in the Oregon Experiment to electronic health record data from 108 Oregon CHCs within the OCHIN community health information network (originally the Oregon Community Health Information Network) (N = 34,849). We performed intent-to-treat analyses using zero-inflated Poisson regression models to compare 36-month (2008–2011) usage rates among those selected to apply for Medicaid vs not selected, and instrumental variable analyses to estimate the effect of gaining Medicaid coverage on use. Use outcomes included primary care visits, behavioral/mental health visits, laboratory tests, referrals, immunizations, and imaging.RESULTSThe intent-to-treat analyses revealed statistically significant differences in rates of behavioral/mental health visits, referrals, and imaging between patients randomly selected to apply for Medicaid vs those not selected. In instrumental variable analyses, gaining Medicaid coverage significantly increased the rate of primary care visits, laboratory tests, referrals, and imaging; rate ratios ranged from 1.27 (95% CI, 1.05–1.55) for laboratory tests to 1.58 (95% CI, 1.10–2.28) for referrals.CONCLUSIONSOur results suggest that use of many different types of CHC services will increase as patients gain Medicaid through Affordable Care Act expansions. To maximize access to critical health services, it will be important to ensure that the health care system can support increasing demands by providing more resources to CHCs and other primary care settings.     

Primary Health Care in Community Health Centers and Comparison with Office-Based Practice

We examine the roles of nurse practitioners (NPs), physician assistants (PAs), and nurse midwives (CNMs) in community health centers (CHCs). We also compare primary care physicians in CHCs with office-based physicians. Estimates are from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, a nationally representative annual survey of nonfederal, office-based patient care physicians and their visits. Analysis of primary care delivery in CHCs and office-based practices are based on 1,434 providers and their visits (n = 32,300). During 2006–2007, on average, physicians comprised 70% of CHC clinicians, with NPs (20%), PAs (9%), and CNMs (1%) making up the remainder. PAs, NPs, and CNMs provided care in almost a third of CHC primary care visits; 87% of visits to these CHC providers were independent of physicians. Types of patients seen by clinicians suggest a division of labor in caring for CHC patients. NPs and PAs were more likely than physicians to report providing health education services. There were no other differences among services examined. Office-based physicians were less likely to work alongside PAs/NPs/CNMs than CHC physicians. CHC staffing is contingent on a variety of providers. CHC staffing patterns may serve as models of primary care staffing for office practices as demand for primary care services nationwide increases.     

The impact of managed care on the mix of vulnerable populations served by community health centers

This article examined the impact of managed care involvement on vulnerable populations served by community health centers (CHCs), while controlling for center rural-urban location and size, and found that centers involved in managed care have served a significantly smaller proportion of uninsured patients but a higher proportion of Medicaid users than those not involved in managed care. The results suggest that the increase in Medicaid managed care patients may lead to a reduced capacity to care for the uninsured, thus hampering CHCs from expanding access to health care for the medically indigent.     

Community health center integration: experience in the State of Ohio

In the face of severe financial challenges and demands to improve quality and service to patients, many community health centers (CHCs) have aligned or integrated with other CHCs, physician groups, or hospitals. Yet the nature of and rationale for these organizational decisions are not well understood. Our research applied an organizational theoretical framework to test whether strategic adaptation theory or institutional theory best describes the integration activity of CHCs in Ohio. We collected primary data from case studies of seven CHCs selected for geographic representation and studied December 2000-January 2001. Semi-structured interviews and a case study database supported our chain of evidence. We found that CHC integration activity was substantial (five of seven CHCs integrated) and extremely varied. Consistent with strategic adaptation theory, we determined that CHC integration actions were predominantly center-specific, rational responses to environmental challenges and were initiated to improve operations or financial performance. Rarely did CHCs initiate major organizational change merely to mimic other CHC actions, as might have been expected of highly institutionalized organizations. Understanding the basis for CHCs' strategic decisions while monitoring financial health will remain critical as lawmakers and administrators work to develop policies that both maintain progress made and improve primary care access for the poor, the uninsured, and those with special health care needs served by these important safety net providers.     

The quality of chronic disease care in U.S. community health centers

Community health centers (CHCs) are responsible for providing care for more than fifteen million Americans, many of whom are members of groups who have been documented to receive low-quality care. This study examines the quality of care for patients with chronic disease in a nationally representative sample of federally funded CHCs. Fewer than half of eligible patients received appropriate care for the majority of indicators measured, and uninsured patients received poorer care than insured patients. Although the quality of chronic disease care in CHCs compares favorably with that of care received in other settings, gaps in quality were observed for the uninsured.     

FQHC (Federally Qualified Health Center): harnessing the incentives of cost reimbursement

Community health centers (CHCs) are federally supported primary care providers to the low-income and uninsured. The federally qualified health center (FQHC) legislation requires states to pay CHCs for Medicaid services on the basis of reasonable cost. The statute generated controversy, particularly in a time when, for most providers, cost-related reimbursement has given way to fixed payments and managed care. This article examines the impact of FQHC on revenue and utilization of CHCs, using data for 328 centers that were in continuous operation between 1989 (the year the legislation was enacted) and 1992, the first year of full implementation. During this period, the CHCs Medicaid revenue grew rapidly. FQHC is estimated to account for under one third of the total increase, while inflation and growth in utilization due to expanded Medicaid eligibility are estimated to account for the other two thirds. At the same time, the change to cost-related reimbursement had a significant increase in total service users and Medicaid recipients receiving care from CHCs. Although some expected that cost-reimbursement would lead to inflationary increase in utilization, this did not occur. There was no statistically significant relationship between the change in payment methodology and changes in encounters per user. The experience of FQHC indicates that, for safety net providers of primary care, cost-related reimbursement is not "inherently inflationary." Results of this study raise the question of whether payment within constraints, but bearing relationship to cost, is not an appropriate approach to developing primary care capitation rates for these providers--and assuring maintenance of the safety net for the uninsured.     

Primary care of patients without insurance by community health centers

Community health centers (CHCs) are in a strong position to meaningfully contribute to health promotion, early detection, and improvement in health care outcomes for some of the most vulnerable person in the nation, since almost one in three users of federally funded CHCs was uninsured in 1994. The purpose of this article is to compare uninsured CHC users with uninsured people nationwide. Data for the analysis came primarily from two population-based surveys: the 1994 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the 1995 Community Health Center (CHC) User Survey.     

The financial performance of community health centers, 1996-1999

This paper presents recent financial health trends of community health centers (CHCs) between 1996 and 1999, a time characterized by fiscal and operating challenges. Results show that many individual CHCs have been subject to large changes in payer-mix among uninsured and Medicaid users. Troubling is the finding that more than half of all CHCs reported operating deficits in 1997, 1998 and 1999. CHCs experiencing large increases in the share of uninsured users and those participating in Medicaid managed care appear to have been disproportionately affected. The analyses presented support recommendations for enhanced data collection and for further monitoring of CHCs' financial health.     

Expanding care versus expanding coverage: how to improve access to care

The Bush administration has proposed expanding insurance coverage as well as community health centers (CHCs) to increase access to care for uninsured people. This paper examines the relative effects of insurance coverage and CHC capacity on access to care. Communities that have both high insurance coverage and extensive CHC capacity tend to have the best access, although the former appears more important. Funding of insurance coverage expansions is likely to produce greater gains in access than if an equivalent level of funding were invested in CHCs. Policymakers should consider CHC expansions as complementary to insurance coverage expansions rather than as a substitute.     

Impact of community health centers and Medicaid on the use of health services.

The impact of improved access to health care through the Federal community health center (CHC) and Medicaid programs was examined in five urban low-income areas. Data on access to care and physician, hospital, and dental services utilization were collected by baseline and followup health surveys in the CHCs'' services areas. There was a shift in use from hospital clinics to CHCs. Followup surveys indicated that 23 percent of the population reported CHCs as usual source of care. Travel time to source of care was reduced for users of CHCs. Medicaid coverage of the population in the survey areas increased from 16 to 37 percent between the baseline and followup surveys, an interval of 4 to 7 years. Increases occurred in the use of physicians and dental care between the baseline and followup surveys, but the rates scarcely kept pace with the national rates. Respondents who reported CHCs as their usual source of care, however, had a higher rate of physician visits and a lower rate of hospitalization compared with those using private physicians or hospital clinics as the usual source of care. Respondents with Medicaid coverage usually had higher physician and hospital use, irrespective of usual source of care. Both CHC and Medicaid programs contributed to increased use of dental care by providing financial and dental care resources. Although these two programs greatly facilitated the use of health services, disparity in physician and dental utilization remains between the five low-income areas and the averages for the nation.     

Factors associated with increased dental care utilization in five urban, low-income areas.

Survey data were used to measure change in dental utilization in five urban low-income areas as a result of increased financial (Medicaid) and facility (community health centers) access to dental care. The average annual dental visit between the baseline and follow-up surveys showed a dramatic increase in four of the five survey areas. With the exception of Roxbury, Massachusetts, where the rate was already high in the earlier survey, the dental visit rate in the remaining areas increased 33 to 80 per cent compared to an increase of only 7 per cent nationally between 1969 and 1975. Both CHC and Medicaid programs made important contributions to increased dental care. Among persons who saw a dentist in the year in these areas, 25 per cent reported CHC as their usual source of dental care and 46 per cent reported that their dental care costs in the year were borne by Medicaid. In spite of recent increases, however, the average annual dental visit rate was only 1.0 in the five areas compared to 1.6 nationally, which is 60 per cent higher. The generally low dental utilization levels among persons covered by Medicaid or served by CHCs may indicate that much of the increased dental utilization which occurred in these areas was limited to taking care of existing dental problems while neglecting preventive dental care.     

A national study of problematic care experiences among Latinos with diabetes

Despite the large disease burden of diabetes, little is known about the care experiences of Latinos with diabetes across diverse primary care settings. This study compares problematic care experiences among Latinos with diabetes across usual care sites (community health centers [CHCs], private physician practices, or without a usual source of care), using a national sample of Latino diabetic patients (N=583). Nearly half of the respondents reported at least one problematic care experience during their last clinician visit. Compared with respondents treated primarily by private physicians, respondents receiving care in CHCs or without a usual source of care reported more problematic care experiences. However, patient health insurance coverage and acculturation accounted for the highest proportion of explainable differences in problematic care experiences between CHCs and private physician offices. Initiatives should clarify the extent to which the care experiences of Latino diabetics, particularly uninsured and less acculturated patients who tend to be cared for by CHCs, can be improved through clinician communication and patient self-management interventions.     

Community health center-led networks: cooperating to compete

The primary mission of community health centers (CHCs) is to provide primary and preventive healthcare for the underserved and vulnerable populations, including the uninsured, underinsured, and Medicaid beneficiaries. Economic and regulatory challenges have placed these safety net providers in a precarious position, forcing some to respond using cooperative strategies. This article focuses on seven CHC-led networks, delineating their integrative efforts in the core areas of managed care, clinical, administrative, information, and finance. Interviews with key representatives from each network highlight the networks' accomplishments and the critical success factors and outcomes of their integrative efforts. Several underlying themes emerged from this study that are consistent with findings of previous studies conducted in other organizational settings. Specifically participants in CHC-led networks cite the following factors as contributors to success: reciprocity, communication, trust, and long-standing relationships among key individuals. This is the first study to provide a rich depiction of CHC network activities.     

Team-based care: Views from community health center staff

ABSTRACT

Community health centers (CHC) provide quality care for vulnerable patients, and a potentially contributing factor to this quality is the integration of a patient-centered medical home (PCMH). PCMH relies on a team-based approach, a principle in which social workers are trained and research examines in primary care environments. Less is known about team-based care in CHCs. An exploratory qualitative study with 14 CHC staff was conducted to examine the current state of team-based care and secondarily, to examine the role of social workers. Content analysis revealed four themes central to team-based care. Implications for CHCs and social workers are discussed.     

The substitutability of outpatient primary care in rural community health centers for inpatient hospital care.

To determine whether outpatient medical care obtained at federally funded rural community health centers (CHCs) in Maine acts primarily as a substitute or as a complement to inpatient care, a study of 36 communities served by CHCs was conducted. The hospital use of CHC users (age- and sex-adjusted admissions, days, and length of stay) was compared with that of nonusers from the same communities in 1980. Statistically lower rates of hospital admissions and days were observed for all CHC patients and for selected groups based on their age, sex, and insurance status (specifically Medicaid or Medicare). Hospital use of CHC community populations was then compared with that of 24 comparison communities without access to CHCs, using multiple linear regression in a pre/post design. The model tested, which included rates of health center use, insurance penetration, poverty, and hospital availability, among other factors, did not detect any differences in hospital use between CHC community and comparison populations. These results and additional data presented on selected hospital diagnoses and insurance coverage suggest that treatment, and hospitalization incentives, of CHC providers may reduce hospitalization. Clinic providers lack the economic, professional, and institutional incentives to hospitalize. Additional study to determine the actual substitutability effect is indicated.     

Patients’ Experiences in Different Models of Community Health Centers in Southern China

PURPOSE

Current health care reforms in China have an overall goal of strengthening primary care through the establishment and expansion of primary care networks based on community health centers (CHCs). Implementation in urban areas has led to the emergence of different models of ownership and management. The objective of this study was to evaluate the primary care experiences of patients in the Pearl River Delta as measured by the Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT) and the relationships with ownership and management in the 3 different models we describe.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted on-site at CHCs in 3 cities within the Pearl River Delta, China, using a multistage cluster sampling method. A validated Mandarin Chinese version of the PCAT–Adult Edition (short version) was adopted to collect information from adult patients regarding their experiences with primary care sources. PCAT scores for individual primary care attributes and total primary care assessment scores were assessed with respect to sociodemographic characteristics, health characteristics, and health care service utilization across 3 primary care models.

RESULTS

One thousand four hundred forty (1,440) primary care patients responded to the survey, for an overall response rate of 86.1%. Respondents gave government-owned and -managed CHCs the highest overall PCAT scores when compared with CHCs either managed by hospitals (95.18 vs 90.81; P = .005) or owned by private and social entities (95.18 vs 90.69; P =.007) as a result of better first-contact care (better first-contact utilization) and coordination of care (better service coordination and information system). Factors that were positively and significantly associated with higher overall assessment scores included the presence of a chronic condition (P <.001), having medical insurance (P = .006), and a self-reported good health status (P <.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that government-owned and -managed CHCs may be able to provide better first-contact care in terms of utilization and coordination of care, and may be better at solving the problem of underutilization of the CHCs as the first-contact point of care, one key problem facing the reforms in China.     

Managed care and community health centers

This study has two objectives: (1) to examine the relationship between the involvement of community health centers (CHCs) in managed care and various center characteristics, including patient, provider, services, and financial characteristics, that are critically linked with the fulfillment of their mission and (2) to identify factors significantly associated with CHCs' involvement in managed care. Regarding the first objective, the study indicates that CHCs involved in managed care have more diversified sources of revenue and depend less on grant funding than other CHCs, and they serve a significantly smaller proportion of uninsured and homeless patients. Involvement in managed care is also associated with greater financial vulnerability, reflected in higher costs and net revenue deficits. Regarding the second objective, the study finds that CHCs have become involved in managed care largely in response to external market pressures, such as the prospect of reduced federal grant funding. Other significant factors include center size, location, and the percentage of users who are Medicaid patients.