Reporting of CAHPS quality information to medicare beneficiaries

OBJECTIVES: To assess which Consumer Assessment of Health Plans (CAHPS) survey measures Medicare beneficiaries find the most meaningful, how beneficiaries and information intermediaries interpret different formats for presenting CAHPS information, and how beneficiaries have reacted to the CAHPS information included in the annual mailing to beneficiaries called Medicare & You 2000. DATA SOURCES: Fourteen focus groups of beneficiaries and State Health Insurance Assistance Program counselors, more than 200 cognitive interviews, and 122 mall-intercept interviews with beneficiaries were conducted from spring 1998 through winter 2000. STUDY DESIGN: In 1998 focus groups and cognitive interviews were conducted with Medicare beneficiaries and State Health Insurance Assistance Program counselors to determine which CAHPS measures to report to Medicare beneficiaries and how to report this information. In 1999 additional focus groups and mall-intercept interviews were conducted to determine which measures to include in Medicare & You 2000. To obtain feedback on the CAHPS information in Medicare & You 2000 additional focus groups were conducted in winter 2000. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Focus group participants indicated that getting the care they need quickly, having access to specialists, and communicating well with doctors were more important to them than nonmedical characteristics of plans. Most beneficiaries had problems interpreting quality information. Many misinterpreted star charts, and while bar charts appear easier to read, many beneficiaries still had trouble interpreting the information on these charts. Most beneficiaries did not consider quality information important to them and most were unaware of the availability of CAHPS information. CONCLUSIONS: Many challenges lie ahead in making quality information meaningful to Medicare beneficiaries. These challenges include increasing awareness of the existence of this information, educating beneficiaries about how this information can help in choosing a health plan, continuing to simplify reporting formats, assuring beneficiaries that this information comes from a credible source, and providing guidance to beneficiaries about how quality information can help with health care decisions.     

Differences in the structure of CAHPS measures among the medicare fee-for-service, medicare managed care, and privately insured populations

OBJECTIVE: To confirm in a new population, the Medicare fee-for-service population, the factor structure previously found in two Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) field-test surveys with Medicare HMO and adult privately insured populations. DATA SOURCES: Primary data were collected in the fall of 1998. Survey responses from the Medicare Fee-for-Service CAHPS survey field test were compared to results from the Medicare HMO and adult privately insured field-test studies conducted in the fall of 1996. STUDY DESIGN: Respondents for the field-test survey were a random sample of Medicare beneficiaries in five states who had opted for the original Medicare plan (fee-for-service). DATA COLLECTION: Data were collected by a mailed survey with a telephone follow-up survey to those who did not return the mailed survey. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A confirmatory factor analysis in two different samples of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries provided basic support for a previously reported three-factor structure underlying the CAHPS reports and rating items: (1) quality of provider or staff communications; (2) timely access to quality health care; and (3) quality of plan administration. An exploratory factor analysis revealed a variant three-factor structure. CONCLUSION: Because of differences in the factor structures among the different populations discussed, caution needs to be exercised in any composite development, based on factor analysis or any other basis, by which cross-population comparisons will be made. Comparisons should only be made on composites representing stable structure across all populations concerned.     

Health plan decision making with new medicare information materials

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of providing new Medicare information materials on consumers' attitudes and behavior about health plan choice. DATA SOURCE: New and experienced Medicare beneficiaries who resided in the Kansas City metropolitan statistical area during winter 1998-99 were surveyed. More than 2,000 computer-assisted telephone interviews were completed across the two beneficiary populations with a mean response rate of 60 percent. STUDY DESIGN: Medicare beneficiaries were randomly assigned to a control group or one of three treatment groups that received varying amounts and types of new Medicare information materials. One treatment group received the Health Care Financing Administrations's pilot Medicare & You 1999 handbook, a second group received the same version of the handbook and a Medicare version of the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans (CAHPS) report, and a third treatment group received the Medicare & You bulletin, an abbreviated version of the handbook. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Results of the study suggest that the federal government's new consumer information materials are having some influence on Medicare beneficiaries' attitudes and behaviors about health plan decision making. Experienced beneficiary treatment group members were significantly more confident with their current health plan choice than control group members, but new beneficiaries were significantly less likely to use the new materials to choose or change health plans than control group members. In general the effects on confidence and health plan switching did not vary across the different treatment materials. CONCLUSIONS: The 1999 version of the Medicare & You materials contained a message that it is not necessary to change health plans. This message appears to have decreased the likelihood of using the new materials to choose or change plans, whereas other materials to which beneficiaries are exposed may encourage plan switching. Because providing more information to beneficiaries did not result in commensurate increases in confidence levels or rate of health plan switching, factors other than the amount of information, such as how the information is presented, may be more critical than volume.     

Understanding biased selection in Medicare HMOs

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the extent of favorable health maintenance organization (HMO) selection for a longitudinal cohort of Medicare beneficiaries, examine whether the extent of favorable selection varies with the degree of Medicare HMO market penetration in a county, and explain conflicting findings in the literature on favorable HMO selection. DATA SOURCES: A panel of 1992-1996 data from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS), supplemented with linked data from the Area Resource File and Medicare administrative datasets. STUDY DESIGN: Using random effects probit estimation, we model a beneficiary's HMO enrollment status as a function of self-reported health status and Medicare HMO market penetration. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: The MCBS data for beneficiaries residing in states served by Medicare HMOs in 1992-1996 were linked by county to the supplementary datasets. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We find that favorable selection persists in the cohort over time on some, but not all, measures. We find no substantial association between favorable HMO selection and HMO market penetration. We find that conflicting findings in the literature on favorable HMO selection may be explained by several methodological choices, including the choice of health status measure and the structure of the sample. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support further risk adjustment of the adjusted average per capita cost (AAPCC) payment formula.     

The effects of method of presenting health plan information on HMO enrollment by Medicaid beneficiaries.

Marketing strategies are critical for enhancing HMO enrollments among Medicaid beneficiaries when they are provided a choice of health plans. This study examined one component of marketing HMOs--the method of communicating the HMO's attributes. The purpose of the analysis was to determine if characteristics of Medicaid beneficiaries who enroll in HMOs vary by method of communicating information about health plan options. Data were analyzed from the marketing component of California's Prepaid Health Research, Evaluation, and Demonstration (PHRED) project. Five communication methods are examined in the article: brochure, film, county eligibility worker presentation, state representative presentation, and HMO representative presentation. The analysis reveals that each communication method is most effective with a different type of beneficiary. No single consumer characteristic is related to HMO enrollment across all five methods, although lack of a private physician and dissatisfaction with a current provider are associated with choice in four methods. Film is the best method for attracting persons who have an ongoing relationship with a provider.     

Case-mix adjustment of the National CAHPS benchmarking data 1.0: a violation of model assumptions?

OBJECTIVE: To compare models for the case-mix adjustment of consumer reports and ratings of health care. DATA SOURCES: The study used the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans (CAHPS) survey 1.0 National CAHPS Benchmarking Database data from 54 commercial and 31 Medicaid health plans from across the United States: 19,541 adults (age > or = 18 years) in commercial plans and 8,813 adults in Medicaid plans responded regarding their own health care, and 9,871 Medicaid adults responded regarding the health care of their minor children. STUDY DESIGN: Four case-mix models (no adjustment; self-rated health and age; health, age, and education; and health, age, education, and plan interactions) were compared on 21 ratings and reports regarding health care for three populations (adults in commercial plans, adults in Medicaid plans, and children in Medicaid plans). The magnitude of case-mix adjustments, the effects of adjustments on plan rankings, and the homogeneity of these effects across plans were examined. DATA EXTRACTION: All ratings and reports were linearly transformed to a possible range of 0 to 100 for comparability. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Case-mix adjusters, especially self-rated health, have substantial effects, but these effects vary substantially from plan to plan, a violation of standard case-mix assumptions. CONCLUSION: Case-mix adjustment of CAHPS data needs to be re-examined, perhaps by using demographically stratified reporting or by developing better measures of response bias.     

Do Commercial Managed Care Members Rate Their Health Plans Differently than Medicaid Managed Care Members?

OBJECTIVE: To determine if members of commercial managed care and Medicaid managed care rate the experience with their health plans differently. DATA SOURCES: Data from both commercial and Medicaid Consumer Assessment of Health Plan Surveys (CAHPS) in New York State. STUDY DESIGN: Regression models were used to determine the effect of population (commercial or Medicaid) on a member's rating of their health plan, controlling for health status, age, gender, education, race/ethnicity, number of office visits, and place of residence. DATA COLLECTION: Managed care plans are required to submit to the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) results of the annual commercial CAHPS survey. The NYSDOH conducted a survey of Medicaid enrollees using Medicaid CAHPS. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Medicaid managed care members in excellent or very good health rate their health plan higher than commercial members in excellent or very good health. There is no difference in health plan rating for commercial and Medicaid members in good, fair, or poor health. Older, less educated, black, and Hispanic members who live outside New York City are more likely to rate their managed care plan higher. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid members rating of their health care equals or exceeds ratings by commercial members.     

Consumer perspectives on information needs for health plan choice

The premise that competition will improve health care assumes that consumers will choose plans that best fit their needs and resources. However, many consumers are frustrated with currently available plan comparison information. We describe results from 22 focus groups in which Medicare beneficiaries, Medicaid enrollees, and privately insured consumers assessed the usefulness of indicators based on consumer survey data and Health Employer Data Information Set (HEDIS)-type measures of quality of care. Considerable education would be required before consumers could interpret report card data to inform plan choices. Policy implications for design and provision of plan information for Medicare beneficiaries and Medicaid enrollees are discussed.     

Managed care and preventable hospitalization among Medicaid adults

OBJECTIVE: The study examines the association between managed care enrollment and preventable hospitalization patterns of adult Medicaid enrollees hospitalized in four states. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Hospital discharge data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) database of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for New York (NY), Pennsylvania (PA), Wisconsin (WI), and Tennessee (TN) residents in the age group 20-64 hospitalized in those states, linked to the Area Resource File (ARF) and American Hospital Association (AHA) survey files for 1997. STUDY DESIGN: The study uses separate logistic models for each state comparing preventable admissions with marker admissions (urgent, insensitive to primary care). The model controls for socioeconomic and demographic variables, and severity of illness. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Consistently in different states, private health maintenance organization (HMO) enrollment was associated with fewer preventable admissions than marker admissions, compared to private fee-for-service (FFS). However, Medicaid managed care enrollment was not associated with a reduction in preventable admissions, compared to Medicaid FFS. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that the preventable hospitalization pattern for private HMO enrollees differs significantly from that for commercial FFS enrollees. However, little difference is found between Medicaid HMO enrollees and Medicaid FFS patients. The findings did not vary by the level of Medicaid managed care penetration in the study states.     

Effects of Medicaid managed care programs on health services access and use

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effects of Medicaid managed care (MMC) programs on Medicaid enrollees' access to and use of health care services at the national level. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: 1991-1995 National Health Interview Surveys (NHIS) and a 1998 Urban Institute survey on state Medicaid managed care programs. STUDY DESIGN: Using multivariate regression models, we estimated the effect of living in a county with an MMC program on several access and use measures for nonelderly women who receive Medicaid through AFDC and child Medicaid recipients. We focus on mandatory programs and estimate separate effects for primary care case management (PCCM) programs, health maintenance organization (HMO) programs, and mixed PCCM/HMO programs, relative to fee-for-service (FFS) Medicaid. We control for individual and county characteristics, and state and year effects. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHOD: This study uses pooled individual-level data from up to five years of the NHIS (1991-1995), linked to information on Medicaid managed care characteristics at the county level from the 1998 MMC survey. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We find virtually no effects of mandatory PCCM programs. For women, mandatory HMO programs reduce some types of non-emergency room (ER) use, and increase reported unmet need for medical care. The PCCM/HMO programs increase access, but had no effects on use. For children, mandatory HMO programs reduce ER visits, and increase the use of specialists. The PCCM/HMO programs reduce ER visits, while increasing other types of use and access. CONCLUSIONS: Mandatory PCCM/HMO programs improved access and utilization relative to traditional FFS Medicaid, primarily for children. Mandatory HMO programs caused some access problems for women.     

Comparing mortality and time until death for medicare HMO and FFS beneficiaries

OBJECTIVE: To compare adjusted mortality rates of TEFRA-risk HMO enrollees and disenrollees with rates of beneficiaries enrolled in the Medicare fee-for-service sector (FFS), and to compare the time until death for decedents in these three groups. DATA SOURCE: Data are from the 124 counties with the largest TEFRA-risk HMO enrollment using 1993-1994 Medicare Denominator files for beneficiaries enrolled in the FFS and TEFRA-risk HMO sectors. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study that tracks the mortality rates and time until death of a random sample of 1,240,120 Medicare beneficiaries in the FFS sector and 1,526,502 enrollees in HMOs between April 1, 1993 and April 1, 1994. A total of 58,201 beneficiaries switched from an HMO to the FFS sector and were analyzed separately. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: HMO enrollees have lower relative odds of mortality than a comparable group of FFS beneficiaries. Conversely, HMO disenrollees have higher relative odds of mortality than comparable FFS beneficiaries. Among decedents in the three groups, HMO enrollees lived longer than FFS beneficiaries, who in turn lived longer than HMO disenrollees. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare TEFRA-risk HMO enrollees appear to be, on average, healthier than beneficiaries enrolled in the FFS sector, who appear to be in turn healthier than HMO disenrollees. These health status differences persist, even after controlling for beneficiary demographics and county-level variables that might confound the relationship between mortality and the insurance sector.     

Creating more effective health plan quality reports for consumers: lessons from a synthesis of qualitative testing

OBJECTIVE: Social marketing techniques such as consumer testing have only recently been applied to develop effective consumer health insurance information. This article discusses lessons learned from consumer testing to create consumer plan choice materials. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Data were collected from 268 publicly and privately insured consumers in three studies between 1994 and 1999. STUDY DESIGN: Iterative testing and revisions were conducted to design seven booklets to help Medicaid, Medicare, and employed consumers choose a health plan. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Standardized protocols were used in 11 focus groups and 182 interviews to examine the content, comprehension, navigation, and utility of the booklets. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A method is suggested to help consumers narrow their plan choices by breaking down the process into smaller decisions using a set of guided worksheets. CONCLUSION: Implementing these lessons is challenging and not often done well. This article gives examples of evidence-based approaches to address cognitive barriers that designers of consumer health insurance information can adapt to their needs.     

Race/ethnicity,language, and patients' assessments of care in Medicaid managed care

OBJECTIVE: Consumer assessments of health care provide important information about how well health plans and clinicians meet the needs of the people they serve. The purpose of this study was to examine whether consumer reports and ratings of care in Medicaid managed care vary by race/ethnicity and language. DATA SOURCES: Data were derived from the National CAHPS Benchmarking Database (NCBD) 3.0 and consisted of 49,327 adults enrolled in Medicaid managed care plans in 14 states in 2000. DATA COLLECTION: The CAHPS data were collected by telephone and mail. Surveys were administered in Spanish and English. The response rate across plans was 38 percent. STUDY DESIGN: Data were analyzed using linear regression models. The dependent variables were CAHPS 2.0 global rating items (personal doctor, specialist, health care, health plan) and multi-item reports of care (getting needed care, timeliness of care, provider communication, staff helpfulness, plan service). The independent variables were race/ethnicity, language spoken at home (English, Spanish, Other), and survey language (English or Spanish). Survey respondents were assigned to one of nine racial/ethnic categories based on Hispanic ethnicity and race: White, Hispanic/Latino, Black/African American, Asian/Pacific Islanders, American Indian/Alaskan native, American Indian/White, Black/White, Other Multiracial, Other Race/Ethnicity. Whites, Asians, and Hispanics were further classified into language subgroups based on the survey language and based on the language primarily spoken at home. Covariates included gender, age, education, and self-rated health. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Racial/ethnic and linguistic minorities tended to report worse care than did whites. Linguistic minorities reported worse care than did racial and ethnic minorities. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that racial and ethnic minorities and persons with limited English proficiency face barriers to care, despite Medicaid-enabled financial access. Health care organizations should address the observed disparities in access to care for racial/ethnic and linguistic minorities as part of their quality improvement efforts.     

Health insurance knowledge among Medicare beneficiaries

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of new consumer information materials about the Medicare program on beneficiary knowledge of their health care coverage under the Medicare system. DATA SOURCE: A telephone survey of 2,107 Medicare beneficiaries in the 10-county Kansas City metropolitan statistical area. STUDY DESIGN: Beneficiaries were randomly assigned to a control group and three treatment groups each receiving a different set of Medicare informational materials. The "handbook-only" group received the Health Care Financing Administration's new Medicare & You 1999 handbook. The "bulletin" group received an abbreviated version of the handbook, and the "handbook + CAHPS" group received the Medicare & You handbook plus the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans (CAHPS) survey report comparing the quality of health care provided by Medicare HMOs. Beneficiaries interested in receiving information were oversampled. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Data were collected during two separate telephone surveys of Medicare beneficiaries: one survey of new beneficiaries and another survey of experienced beneficiaries. The intervention materials were mailed to sample members in advance of the interviews. Knowledge for the treatment groups was measured shortly after beneficiaries received the intervention materials. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Respondents' knowledge was measured using a psychometrically valid and reliable 15-item measure. Beneficiaries who received the intervention materials answered significantly more questions correctly than control group members. The effect on beneficiary knowledge of providing the information was modest for all intervention groups but varied for experienced beneficiaries only, depending on the intervention they received. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that all of the new materials had a positive effect on beneficiary knowledge about Medicare and the Medicare + Choice program. While the absolute gain in knowledge was modest, it was greater than increases in knowledge associated with traditional Medicare information sources.     

Racial and ethnic differences in parents' assessments of pediatric care in Medicaid managed care

OBJECTIVE: This study examines whether parents' reports and ratings of pediatric health care vary by race/ethnicity and language in Medicaid managed care. DATA SOURCES: The data analyzed are from the National Consumer Assessment of Health Plans (CAHPS) Benchmarking Database 1.0 and consist of 9,540 children enrolled in Medicaid managed care plans in Arkansas, Kansas, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Vermont, and Washington state from 1997 to 1998. DATA COLLECTION: The data were collected by telephone and mail, and surveys were administered in Spanish and English. The mean response rate for all plans was 42.1 percent. STUDY DESIGN: Data were analyzed using multiple regression models. The dependent variables are CAHPS 1.0 ratings (personal doctor, specialist, health care, health plan) and reports of care (getting needed care, timeliness of care, provider communication, staff helpfulness, plan service). The independent variables are race/ethnicity (white, African American, American Indian, Asian, and Hispanic), Hispanic language (English or Spanish), and Asian language (English or other), controlling for gender, age, education, and health status. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Racial/ethnic minorities had worse reports of care than whites. Among Hispanics and Asians language barriers had a larger negative effect on reports of care than race/ethnicity. For example, while Asian non-English-speakers had lower scores than whites for staff helpfulness (beta = -20.10), timeliness of care (beta = -18.65), provider communication (beta = -17.19), plan service (beta = -10.95), and getting needed care (beta = -8.11), Asian English speakers did not differ significantly from whites on any of the reports of care. However, lower reports of care for racial/ethnic groups did not translate necessarily into lower ratings of care. CONCLUSIONS: Health plans need to pay increased attention to racial/ethnic differences in assessments of care. This study's finding that language barriers are largely responsible for racial/ethnic disparities in care suggests that linguistically appropriate health care services are needed to address these gaps.     

Issues regarding health plan payments under Medicare and recommendations for reform.

The failures of the market for current Medicare health plans include poor information and price distortions and can be attributed to government policy. Reforms that could improve its structure are annual open enrollment periods, premium rebates from health management organizations (HMOs) to members, and termination of the federal government's subsidy of Medicare supplementary insurance. However, the price for a basic Medicare benefits package would still be distorted because Medicare bases its contribution on the cost of a comparable package in the fee-for-service (FFS) sector rather than on the cost of the most efficient plan available to beneficiaries in each market area. The present Medicare HMO program almost certainly increases total Medicare costs and actually discourages HMO growth by shielding beneficiaries from the true price difference between basic benefits in the HMO and FFS sectors. Lacking payment reforms, the Medicare HMO program should be terminated.     

Who Switches from Medigap to Medicare HMOs?

OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors affecting whether Medigap owners switch to Medicare managed care plans. DATA SOURCES: The primary data were the 1993-1996 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) Cost and Use Files. These were supplemented by data available from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) website. STUDY DESIGN: Individuals on the MCBS files with Medigap coverage in the period 1993-1996 were included in the study. The person-year was the unit of analysis. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine whether or not a Medigap owner switched to a Medicare-managed care plan during a particular year. Independent variables included measures of affordability, need for services, health insurance benefits, sociodemographics, and supply of managed care plans. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We did not detect strong evidence that beneficiaries in poorer health were more likely than others to switch from Medigap coverage to Medicare-managed care. In addition, higher Medigap premiums did not appear to induce beneficiaries to switch into managed care. CONCLUSIONS: We examined selection bias in joining managed care plans among the subset of Medicare beneficiaries who have Medigap policies. No strong evidence of selection bias was found in this population. We conclude that there was no evidence that the Medigap market is becoming prohibitively expensive as a result of unfavorable selection.     

Beneficiaries' perceptions of new Medicare health plan choice print materials

This article presents findings from a study involving seven focus groups with aged and disabled Medicare beneficiaries in the Kansas City area regarding their impressions of a pilot version of the Medicare & You 1999 handbook and the Medicare Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) survey report. Beneficiaries generally had positive reactions to both booklets and viewed the handbook as an important reference tool. Based on the findings, we present policy recommendations for the development and dissemination of Medicare health plan information to beneficiaries.     

Differences in CAHPS adult survey reports and ratings by race and ethnicity: an analysis of the National CAHPS benchmarking data 1.0

OBJECTIVE: To examine racial/ethnic group differences in adults' reports and ratings of care using data from the National Consumer Assessment of Health Plans (CAHPS) survey Benchmarking Database (NCBD) 1.0. DATA SOURCE: Adult data from the NCBD 1.0 is comprised of CAHPS 1.0 survey data from 54 commercial and 31 Medicaid health plans from across the United States. A total of 28,354 adult respondents (age > or = 18 years) were included in this study. Respondents were categorized as belonging to one of the following racial/ethnic groups: Hispanic (n = 1,657), white (n = 20,414), black or African American (n = 2,942), Asian and Pacific Islander (n = 976), and American Indian or Alaskan native (n = 588). STUDY DESIGN: Four single-item global ratings (personal doctor, specialty care, overall rating of health plan, and overall rating of health care) and five multiple-item report composites (access to needed care, provider communication, office staff helpfulness, promptness of care, and health plan customer service) from CAHPS 1.0 were examined. Statistical Analyses. Multiple regression models were estimated to assess differences in global ratings and report composites between whites and members of other racial/ethnic groups, controlling for age, gender, perceived health status, educational attainment, and insurance type. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Members of racial/ethnic minority groups, with the exception of Asians/Pacific Islanders, reported experiences with health care similar to those of whites. However, global ratings of care by Asians/Pacific Islanders are similar to those of whites. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in quality of care for Asians/Pacific Islanders are needed. Comparisons of care in racially and ethnically diverse populations based on global ratings of care should be interpreted cautiously.     

Serving distinct populations: performance in Medicaid HMOs and commercial HMOs

The objective of this study was to compare the preventable emergency department (ED) admissions of Medicaid health maintenance organization (HMO) beneficiaries and commercial HMO beneficiaries in the state of Florida, in addition to analyzing the effect of HMO market conditions in relation to these admissions. Paired and unpaired t tests and 10 regression equations were estimated using ED hospital admission data to examine the differences between Medicaid and commercial HMOs in 5 commonly recognized preventable hospitalization conditions. For the same preventable ED admissions, Medicaid and commercial HMO beneficiaries had statistically different rates of admission. In 3 of 5 conditions, Medicaid HMO beneficiaries had more preventable ED admissions than did commercial HMOs for the same conditions. HMO market conditions did not have a statistically significant association with preventable ED admissions for either beneficiary group, whereas teaching status and the percentage of females admitted to the hospital under a given HMO payer type had the greatest effect on preventable ED admissions. Whereas uncontrolled comparisons of preventable ED admissions are statistically different between Medicaid and commercial HMO beneficiaries, controlling for hospital and patient characteristics, market conditions do not affect the rate of preventable ED admissions.