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.     

Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute-Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the psychometric properties of a vision-targeted measure of health-related quality of life, the National Eye Institute-Refractive Error Quality of Life survey (NEI-RQL), which includes 13 scales designed to assess the impact of refractive error and its correction on day-to-day life. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: The NEI-RQL was self-administered by 667 myopes, 380 hyperopes, and 114 emmetropes recruited from the practices of 6 medical centers. All participants had near and distance visual acuity of 20/32 or better in the worse eye while benefiting from their current method for correction of refractive error (glasses, contact lens, refractive surgery). METHODS: Mean scores, standard deviations, internal consistency reliability, and test-retest intraclass correlations were estimated for the NEI-RQL scales. Item discrimination was assessed by item-scale correlations. Construct validity was evaluated by assessing the sensitivity of scale scores to type of refractive error, type of refractive error correction, and spherical equivalent. Construct validity of the NEI-RQL was compared to those of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) and the National Eye Institute Vision Functioning Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) in a random subsample of respondents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The 13 NEI-RQL scales-clarity of vision, expectations, near vision, far vision, diurnal fluctuations, activity limitations, glare, symptoms, dependence on correction, worry, suboptimal correction, appearance, and satisfaction with correction. RESULTS: Emmetropes tended to score significantly better on the NEI-RQL scales than myopes and hyperopes. The method of refractive error correction was also associated with NEI-RQL scores. In addition, the NEI-RQL multi-item scales accounted for 29% of the variance in the NEI-RQL satisfaction with correction item beyond that explained by the SF-36 and the NEI VFQ-25. CONCLUSION: These results support the reliability and construct validity of the NEI-RQL. The instrument appears to be useful for comparisons of people with different types of correction for refractive error.     

Development of subscales from the symptoms/problems and effects of kidney disease scales of the kidney disease quality of life instrument

BACKGROUND: The Kidney Disease Quality of Life Instrument (KDQOL) was developed to provide clinicians with a comprehensive assessment of the important domains of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for patients with end-stage renal disease who are undergoing hemodialysis. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop subscales from the 55 items comprising the Symptoms/Problems and Effects of Kidney Disease scales of the KDQOL and to measure the internal consistency reliability of these subscales. METHODS: The 55 items from the Symptoms/Problems and Effects of Kidney Disease scales were arranged into substantively meaningful clusters using an affinity mapping procedure. The resulting subscales were assessed for internal consistency reliability using data from a sample of 165 individuals with kidney disease who had completed the KDQOL. RESULTS: Eleven multi-item subscales were identified: pain, psychological dependency, cognitive functioning, social functioning, dialysis-related symptoms, cardiopulmonary symptoms, sleep, energy, cramps, diet, and appetite. Four items (clotting or other problems with access site, high blood pressure, numbness in hands or feet, and blurred vision) were not included in any of these subscales. Internal consistency reliability estimates for the 11 subscales ranged from 0.66 to 0.92. These subscales correlated with the scales from the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey as hypothesized (ie, corresponding pain, energy, and social functioning scales had the highest correlations). In addition, several subscales were significantly associated, as hypothesized, with other variables such as the number of disability days. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study further support the reliability and validity of the KDQOL. The 11 subscales identified yield more detailed information on the HRQOL of patients with kidney disease and provide a basis for specific improvements in the quality of care delivered to these patients.     

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.     

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.