Literature DB >> 11194303

Problems with quality monitoring for Medicaid managed care: perceptions of institutional and private providers in New York City.

G Fairbrother1, S Friedman, G C Butts, J Cukor, A Tassi.   

Abstract

The study objective was to examine quality oversight efforts by Medicaid managed care organizations (MCOs) for children in a sample of ambulatory care institutions and private practices in New York City. This was a cross-sectional study of quality assurance priorities and strategies of MCOs and their impact date in institutions in New York City. Data were from structured interviews administered in 1997 to medical directors in the eight largest MCOs; and medical directors, heads of ambulatory pediatrics, and institutional pediatricians in a random sample of 15 institutions and 20 private office-based providers. Medical directors in MCOs reported that their main priority areas were the preventive care measures (e.g., immunization and lead screening) that they must report to the state. Knowledge of these MCO priority areas and monitoring activities was high for medical directors in the random sample, but decreased from these medical directors to heads of ambulatory pediatrics to institutional pediatricians, with the differences between the medical directors and institutional pediatricians significant (P < .05). However, 96% of the institutional pediatricians reported knowing their own institution's priorities and monitoring activities. In contrast, most private pediatricians reported they knew MCO priorities and monitoring activities (80%). Less than 33% of any group reported activities as "very effective" or felt any incentive to improve performance. There was a high level of overlap in provider networks, with institutions and private providers having children in many MCOs, and MCOs having children in many sites. Conclusions. The current model of quality oversight is producing reports for the state, but is not translating into effective strategies at the provider level. The need to work through the leadership in institutions to influence quality is highlighted. The level of overlap in provider networks suggests the need for collaboration among MCOs in quality monitoring.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11194303      PMCID: PMC3456772          DOI: 10.1007/BF02344024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urban Health        ISSN: 1099-3460            Impact factor:   3.671


  13 in total

1.  Making report cards work.

Authors:  E K Wicks; J A Meyer
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  1999 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.301

2.  IMPROVE: bridge over troubled waters.

Authors:  S Magnan; L I Solberg; T E Kottke; A F Nelson; G M Amundson; S Richards; M K Reed
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Improv       Date:  1998-10

Review 3.  Children and managed health care: analysis and recommendations.

Authors:  L W Deal; P H Shiono; R E Behrman
Journal:  Future Child       Date:  1998 Summer-Fall

4.  The National Committee for Quality Assurance.

Authors:  J K Iglehart
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1996-09-26       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Beyond competition.

Authors:  R A Berenson
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  1997 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.301

6.  Access to office-based physicians under capitation reimbursement and Medicaid case management. Findings from the Children's Medicaid Program.

Authors:  M M Hohlen; L M Manheim; G V Fleming; S M Davidson; B K Yudkowsky; S M Werner; G M Wheatley
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  The dynamics of Medicaid enrollment.

Authors:  P F Short; J C Cantor; A C Monheit
Journal:  Inquiry       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 1.730

8.  Commentary: Lessons from Medicaid--improving access to office-based physician care for the low-income population.

Authors:  D Rowland; A Salganicoff
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  Quality management by state Medicaid agencies converting to managed care: plans and current practice.

Authors:  B E Landon; C Tobias; A M Epstein
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-01-21       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  A comparison of physician-patient interaction at fee-for-service and HMO sites.

Authors:  E J Callahan; K D Bertakis
Journal:  Fam Pract Res J       Date:  1993-06
View more
  1 in total

1.  Improving the process through which health plans and providers exchange performance-related mammography data.

Authors:  Gerry Fairbrother; James Luciano; Heidi L Park
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.671

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.