SeungJin Bae1, Meredith B Rosenthal. 1. Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. genice@hiramail.net
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The implications of measuring and rewarding performance for patients with multiple chronic conditions have not been explored empirically. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the number of chronic conditions was associated with patient's receipt of recommended preventive care. METHODS: We evaluated the association between the likelihood of receiving recommended preventive care and the number of chronic conditions in the diabetic population by analyzing the 2003 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey using logistic regression. Demographic characteristics and the number of chronic conditions were compared using chi(2) tests. OUTCOME MEASURES: Hemoglobin A1C test and diabetic eye exam. RESULTS: In 2003, approximately 14.2 million non-institutionalized Americans had diabetes and 23% of them had five or more chronic conditions besides diabetes. Those patients were 67% (p < 0.05) and 50% (p < 0.001) more likely to receive hemoglobin A1C test and eye exams compared with diabetic patients with no additional chronic conditions. After adjusting for the number of office-based physician visits, a larger number of chronic conditions did not significantly affect the likelihood of receiving recommended care. Diabetic patients with more chronic conditions had more frequent office-based physician visits (p < 0.0001), and patients with 11 or more annual office-based physician visits were 43% (p < 0.05) and 40% (p < 0.01) more likely to receive hemoglobin A1C test and eye exam, respectively, compared with diabetic patients who had less than two office-based physician visits. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic patients with more chronic conditions may receive better quality of preventive care, partly due to their higher number of office-based physician visits.
BACKGROUND: The implications of measuring and rewarding performance for patients with multiple chronic conditions have not been explored empirically. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the number of chronic conditions was associated with patient's receipt of recommended preventive care. METHODS: We evaluated the association between the likelihood of receiving recommended preventive care and the number of chronic conditions in the diabetic population by analyzing the 2003 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey using logistic regression. Demographic characteristics and the number of chronic conditions were compared using chi(2) tests. OUTCOME MEASURES: Hemoglobin A1C test and diabetic eye exam. RESULTS: In 2003, approximately 14.2 million non-institutionalized Americans had diabetes and 23% of them had five or more chronic conditions besides diabetes. Those patients were 67% (p < 0.05) and 50% (p < 0.001) more likely to receive hemoglobin A1C test and eye exams compared with diabeticpatients with no additional chronic conditions. After adjusting for the number of office-based physician visits, a larger number of chronic conditions did not significantly affect the likelihood of receiving recommended care. Diabeticpatients with more chronic conditions had more frequent office-based physician visits (p < 0.0001), and patients with 11 or more annual office-based physician visits were 43% (p < 0.05) and 40% (p < 0.01) more likely to receive hemoglobin A1C test and eye exam, respectively, compared with diabeticpatients who had less than two office-based physician visits. CONCLUSIONS:Diabeticpatients with more chronic conditions may receive better quality of preventive care, partly due to their higher number of office-based physician visits.
Authors: Angelica P Herrera; Matthew Lee Smith; Marcia G Ory; Hector P Rodriguez; Ruth Warre; Wesley K Thompson; Annette Azcue; Jairo A Romero Journal: J Aging Health Date: 2011-10
Authors: Elizabeth A Bayliss; Patrick J Blatchford; Sophia R Newcomer; John F Steiner; Diane L Fairclough Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-01-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Eindra Aung; Maria Donald; Joseph Coll; Jo Dower; Gail M Williams; Suhail A R Doi Journal: Health Expect Date: 2013-10-24 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Elizabeth M Magnan; Daniel M Bolt; Robert T Greenlee; Jennifer Fink; Maureen A Smith Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2016-11-13 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Lena M Chen; Arnold M Epstein; E John Orav; Clara E Filice; Lok Wong Samson; Karen E Joynt Maddox Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ignacio Ricci-Cabello; Sarah Stevens; Evangelos Kontopantelis; Andrew R H Dalton; Robert I Griffiths; John L Campbell; Tim Doran; Jose M Valderas Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 5.166