M Laura Johnson1, Hector P Rodriguez, M Rosa Solorio. 1. Department of Health Services, University of California, Los Angeles, PO Box 951772, 650 Charles E. Young Drive South, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of case-mix adjustment on community health center (CHC) performance on patient experience measures. DATA SOURCES: A Medicaid-managed care plan in Washington State collected patient survey data from 33 CHCs over three fiscal quarters during 2007-2008. The survey included three composite patient experience measures (6-month reports) and two overall ratings of care. The analytic sample includes 2,247 adult patients and 2,859 adults reporting for child patients. STUDY DESIGN: We compared the relative importance of patient case-mix adjusters by calculating each adjuster's predictive power and variability across CHCs. We then evaluated the impact of case-mix adjustment on the relative ranking of CHCs. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Important case-mix adjusters included adult self-reported health status or parent-reported child health status, adult age, and educational attainment. The effects of case-mix adjustment on patient reports and ratings were different in the adult and child samples. Adjusting for race/ethnicity and language had a greater impact on parent reports than adult reports, but it impacted ratings similarly across the samples. The impact of adjustment on composites and ratings was modest, but it affected the relative ranking of CHCs. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure equitable comparison of CHC performance on patient experience measures, reports and ratings should be adjusted for adult self-reported health status or parent-reported child health status, adult age, education, race/ethnicity, and survey language. Because of the differential impact of case-mix adjusters for child and adult surveys, initiatives should consider measuring and reporting adult and child scores separately.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of case-mix adjustment on community health center (CHC) performance on patient experience measures. DATA SOURCES: A Medicaid-managed care plan in Washington State collected patient survey data from 33 CHCs over three fiscal quarters during 2007-2008. The survey included three composite patient experience measures (6-month reports) and two overall ratings of care. The analytic sample includes 2,247 adult patients and 2,859 adults reporting for childpatients. STUDY DESIGN: We compared the relative importance of patient case-mix adjusters by calculating each adjuster's predictive power and variability across CHCs. We then evaluated the impact of case-mix adjustment on the relative ranking of CHCs. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Important case-mix adjusters included adult self-reported health status or parent-reported child health status, adult age, and educational attainment. The effects of case-mix adjustment on patient reports and ratings were different in the adult and child samples. Adjusting for race/ethnicity and language had a greater impact on parent reports than adult reports, but it impacted ratings similarly across the samples. The impact of adjustment on composites and ratings was modest, but it affected the relative ranking of CHCs. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure equitable comparison of CHC performance on patient experience measures, reports and ratings should be adjusted for adult self-reported health status or parent-reported child health status, adult age, education, race/ethnicity, and survey language. Because of the differential impact of case-mix adjusters for child and adult surveys, initiatives should consider measuring and reporting adult and child scores separately.
Authors: Floyd Jackson Fowler; Patricia M Gallagher; Vickie L Stringfellow; Alan M Zaslavsky; Joseph W Thompson; Paul D Cleary Journal: Med Care Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Estevan A Garcia; Lonnie C Roy; Pamela J Okada; Sebrina D Perkins; Robert A Wiebe Journal: Pediatr Emerg Care Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 1.454
Authors: Laura L Eselius; Paul D Cleary; Alan M Zaslavsky; Haiden A Huskamp; Susan H Busch Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2008-09-08 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Hector P Rodriguez; Ted von Glahn; David E Grembowski; William H Rogers; Dana Gelb Safran Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-07-24 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Tenbroeck G Smith; Alyssa N Troeschel; Kathleen M Castro; Neeraj K Arora; Kevin Stein; Joseph Lipscomb; Otis W Brawley; Ryan M McCabe; Steven B Clauser; Elizabeth Ward Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-05-17 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lucinda B Leung; Arturo Vargas-Bustamante; Ana E Martinez; Xiao Chen; Hector P Rodriguez Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2016-10-21 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Alyssa Troeschel; Tenbroeck Smith; Kathleen Castro; Katherine Treiman; Joseph Lipscomb; Ryan M McCabe; Steven Clauser; Eliot L Friedman; Patricia D Hegedus; Kenneth Portier Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2016-06-23 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Dolf de Boer; Michael van den Berg; Marta Ballester; Janika Bloemeke; Wienke Boerma; Katherine de Bienassis; Peter Groenewegen; Oliver Groene; Candan Kendir; Niek Klazinga; Ian Porter; Rosa Sunol; Laura Thomas; Jose Maria Valderas; Rachel Williams; Mieke Rijken Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-09-19 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Hector P Rodriguez; Mark W Friedberg; Arturo Vargas-Bustamante; Xiao Chen; Ana E Martinez; Dylan H Roby Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 2.655