Literature DB >> 2061055

Prepaid versus traditional Medicaid plans: lack of effect on pregnancy outcomes and prenatal care.

T S Carey1, K Weis, C Homer.   

Abstract

Enrollment of Medicaid recipients into capitated, case-managed systems has been advocated as a method of controlling cost. We studied prenatal care and birth outcomes for women and children enrolled in Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) in two capitated programs in Santa Barbara, California and Jackson County, Missouri (Prepaid), compared with similar but fee-for-service comparison medical communities in Ventura County, California and St. Louis, Missouri (FFS). At the sites of care, 2,336 inpatient and 823 prenatal care records were abstracted. Women at all sites received fewer than the recommended number of prenatal visits. At no site did more than 40 percent of women receive prenatal care in the first trimester of pregnancy. Mean birth weight and proportion of children of low birth weight (less than 2,500 grams) were similar between the demonstration and comparison counties. Complications of pregnancy and cesarean section rates were also similar between demonstration and comparison counties. This study did not demonstrate a decreased quality of care provided to enrollees in capitated, case-managed Medicaid programs compared with fee-for-service. Basic prenatal care was provided only to some members of this population, regardless of the type of physician payment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 2061055      PMCID: PMC1069818     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Res        ISSN: 0017-9124            Impact factor:   3.402


  13 in total

1.  Competitive health plans and alternative payment arrangements for physicians in the United States: public sector examples.

Authors:  D A Freund
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  What determines the start of prenatal care? Prenatal care, insurance, and education.

Authors:  J P Cooney
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1985-08       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  Comparison of health outcomes at a health maintenance organisation with those of fee-for-service care.

Authors:  J E Ware; R H Brook; W H Rogers; E B Keeler; A R Davies; C D Sherbourne; G A Goldberg; P Camp; J P Newhouse
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-05-03       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Prenatal care and pregnancy outcome in an HMO and general population: a multivariate cohort analysis.

Authors:  J D Quick; M R Greenlick; K J Roghmann
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1981-04       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  A controlled trial of the effect of a prepaid group practice on use of services.

Authors:  W G Manning; A Leibowitz; G A Goldberg; W H Rogers; J P Newhouse
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1984-06-07       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Assessing the evidence on HMO performance.

Authors:  H S Luft
Journal:  Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc       Date:  1980

7.  Effect of a health maintenance organization on physiologic health. Results from a randomized trial.

Authors:  E M Sloss; E B Keeler; R H Brook; B H Operskalski; G A Goldberg; J P Newhouse
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1987-01       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  The impact of the Mississippi Improved Child Health Project on prenatal care and low birthweight.

Authors:  D M Strobino; G A Chase; Y J Kim; B E Crawley; J H Salim; G Baruffi
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  Birth weight among women of different ethnic groups.

Authors:  P H Shiono; M A Klebanoff; B I Graubard; H W Berendes; G G Rhoads
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1986-01-03       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Evaluation of the Medicaid competition demonstrations.

Authors:  D A Freund; L F Rossiter; P D Fox; J A Meyer; R E Hurley; T S Carey; J E Paul
Journal:  Health Care Financ Rev       Date:  1989
View more
  15 in total

1.  Medicaid and preterm births in Virginia: an analysis of recent outcomes.

Authors:  Emmanuel A Anum; Sheldon M Retchin; Sheryl L Garland; Jerome F Strauss
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2010-09-11       Impact factor: 2.681

2.  How good is the quality of health care in the United States? 1998.

Authors:  Mark A Schuster; Elizabeth A McGlynn; Robert H Brook
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.911

3.  Impact of the HealthChoice program on cesarean section and vaginal birth after C-section deliveries: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Arpit Misra
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2007-06-05

4.  Obstetric care and payment source: do low-risk Medicaid women get less care?

Authors:  S Dobie; L G Hart; M Fordyce; C H Andrilla; R A Rosenblatt
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  A comparison of capitated and fee-for-service Medicaid reimbursement methods on pregnancy outcomes.

Authors:  D M Oleske; M L Branca; J B Schmidt; R Ferguson; E S Linn
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 3.402

6.  Primary care case management and birth outcomes in the Iowa Medicaid program.

Authors:  E D Schulman; D J Sheriff; E T Momany
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Use of social services by pregnant Medicaid eligible women in Baltimore.

Authors:  C S Minkovitz; A K Duggan; M H Fox; M H Wilson
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  1999-09

Review 8.  Medicaid and preterm birth and low birth weight: the last two decades.

Authors:  Emmanuel A Anum; Sheldon M Retchin; Jerome F Strauss
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.681

Review 9.  The efficacy of primary care for vulnerable population groups.

Authors:  D Blumenthal; E Mort; J Edwards
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 3.402

10.  The relationship of prenatal care and pregnancy complications to birthweight in Winnipeg, Canada.

Authors:  C A Mustard; N P Roos
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 9.308

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.