OBJECTIVE: To assess limitations of using select Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA) core claims-based measures in capturing the preventive services that may occur in the clinical setting. METHODS: We use claims data from ALL Kids, the Alabama Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), to calculate each of four quality measures under two alternative definitions: (1) the formal claims-based guidelines outlined in the CMS Technical Specifications, and (2) a broader definition of appropriate claims for identifying preventive service use. Additionally, we examine the extent to which these two claims-based approaches to measuring quality differ in assessments of disparities in quality of care across subgroups of children. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences in rates were identified when comparing the two definitions for calculating each quality measure. Measure differences ranged from a 1.9 percentage point change for measure #13 (receiving preventive dental services) to a 25.5 percentage point change for measure #12 (adolescent well-care visit). We were able to identify subgroups based upon family income, rural location, and chronic disease status with differences in quality within the core measures. However, some identified disparities were sensitive to the approach used to calculate the quality measure. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in CHIP design and structure, across states and over time, may limit the usefulness of select claims-based core measures for detecting disparities accurately. Additional guidance and research may be necessary before reporting of the measures becomes mandatory.
OBJECTIVE: To assess limitations of using select Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA) core claims-based measures in capturing the preventive services that may occur in the clinical setting. METHODS: We use claims data from ALL Kids, the Alabama Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), to calculate each of four quality measures under two alternative definitions: (1) the formal claims-based guidelines outlined in the CMS Technical Specifications, and (2) a broader definition of appropriate claims for identifying preventive service use. Additionally, we examine the extent to which these two claims-based approaches to measuring quality differ in assessments of disparities in quality of care across subgroups of children. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences in rates were identified when comparing the two definitions for calculating each quality measure. Measure differences ranged from a 1.9 percentage point change for measure #13 (receiving preventive dental services) to a 25.5 percentage point change for measure #12 (adolescent well-care visit). We were able to identify subgroups based upon family income, rural location, and chronic disease status with differences in quality within the core measures. However, some identified disparities were sensitive to the approach used to calculate the quality measure. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in CHIP design and structure, across states and over time, may limit the usefulness of select claims-based core measures for detecting disparities accurately. Additional guidance and research may be necessary before reporting of the measures becomes mandatory.
Entities:
Keywords:
Administrative Data Uses; Child and Adolescent Health; Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP, SCHIP); Quality of Care / Patient Safety (Measurement)
Authors: Genevieve M Kenney; James Marton; Ariel E Klein; Jennifer E Pelletier; Jeffery Talbert Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2010-11-05 Impact factor: 3.402