Literature DB >> 26979611

Group Prenatal Care Results in Medicaid Savings with Better Outcomes: A Propensity Score Analysis of CenteringPregnancy Participation in South Carolina.

Sarah Gareau1, Ana Lòpez-De Fede2, Brandon L Loudermilk1, Tammy H Cummings1, James W Hardin1,3, Amy H Picklesimer4, Elizabeth Crouch5, Sarah Covington-Kolb4.   

Abstract

Objectives This study was undertaken to determine the cost savings of prevention of adverse birth outcomes for Medicaid women participating in the CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care program at a pilot program in South Carolina. Methods A retrospective five-year cohort study of Medicaid women was assessed for differences in birth outcomes among women involved in CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care (n = 1262) and those receiving individual prenatal care (n = 5066). The study outcomes examined were premature birth and the related outcomes of low birthweight (LBW) and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) visits. Because women were not assigned to the CenteringPregnancy group, a propensity score analysis ensured that the inference of the estimated difference in birth outcomes between the treatment groups was adjusted for nonrandom assignment based on age, race, Clinical Risk Group, and plan type. A series of generalized linear models were run to estimate the difference between the proportions of individuals with adverse birth outcomes, or the risk differences, for CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care participation. Estimated risk differences, the coefficient on the CenteringPregnancy group indicator variable from identity-link binomial variance generalized linear models, were then used to calculate potential cost savings due to participation in the CenteringPregnancy group. Results This study estimated that CenteringPregnancy participation reduced the risk of premature birth (36 %, P < 0.05). For every premature birth prevented, there was an average savings of $22,667 in health expenditures. Participation in CenteringPregnancy reduced the incidence of delivering an infant that was LBW (44 %, P < 0.05, $29,627). Additionally, infants of CenteringPregnancy participants had a reduced risk of a NICU stay (28 %, P < 0.05, $27,249). After considering the state investment of $1.7 million, there was an estimated return on investment of nearly $2.3 million. Conclusions Cost savings were achieved with better outcomes due to the participation in CenteringPregnancy among low-risk Medicaid beneficiaries.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Birth outcomes; CenteringPregnancy; Cost savings; Low birthweight; Medicaid; Neonatal intensive care; Preterm birth

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26979611     DOI: 10.1007/s10995-016-1935-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Matern Child Health J        ISSN: 1092-7875


  24 in total

1.  Evaluation of a group prenatal care-based curriculum in a family medicine residency.

Authors:  Wendy B Barr; Sana Aslam; Marc Levin
Journal:  Fam Med       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.756

2.  Results of multivariable logistic regression, propensity matching, propensity adjustment, and propensity-based weighting under conditions of nonuniform effect.

Authors:  Tobias Kurth; Alexander M Walker; Robert J Glynn; K Arnold Chan; J Michael Gaziano; Klaus Berger; James M Robins
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2005-12-21       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 3.  Use of number needed to treat in cost-effectiveness analyses.

Authors:  Vishvas Garg; Xian Shen; Yan Cheng; James J Nawarskas; Dennis W Raisch
Journal:  Ann Pharmacother       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 3.154

4.  Improved adequacy of prenatal care and healthcare utilization among low-income Latinas receiving group prenatal care.

Authors:  S Darius Tandon; Fallon Cluxton-Keller; Lucinda Colon; Patricia Vega; Alina Alonso
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2013-10-12       Impact factor: 2.681

5.  The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect.

Authors:  R J Cook; D L Sackett
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-02-18

6.  Effects of group prenatal care on psychosocial risk in pregnancy: results from a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Jeannette R Ickovics; Elizabeth Reed; Urania Magriples; Claire Westdahl; Sharon Schindler Rising; Trace S Kershaw
Journal:  Psychol Health       Date:  2011-02

7.  The effect of CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care on preterm birth in a low-income population.

Authors:  Amy H Picklesimer; Deborah Billings; Nathan Hale; Dawn Blackhurst; Sarah Covington-Kolb
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Pregnancy outcomes of adolescents enrolled in a CenteringPregnancy program.

Authors:  Mary Alice Grady; Kathaleen C Bloom
Journal:  J Midwifery Womens Health       Date:  2004 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.388

9.  Group Prenatal Care: A Financial Perspective.

Authors:  Rebecca A Rowley; Lindsay E Phillips; Lisa O'Dell; Racha El Husseini; Sarah Carpino; Scott Hartman
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2016-01

10.  Why Are Half of Women Interested in Participating in Group Prenatal Care?

Authors:  Sarah D McDonald; Wendy Sword; Leyla N Eryuzlu; Binod Neupane; Joseph Beyene; Anne B Biringer
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2016-01
View more
  17 in total

1.  Effects of a Multi-site Expansion of Group Prenatal Care on Birth Outcomes.

Authors:  Amy H Crockett; Emily C Heberlein; Jessica C Smith; Pelin Ozluk; Sarah Covington-Kolb; Carla Willis
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2019-10

2.  Inequality and Innovation: Barriers and Facilitators to 17P Administration to Prevent Preterm Birth among Medicaid Participants.

Authors:  Caitlin Cross-Barnet; Sarah Benatar; Brigette Courtot; Ian Hill; Emily Johnston; Morgan Cheeks
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2018-11

3.  PROCESS AND SYSTEMS: A systems approach to embedding group consultations in the NHS.

Authors:  Tania Jones; Ara Darzi; Garry Egger; Jeannette Ickovics; Ed Noffsinger; Kamalini Ramdas; John Stevens; Marianne Sumego; Fraser Birrell
Journal:  Future Healthc J       Date:  2019-02

4.  Improving Access to Integrative Oncology Through Group Medical Visits: A Pilot Implementation Project.

Authors:  Ariana Thompson-Lastad; Chloe E Atreya; Maria T Chao; Christine Pollak; Anand Dhruva; Trilce Santana; Donald I Abrams
Journal:  J Altern Complement Med       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 2.579

5.  The Quadruple Aim as a Framework for Integrative Group Medical Visits.

Authors:  Isabel Roth; Ariana Thompson-Lastad; A Udaya Thomas
Journal:  J Altern Complement Med       Date:  2020-01-22       Impact factor: 2.579

6.  Implementing Group Prenatal Care in Southwest Georgia Through Public-Private Partnerships.

Authors:  Jacqueline H Grant; Katherine Handwerk; Karen Baker; VaLenia Milling; Sharonda Barlow; Catherine J Vladutiu
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2018-11

7.  Effect of the Medicaid Primary Care Rate Increase on Prenatal Care Utilization Among Medicaid-Insured Women.

Authors:  Jing Li; Michael F Pesko; Mark A Unruh; Hye-Young Jung
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2019-11

8.  Group Prenatal Care Attendance and Women's Characteristics Associated with Low Attendance: Results from Centering and Racial Disparities (CRADLE Study).

Authors:  Ellen Francis; Mary Beth Johnstone; Sarah Convington-Kolb; Brian Witrick; Sarah F Griffin; Xiaoqian Sun; Amy Crockett; Liwei Chen
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2019-10

9.  Race, Medicaid Coverage, and Equity in Maternal Morbidity.

Authors:  Clare C Brown; Caroline E Adams; Jennifer E Moore
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2021-01-21

10.  PretermConnect: Leveraging mobile technology to mitigate social disadvantage in the NICU and beyond.

Authors:  Shilpa G Jani; Audrey D Nguyen; Zara Abraham; Melissa Scala; Yair J Blumenfeld; Jane Morton; Monique Nguyen; Jasmin Ma; Julianna C Hsing; Manafoh Moiwa-Grant; Jochen Profit; C Jason Wang
Journal:  Semin Perinatol       Date:  2021-03-21       Impact factor: 3.311

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.