Association Between Quality of Care and the Sociodemographic Composition of Physicians' Patient Panels: A Repeat Cross-Sectional Analysis

Center for Studying Health System Change, 600 Maryland Avenue SW Suite 550, Washington, DC 20024, USA.
Journal of General Internal Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.42). 05/2011; 26(9):987-94. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-011-1740-7
Source: PubMed


Pay-for-performance programs could worsen health disparities if providers who care for disadvantaged patients face systematic barriers to providing high-quality care. Risk adjustment that includes sociodemographic factors could mitigate the financial incentive to avoid disadvantaged patients.
To test for associations between quality of care and the composition of a physician's patient panel.
Repeat cross-sectional analysis
Nationally representative sample of US primary care physicians responding to a panel telephone survey in 2000-2001 and 2004-2005
Quality of primary care as measured by provision of eight recommended preventive services (diabetic monitoring [hemoglobin A1c testing, eye examinations, cholesterol testing and urine protein analysis], cancer screening [screening colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy and mammography], and vaccinations against influenza and pneumococcus) documented in Medicare claims data and the association between quality and the sociodemographic composition of physicians' patient panels.
Across eight quality measures, physicians' quality of care was not consistently associated with the composition of their patient panel either in a single year or between time periods. For example, a substantial number (seven) of the eighteen significant associations seen between sociodemographic characteristics and the delivery of preventive services in the first time period were no longer seen in the second time period. Among sociodemographic characteristics, panel Medicaid eligibility was most consistently associated with differences in the delivery of preventive services between time points; among preventive services, the delivery of influenza vaccine was most likely to demonstrate disparities in both time points.
In a Medicare pay-for-performance program, a better understanding of the effect of effect of patient panel composition on physicians' quality of care may be necessary before implementing routine statistical adjustment, since the association of quality and sociodemographic composition is small and inconsistent. In addition, we observed improvements between time periods among physicians with varying panel composition.

Download full-text


Available from: Eric Carl Schneider, Jul 23, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Health care reimbursement is increasingly based on quality. Little is known about how clinic-level patient characteristics affect quality, particularly in community health centers (CHCs). Using data from electronic health records for 4019 diabetic patients from 23 primary care CHCs in the OCHIN practice-based research network, we calculated correlations between a clinic's patient panel characteristics and rates of delivery of diabetes preventive services in 2007. Using regression models, we estimated the proportion of variability in clinics' preventive services rates associated with the variability in the clinics' patient panel characteristics. We also explored whether clinics' performance rates were affected by how patient panel denominators were defined. Clinic rates of hemoglobin testing, influenza immunizations, and lipid screening were positively associated with the percentage of patients with continuous health insurance coverage and negatively associated with the percentage of uninsured patients. Microalbumin screening rates were positively associated with the percentage of racial minorities in a clinic's panel. Associations remained consistent with different panel denominators. Clinic variability in delivery rates of preventive services correlates with differences in clinics' patient panel characteristics, particularly the percentage of patients with continuous insurance coverage. Quality scores that do not account for these differences could create disincentives to clinics providing diabetes care for vulnerable patients.
    The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine 11/2013; 26(6):669-79. DOI:10.3122/jabfm.2013.06.130018 · 1.98 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess the feasibility of refining physician quality indicators of screening mammography use based on patient life expectancy. Retrospective population-based cohort study. Texas. Three thousand five hundred ninety-five usual care providers (UCPs) with at least 10 female patients aged 67 and older on January 1, 2008, with an estimated life expectancy of 7 years or more (222,584 women) and at least 10 women with an estimated life expectancy of less than 7 years (90,903 women), based on age and comorbidity. Screening mammography use in 2008–09 by each provider in each population. The average adjusted mammography screening rates for UCPs were 31.1% for women with a life expectancy of less than 7 years and 55.2% for women with a life expectancy of 7 years or longer. For women with limited life expectancy, 3.7% of UCPs had significantly lower and 9.2% had significantly higher than average adjusted mammography screening rates. For women with longer life expectancy, 16.7% of UCPs had significantly lower and 19.7% had significantly higher than average rates. UCP adjusted screening rates were stable over time (2006–07 vs 2008–09, correlation coefficient (r) = 0.65, P < .001). There was a strong correlation between UCP screening rates for their female patients with a life expectancy of less than 7 years and 7 years or longer (r = 0.67, P < .001). Most physician characteristics associated with higher screening rates (e.g., being female and foreign trained) in women with longer life expectancy were also associated with higher screening rates in women with limited life expectancy. Providers with high mammography screening rates for women with longer life expectancy also tend to screen women with limited life expectancy. Quality indicators for screening practice can be improved by distinguishing appropriate use from overuse based on patient life expectancy.
    Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 03/2013; 61(3). DOI:10.1111/jgs.12151 · 4.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Efforts to improve primary care diabetes management have assessed strategies across heterogeneous groups of patients and practices. However, there is substantial variability in how well practices implement interventions and achieve desired outcomes. Objective To examine practice contextual features that moderate intervention effectiveness. Design Secondary analysis of data from a cluster randomized trial of three approaches for implementing the Chronic Care Model to improve diabetes care. Participants Forty small to mid-sized primary care practices participated, with 522 clinician and staff member surveys. Outcomes were assessed for 822 established patients with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes who had at least one visit to the practice in the 18 months following enrollment. Main Measures The primary outcome was a composite measure of diabetes process of care, ascertained by chart audit, regarding nine quality measures from the American Diabetes Association Physician Recognition Program: HgA1c, foot exam, blood pressure, dilated eye exam, cholesterol, nephropathy screen, flu shot, nutrition counseling, and self-management support. Data from practices included structural and demographic characteristics and Practice Culture Assessment survey subscales (Change Culture, Work Culture, Chaos). Key Results Across the three implementation approaches, demographic/structural characteristics (rural vs. urban + .70(p = .006), +2.44(p variability in practice Change Culture (high vs. low: −.24(p = .006), −.20(p = .0771), −.44(p = .0019) and Work Culture (high vs. low: +.56(p = .3160), −1.0(p = .008), −.25 (p = .0216) were associated with trajectories of change in diabetes process of care, either directly or differentially by study arm. Conclusions This study supports the need for broader use of methodological approaches to better examine contextual effects on implementation and effectiveness of quality improvement interventions in primary care settings.
    Journal of General Internal Medicine 12/2014; 30(4). DOI:10.1007/s11606-014-3131-3 · 3.45 Impact Factor
Show more