Measuring prevention more broadly: an empirical assessment of CHIPRA core measures

Nir Menachemi, Justin Blackburn, David J. Becker, Michael A. Morrisey, Bisakha Sen, Cathy Caldwell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalMedicare & medicaid research review
Volume3
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Quality of Health Care
Tooth
Chronic Disease
Guidelines
Research
Children's Health Insurance Program

Keywords

  • Administrative Data Uses
  • Child and Adolescent Health
  • Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP, SCHIP)
  • Quality of Care / Patient Safety (Measurement)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Health Policy

Cite this

Measuring prevention more broadly : an empirical assessment of CHIPRA core measures. / Menachemi, Nir; Blackburn, Justin; Becker, David J.; Morrisey, Michael A.; Sen, Bisakha; Caldwell, Cathy.

In: Medicare & medicaid research review, Vol. 3, No. 3, 01.01.2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Menachemi, Nir ; Blackburn, Justin ; Becker, David J. ; Morrisey, Michael A. ; Sen, Bisakha ; Caldwell, Cathy. / Measuring prevention more broadly : an empirical assessment of CHIPRA core measures. In: Medicare & medicaid research review. 2013 ; Vol. 3, No. 3.
@article{d2db94e4045f4b3581940e4350f5ffd9,
title = "Measuring prevention more broadly: an empirical assessment of CHIPRA core measures",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "Administrative Data Uses, Child and Adolescent Health, Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP, SCHIP), Quality of Care / Patient Safety (Measurement)",
author = "Nir Menachemi and Justin Blackburn and Becker, {David J.} and Morrisey, {Michael A.} and Bisakha Sen and Cathy Caldwell",
year = "2013",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5600/mmrr.003.03.a04",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "3",
journal = "Health Care Financing Review",
issn = "2159-0354",
publisher = "Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Office of Research, Development & Information",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Measuring prevention more broadly

T2 - an empirical assessment of CHIPRA core measures

AU - Menachemi, Nir

AU - Blackburn, Justin

AU - Becker, David J.

AU - Morrisey, Michael A.

AU - Sen, Bisakha

AU - Caldwell, Cathy

PY - 2013/1/1

Y1 - 2013/1/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Administrative Data Uses

KW - Child and Adolescent Health

KW - Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP, SCHIP)

KW - Quality of Care / Patient Safety (Measurement)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85006314845&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85006314845&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5600/mmrr.003.03.a04

DO - 10.5600/mmrr.003.03.a04

M3 - Article

C2 - 24800161

AN - SCOPUS:85006314845

VL - 3

JO - Health Care Financing Review

JF - Health Care Financing Review

SN - 2159-0354

IS - 3

ER -