Comparison of perinatal outcomes among TennCare managed care organizations

被引:8
作者
Cooper, WO
Hickson, GB
Mitchel, EF
Ray, WA
机构
[1] Vanderbilt Univ, Sch Med, Dept Pediat, Nashville, TN 37212 USA
[2] Vanderbilt Univ, Sch Med, Dept Prevent Med, Nashville, TN 37212 USA
关键词
perinatal outcomes; managed care programs; Medicaid; infant death;
D O I
10.1542/peds.104.3.525
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Objective. To compare perinatal outcomes among the managed care organizations (MCOs) providing care to beneficiaries enrolled in TennCare, Tennessee's capitated Medicaid managed care program. Design. Retrospective cohort analysis. Subjects. Infants born in Tennessee during 1995 to women enrolled in TennCare. Primary Outcome Measures. Prenatal care use, birth weight (BW), death in the first 60 days of life, and delivery of extremely low BW (< 1000 g) infants in hospitals without level 3 neonatal intensive care units. Results. During 1995, 34 402 infants were born to mothers enrolled in TennCare. The MCOs differed widely in the demographic characteristics of their enrollees. In addition, there were small differences in prenatal care utilization, but no differences in BW outcomes among the MCOs. In multivariate analysis, however, infants born to women enrolled in 1 MCO were 2.8 times more likely to die in the first 60 days of life than were infants born to women enrolled in the largest MCO (OR: 2.81; 95% CI: 1.31-6.03). Women enrolled in this same MCO seemed to have a higher proportion of extremely low BW (< 1000 g) infants delivering in a hospital lacking a level 3 neonatal intensive care unit (38% vs 20% in the largest MCO). Conclusion. The differences among MCOs in early infant death and in the delivery of high-risk infants in hospitals lacking appropriate neonatal facilities suggest that monitoring of care delivery to vulnerable children should include assessment of appropriate use of specialized services.
引用
收藏
页码:525 / 529
页数:5
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]  
Altman D. G., 1991, Practical Statistics for Medical Research, V1st, P210
[2]  
[Anonymous], CENS POP HOUS SUMM
[3]  
Corrigan J M, 1993, Jt Comm J Qual Improv, V19, P566
[4]  
*CTR BUS EC RES U, 1991, TENN STAT ABSTR
[5]  
FREEMAN RK, 1992, GUIDELINES PERINATAL
[6]   AN EVALUATION OF THE KESSNER ADEQUACY OF PRENATAL-CARE INDEX AND A PROPOSED ADEQUACY OF PRENATAL-CARE UTILIZATION INDEX [J].
KOTELCHUCK, M .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 1994, 84 (09) :1414-1420
[7]  
KRAMER MS, 1987, B WORLD HEALTH ORGAN, V65, P663
[8]   MEDICAID PRENATAL-CARE - A COMPARISON OF USE AND OUTCOMES IN FEE-FOR-SERVICE AND MANAGED CARE [J].
KRIEGER, JW ;
CONNELL, FA ;
LOGERFO, JP .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 1992, 82 (02) :185-190
[9]   TENNCARE - HEALTH SYSTEM REFORM FOR TENNESSEE [J].
MIRVIS, DM ;
CHANG, CF ;
HALL, CJ ;
ZAAR, GT ;
APPLEGATE, WB .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1995, 274 (15) :1235-1241
[10]  
Phibbs CS, 1996, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V276, P1054