Cost-effectiveness of assertive community treatment versus standard case management for persons with co-occurring severe mental illness and substance use disorders.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) in comparison to Standard Case Management (SCM) for persons with severe mental illness and substance use disorders. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: Original data on the effectiveness and social costs of ACT and SCM that were collected between 1989 and 1995. Seven community mental health centers in New Hampshire provided both types of treatment. STUDY DESIGN: Persons with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or bipolar disorder and a concurrent substance use disorder were randomly assigned to ACT or SCM and followed for three years. The primary variables assessed were substance use, psychiatric symptoms, functioning, quality of life, and social costs. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Effectiveness data were obtained from interviews at six-month intervals with persons enrolled in treatment and with their service providers. Social cost and service utilization data came from client reports; interviews with informal caregivers; provider information systems and Medicaid claims; law enforcement agencies; courts; and community service providers. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Participants in both groups showed significant reductions in substance use over time. Focusing on quality of life and substance use outcomes, ACT and SCM were not significantly different in cost-effectiveness over the entire three-year study period. Longitudinal analyses showed that SCM tended to be more efficient during the first two years but that ACT was significantly more efficient than SCM during the final year of the study. CONCLUSIONS: In an adequately funded system, ACT is not more cost-effective than SCM. However, ACT efficiency appears to improve over time.

A longitudinal study of hospitalization rates for patients with chronic disease: results from the Medical Outcomes Study.

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively compare inpatient and outpatient utilization rates between prepaid (PPD) and fee-for-service (FFS) insurance coverage for patients with chronic disease. DATA SOURCE/STUDY SETTING: Data from the Medical Outcomes Study, a longitudinal observational study of chronic disease patients conducted in Boston, Chicago, and Los Angeles. STUDY DESIGN: A four-year prospective study of resource utilization among 1,681 patients under treatment for hypertension, diabetes, myocardial infarction, or congestive heart failure in the practices of 367 clinicians. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Insurance payment system (PPD or FFS), hospitalizations, and office visits were obtained from patient reports. Disease and severity indicators, sociodemographics, and self-reported functional status were used to adjust for patient mix and to compute expected utilization rates. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Compared to FFS, PPD patients had 31 percent fewer observed hospitalizations before adjustment for patient differences (p = .005) and 15 percent fewer hospitalizations than expected after adjustment (p = .078). The observed rate of FFS hospitalizations exceeded the expected rate by 9 percent. These results are not explained by system differences in patient mix or trends in hospital use over four years. Half of the PPD/FFS difference in hospitalization rate is due to intrinsic characteristics of the payment system itself. CONCLUSIONS: PPD patients with chronic medical conditions followed prospectively over four years, after extensive patient-mix adjustment, had 15 percent fewer hospitalizations than their FFS counterparts owing to differences intrinsic to the insurance reimbursement system.

Measuring resource use in economic evaluations: determining the social costs of mental illness.

Concern over costs associated with mental disorders has led to an increase in the number of economic evaluations of treatment interventions; unfortunately, methods for measuring resource use have not kept pace with this concern. Although it is well-known that a significant proportion of the costs associated with mental illness are for resources other than treatment, program evaluators and researchers often count only treatment costs in cost-effectiveness comparisons. Further, existing methods for measuring resource use are plagued by faulty assumptions about resource use, poor validity and reliability, and difficulties quantifying resource use. The authors discuss these problems and suggest five ways of improving measurement of nontreatment resources: clarifying assumptions, using multiple data sources, flexible data collection strategies, methods for improving the accuracy of recall, and an episodic approach to measurement.

Differences in the mix of patients among medical specialties and systems of care. Results from the medical outcomes study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine differences in the mix of patients among medical specialties and among organizational systems of care. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of 20,158 adults (greater than or equal to 18 years of age) who visited providers' offices during 9-day screening periods in 1986. Patient and physician information was obtained by self-administered, standardized questionnaires. SETTING: Offices of 349 physicians practicing family medicine, internal medicine, endocrinology, and cardiology within health maintenance organizations, large multispecialty groups, and solo or small single-specialty group practices in three major US cities. OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic characteristics, prevalence of chronic disease, disease-specific severity of illness, and functional status and well-being. RESULTS: Among patients with selected physician-reported chronic illnesses (diabetes, hypertension, recent myocardial infarction, or congestive heart failure), increasing levels of severity were associated with decreasing levels of functional status and well-being and with increased hospitalizations, more physician visits, and higher numbers of prescription drugs. Compared with patients of general internists, patients of cardiologists were older (56 vs 47 years, P less than .01), had worse functional status and well-being scores (P less than .01), and carried more chronic diagnoses (mean 1.32 vs 1.02, P less than .01); patients of family practitioners were younger (40 vs 47 years, P less than .01) and more functional (P less than .01), carried fewer chronic diagnoses (0.70 vs 1.02, P less than .01), and (among diabetic patients only) had lower disease-specific severity scores (2.06 vs 2.30 on a five-point scale, P less than .01). Compared with patients in health maintenance organizations, patients visiting solo practitioners under fee-for-service payment were older (50 vs 45 years, P less than .01) and sicker (had worse physical functioning) and had a higher mean number of chronic diagnoses (1.10 vs 0.93, P less than .01). CONCLUSION: Patient mix is related to utilization and differs significantly across medical specialties and systems of care. These differences must be taken into account when interpreting variations in utilization and outcomes across specialties and systems, and when considering alternative policies for payment.

Variations in resource utilization among medical specialties and systems of care. Results from the medical outcomes study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether specialty and system of care exert independent effects on resource utilization. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of just over 20,000 patients (greater than or equal to 18 years of age) who visited providers' offices during 9-day periods in 1986. Patient- and physician-provided information was obtained by self-administered questionnaires. SETTING: Offices of 349 physicians practicing family medicine, internal medicine, endocrinology, and cardiology within health maintenance organizations, large multispecialty groups, and solo practices or small single-specialty group practices in three major US cities. OUTCOME MEASURES: Indicators of the intensity of resource utilization were examined among four medical specialties (family practice, general internal medicine, cardiology, and endocrinology) and five systems of care (health maintenance organization, multispecialty group-fee-for-service, multispecialty group-prepaid; solo practice and single-specialty group-fee-for-service, and solo practice and single-specialty group-prepaid) before and after controlling for the mix of patients seen in these offices. The indicators of resource utilization were hospitalizations, annual office visits, prescription drugs, and common tests and procedures, with rates estimated on both a per-visit and per-year basis. RESULTS: Variation in patient mix was a major determinant of the large variations in resource use. However, increased utilization was also independently related to specialty (cardiology and endocrinology), fee-for-service payment plan, and solo and single-specialty group practice arrangements. After adjusting for patient mix, solo practice/single-specialty groups-fee-for-service had 41% more hospitalizations than health maintenance organizations. General internists had utilization rates somewhat greater than family physicians on some indicators. CONCLUSION: Although variations in patient mix should be a major determinant of variations in resource use, the independent effects of specialty training, payment system, and practice organization on utilization rates need further explication. The 2- and 4-year outcomes now being analyzed will provide information critical to interpretation of the variations reported herein.

Health, Society, and the Physician: problem-based learning of the social sciences and humanities. Eight years of experience.

We describe a required course for fourth-year medical students focusing on the application of the social sciences and the humanities to critical decisions in the practice of medicine. During 160 hours (70 with faculty contact) in a 7-week period, active, patient-centered, problem-based learning takes place in small collaborating groups, is facilitated by trained tutors, and uses computerized access to library materials plus reference files and resource persons. Major issues identified in the cases are clarified in complementary lectures and symposia. Formative evaluation is ongoing within tutorial groups. Summative evaluation is determined by the individual student's performance in a final complex management problem using a simulated patient. Evaluation of the course, and the basis for its ongoing revision, are provided by participating students and faculty, whose evaluations of the course have been favorable in 80% to 90% of cases.

Controlled expansion of peripheral nerves: comparison of nerve grafting and nerve expansion/repair for canine sciatic nerve defects.

The inherent disadvantages of nerve grafting have made it necessary to find alternative techniques for treating segmental nerve loss. This study compares the techniques of nerve grafting and nerve expansion/repair for the management of nerve injuries with segmental nerve loss in an animal model. Bilateral segmental sciatic nerve defects were created in eight dogs. On one side a 2-cm segment was excised and replaced with a nerve graft; on the other side a 2-cm defect was created with ligatures and the nerve underwent preliminary expansion and then repair. Eighteen months later nerve conduction velocity (NCV), gastrocnemius contraction force (GCF), and muscle weight (GMW) were determined for the seven surviving animals. NCV for the expanded repair was 58.66 +/- 34.18 m/sec and 47.73 +/- 7.93 for the grafted repair (p = 0.4); GCF was 619.04 +/- 353.70 gm for the expanded repair and 726.80 +/- 415.78 gm (p = 0.2) for the grafted repair; and GMW was 82.80 +/- 5.68 gm for the expanded repair and 109.55 +/- 20.63 gm (p = 0.02) for the grafted repair. The data suggest that: 1) conventional tissue expansion techniques can be used successfully to repair segmental peripheral nerve defects; 2) NCV and GCF are comparable for grafting and expansion/repair techniques although GMW is significantly higher in the grafted group; and 3) nerve expansion/repair may prove to be a useful alternative to grafting.

The Medical Outcomes Study. An application of methods for monitoring the results of medical care.

The Medical Outcomes Study was designed to (1) determine whether variations in patient outcomes are explained by differences in system of care, clinician specialty, and clinicians' technical and interpersonal styles and (2) develop more practical tools for the routine monitoring of patient outcomes in medical practice. Outcomes included clinical end points; physical, social, and role functioning in everyday living; patients' perceptions of their general health and well-being; and satisfaction with treatment. Populations of clinicians (n = 523) were randomly sampled from different health care settings in Boston, Mass; Chicago, Ill; and Los Angeles, Calif. In the cross-sectional study, adult patients (n = 22,462) evaluated their health status and treatment. A sample of these patients (n = 2349) with diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart disease, and/or depression were selected for the longitudinal study. Their hospitalizations and other treatments were monitored and they periodically reported outcomes of care. At the beginning and end of the longitudinal study, Medical Outcomes Study staff performed physical examinations and laboratory tests. Results will be reported serially, primarily in The Journal.

Do primary physicians actually manage their patients' fee-for-service care?

In what proportion of a patient's total health care is the primary physician involved? By means of calendar diaries and telephone interviews, 211 primary care patients from community practices of the Dartmouth Primary Care Cooperative Information Project were followed prospectively for one year. We found that a substantial proportion of care was managed (that is, either actually provided or coordinated in advance) by the patient's primary physician. Specifically, criteria for a primary physician's role in management were met by 75% of 1379 ambulatory visits to physicians, 33% of 786 visits to nonphysician health care providers, 81% of 26 nonemergency hospitalizations, and 78% of 2769 prescriptions. Primary physicians in these settings appear to function as case managers even when they are not participating in formal managed-care systems.

Assessment of function in routine clinical practice: description of the COOP Chart method and preliminary findings.

The COOP Project, a primary care research network, has begun development of a Chart method to screen function quickly. The COOP Charts, analogous to Snellen Charts, were pretested in two practices on adult patients (N = 117) to test feasibility, clinical utility, and validity. Patients completed questionnaires containing validated health status scales and sociodemographic variables. Practice staff filled out forms indicating COOP Chart scores and clinical data. We held debriefing interviews with staff who administered the Charts. The results indicate the Charts take 1-2 minutes to administer, are easy to use, and produce important clinical data. The patterns of correlations between the Charts and validity indicator variables provide evidence for both convergent and discriminant validity. We conclude that new measures are needed to assess function in a busy office practice and that the COOP Chart system represents one promising strategy.

Chief complaint fatigue: a longitudinal study from the patient's perspective.

Fatigue is one of the 10 most common reasons for visiting a physician. Yet little is known about its course or impact, from the patient's perspective, on quality of life or utilization of medical care. The Dartmouth COOP Project, a primary care research network, conducted a one-year prospective study comparing chief complaint fatigue (CCF) patients with two age/sex matched comparison groups (N = 243). Results show that almost 67% of the CCF patients improved over one year; however, they had much higher utilization rates and substantial limitations in physical and emotional function. Fatigue was associated with physical symptoms and interference with many aspects of daily life. We conclude that fatigue has a powerful, adverse effect on quality of life. We hope the findings may help physicians to better understand and treat patients who seek care for fatigue.

Functional health status levels of primary care patients.

A cross-sectional study was conducted on functional status of adults visiting primary care practices. Limitations in physical and mental function were assessed independently in 28 practices by patients (N = 1,227) and physicians (N = 47) using a simple global index of disability. Results indicated 12% of patients rated their physical limitations as major and 8% rated major emotional limitations during the past month. Comparable assessments by physicians were 5% and 4%, respectively. Differences between patients and physicians were statistically significant and are demonstrated to be clinically relevant. Patients' functional limitations were associated with increased utilization of ambulatory care, older age, lower level of education, unemployment, and a primary diagnosis of a chronic condition. We conclude that functional status can be routinely recorded in medical practice to help describe severity, predict utilization, and improve the physician-patient relationship.

Professional uncertainty and the problem of supplier-induced demand.

This paper discusses the puzzling problem of large differences in per capita use of certain common surgical procedures among neighboring populations, which by all available measures are quite similar in need for and access to services. The evidence reviewed here supports the hypothesis that variations occur to a large extent because of differences among physicians in their evaluation of patients (diagnosis) or in their belief in the value of the procedures for meeting patient needs (therapy). This hypothesis, which we call the professional uncertainty hypothesis, is germane to current controversies concerning the nature and extent of supplier influence on the demand for medical services. It is also important because of its implications for health regulatory policy. Our plan is to (1) review the relevance of the hypotheses for the supplier-induced demand controversy; (2) review the epidemiologic evidence on the nature and causes of variation; (3) examine patterns of use of common surgical procedures to illustrate the importance of supplier influence on utilization; and (4) consider some of the implications of the professional uncertainty hypotheses for public policy.

Public choice in health: problems, politics and perspectives on formulating national health policy.

Development of health policy goals necessitates a choice among normative premises--an accommodation of conflicting values. Any debate that does not identify underlying assumptions or link policy prescriptions to a theoretical perspective is destined to degenerate into uncommunicative and unproductive rhetorical posturing. A sensible approach toward formulating national health policy requires that competing values be identified and discussed explicitly. This article will examine the effect that selection of different theoretical perspectives can have on the identification of problems and on the formulation of prescriptive policies in the health field. It will also focus on the different values that are promoted by different policy perspectives and consider alternative models for implementing value choices.