Effects of Global Budget Payments on Vulnerable Medicare Subpopulations in Maryland.

There is little evidence regarding population equity in alternative payment models (APMs). We aimed to determine whether one such APM, the Maryland All-Payer Model (MDAPM), had differential effects on subpopulations of vulnerable Medicare beneficiaries. We utilized Medicare fee-for-service claims for beneficiaries living in Maryland and 48 comparison hospital market areas between 2011 and 2018. We used doubly robust difference-in-difference-in-differences regression models to estimate the differential effects of MDAPM on Medicare beneficiaries by dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid, disability as original reason for Medicare entitlement, presence of multiple chronic conditions (MCC), race, and rural residency status. Dual, disabled, and beneficiaries with MCC had greater reductions in expenditures and utilization than their counterparts. Hospitals may have prioritized high-cost, high-need patients as they changed their care delivery practices. The percentage of hospital discharges with 14-day follow-up was significantly lower for disadvantaged subpopulations, including duals, disabled, and non-White.

Pediatricians' assessments of caries risk and need for a dental evaluation in preschool aged children.

BACKGROUND: Risk-based prioritization of dental referrals during well-child visits might improve dental access for infants and toddlers. This study identifies pediatrician-assessed risk factors for early childhood caries (ECC) and their association with the need for a dentist's evaluation. METHODS: A priority oral health risk assessment and referral tool (PORRT) for children < 36 months was developed collaboratively by physicians and dentists and used by 10 pediatricians during well-child visits. PORRT documented behavioral, clinical, and child health risks for ECC. Pediatricians also assessed overall ECC risk on an 11-point scale and determined the need for a dental evaluation. Logistic regression models calculated the odds for evaluation need for each risk factor and according to a 3-level risk classification. RESULTS: In total 1,288 PORRT forms were completed; 6.8% of children were identified as needing a dentist evaluation. Behavioral risk factors were prevalent but not strong predictors of the need for an evaluation. The child's overall caries risk was the strongest predictor of the need for an evaluation. Cavitated (OR = 17.5; 95% CI = 8.08, 37.97) and non-cavitated (OR = 6.9; 95% CI = 4.47, 10.82) lesions were the strongest predictors when the caries risk scale was excluded from the analysis. Few patients (6.3%) were classified as high risk, but their probability of needing an evaluation was only 0.36. CONCLUSIONS: Low referral rates for children with disease and prior to disease onset but at elevated risk, indicate interventions are needed to help improve the dental referral rates of physicians.

Primary health care providers' advice for a dental checkup and dental use in children.

OBJECTIVE: In this study we estimated factors associated with children being advised to see the dentist by a doctor or other health provider; tested for an association between the advisement on the likelihood that the child would visit the dentist; and estimated the effect of the advisement on dental costs. METHODS: We identified a sample of 5268 children aged 2 to 11 years in the 2004 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey. A cross-sectional analysis with logistic regression models was conducted to estimate the likelihood of the child receiving a recommendation for a dental checkup, and to determine its effect on the likelihood of having a dental visit. Differences in cost for children who received a recommendation were assessed by using a linear regression model. All analyses were conducted separately on children aged 2 to 5 (n = 2031) and aged 6 to 11 (n = 3237) years. RESULTS: Forty-seven percent of 2- to 5-year-olds and 37% of 6- to 11-year-olds had been advised to see the dentist. Children aged 2 to 5 who received a recommendation were more likely to have a dental visit (odds ratio: 2.89 [95% confidence interval: 2.16-3.87]), but no difference was observed among older children. Advice had no effect on dental costs in either age group. CONCLUSIONS: Health providers' recommendation that pediatric patients visit the dentist was associated with an increase in dental visits among young children. Providers have the potential to play an important role in establishing a dental home for children at an early age. Future research should examine potential interventions to increase effective dental referrals by health providers.

Distance to care and relative supply among pediatric surgical subspecialties.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to describe geographic proximity to and quantify relative supply of 7 pediatric surgical specialties in the United States. METHODS: Data from the 2005 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile and the Claritas Pop-Facts Database were used to calculate subspecialty-specific, population-weighted, straight-line distances between each zip code centroid and the nearest provider. These same data sources were used to calculate the percentage of hospital referral regions with a provider, the percentage of the younger than 18 years population living within selected distances of providers, and provider-to-population ratios for each of the pediatric surgical subspecialties. Further, we calculated the correlation between practice locations and children's hospitals offering pediatric surgical services. RESULTS: Across pediatric surgical specialties, average distances to the nearest provider ranged from 27.1 miles for pediatric surgery to 100.9 miles for pediatric cardiothoracic surgery. The average population-weighted distance to a provider was less than 30 miles for pediatric surgery and pediatric ophthalmology only. For 5 of the 7 pediatric surgical specialties studied, approximately one quarter of the younger than 18 years population lives more than 1-hour drive from a provider. Provider-to-younger than 18 years population ratios range across hospital referral region from 0.04 per 100,000 for pediatric cardiothoracic surgery to 0.97 per 100,000 for pediatric surgery. The correlation between pediatric surgeons and children's hospitals offering services was 0.72. CONCLUSIONS: Although the practice locations of pediatric surgical subspecialties parallel the geographic distribution of children in the United States, large percentages of the younger than 18 years population must travel long distance to receive care from these providers. Large coefficients of variation reveal substantial maldistribution. These findings lay the groundwork for workforce assessments of the pediatric surgical subspecialties and underscore the need for future studies that assess access barriers for children in need of surgical care.