Medical Complexity Among Children with Special Health Care Needs
A Two-Dimensional View
ResearchPosted on rand.org Dec 11, 2015Published in: HSR, Health Services Research, 2015
A Two-Dimensional View
ResearchPosted on rand.org Dec 11, 2015Published in: HSR, Health Services Research, 2015
OBJECTIVE: To identify subgroups of U.S. children with special health care needs (CSHCN) and characterize key outcomes. DATA SOURCE: Secondary analysis of 2009–2010 National Survey of CSHCN. STUDY DESIGN: Latent class analysis grouped individuals into substantively meaningful classes empirically derived from measures of pediatric medical complexity. Outcomes were compared among latent classes with weighted logistic or negative binomial regression. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: LCA identified four unique CSHCN subgroups: broad functional impairment (physical, cognitive, and mental health) with extensive health care (Class 1), broad functional impairment alone (Class 2), predominant physical impairment requiring family-delivered care (Class 3), and physical impairment alone (Class 4). CSHCN from Class 1 had the highest ED visit rates (IRR 3.3, p < .001) and hospitalization odds (AOR: 12.0, p < .001) and lowest odds of a medical home (AOR: 0.17, p < .001). CSHCN in Class 3, despite experiencing more shared decision making and medical home attributes, had more ED visits and missed school than CSHCN in Class 2 (p < .001); the latter, however, experienced more cost-related difficulties, care delays, and parents having to stop work (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing distinct impacts of cognitive and mental health impairments and health care delivery needs on CSHCN outcomes may better direct future intervention efforts.
This publication is part of the RAND external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.