Estimating Associations Between Medical Home Adoption, Utilization, and Quality

A Comparison of Evaluation Approaches

Published in: Medical Care, Volume 56, Number 1 (January 2018), pages 25-30. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000842

Posted on RAND.org on January 25, 2018

by Grant R. Martsolf, Ryan Kandrack, Matthew D. Baird, Mark W. Friedberg

Read More

Access further information on this document at Medical Care

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Background

Methodological differences between evaluations of medical home adoption might complicate readers' ability to draw conclusions across studies.

Objectives

To study whether associations between medical home adoption and patient care are affected by methodological choices.

Design, Setting, and Subjects

Among 71 practices participating in the Pennsylvania Chronic Care Initiative (a medical home pilot), we estimated cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between 4 definitions of "medical home adoption" [National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) recognition in year 3, Medical Home Index scores at baseline and 3, and within-practice changes in Medical Home Index scores between baseline and year 3] and utilization and quality.

Measurements

Six utilization and 6 quality measures.

Results

In cross-sectional analyses at year 3, NCQA recognition was associated with higher rates of nephropathy monitoring (7.23 percentage points; confidence interval, 0.45-14.02), breast cancer screening (7.48; 2.11-12.86), and colorectal cancer screening (8.43; 2.44-14.42). In longitudinal analyses, NCQA recognition was associated with increases in hospitalization rates (2.75 per 1000 patient-months; 0.52-4.98). In baseline cross-sectional analyses, higher Medical Home Index scores were associated with fewer ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations (-0.61 per 1000 patient per month; -1.11 to -0.11), all-cause emergency department visits (-6.80; -12.28 to -1.32), and ambulatory care-sensitive emergency department visits (-5.60; 10.32 to -0.88). There were no statistically significant associations between any other measure of medical home adoption and quality or utilization.

Conclusions

The findings of medical home evaluations are sensitive to methodological choices. Meta-analyses, narrative reviews, and other syntheses of medical home studies should consider subdividing their findings by analytic approach.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation 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.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation 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.