Preventing Low Birth Weight in Illinois: Outcomes of the Family Case Management Program

Relationship between intervention dosage and success of resource connections in a social needs intervention

OBJECTIVES

Social needs interventions in medical settings aim to mitigate the effects of adverse social circumstances on health outcomes by connecting vulnerable patients with resources. This study examined the relationship between intervention dosage and the success of resource connections using data from a social needs intervention in multiple clinical settings across the US.

STUDY DESIGN

The intervention uses a case management approach to connect patients with unmet needs to resources and services in the community. Intervention dosage was conceptualized as the number of contacts between the navigator and the patient, categorized as direct contact (phone vs. in person) and indirect contact (initiated by the navigator vs. patient). Success of the intervention was conceptualized as 'none,' 'partial,' or 'optimal' for each patient, based on the number of social needs the resource connections addressed.

METHODS

Administrative data were extracted for 38,404 unique patients who screened positive for unmet resource needs between 2012 and 2017. Owing to the large sample size, statistical corrections were made to reduce type I error.

RESULTS

Multinomial logistic regression analyses showed that higher intervention dosage was related to greater success of resource connections, after adjusting for the patient and site characteristics, and the number of needs (odds ratios ranged from 1.62 to 2.89). In-person contact, although received by only 25% of the patients, was associated with the highest probability of optimal success.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates a feasible way to conceptualize an intervention dose for a social needs intervention that uses a case management approach and has implications for how intervention delivery may improve success of resource connections.

The impact of the Medicaid high-risk ob care management program in New York State

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effect of high-risk obstetrics (HROB) care management on infant health and Medicaid expenditures.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

Medicaid administrative data and vital statistics from 2011 to 2013. In New York State, all Medicaid managed care plans provide HROB care management to their members.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study with a nonequivalent control group. Selection bias was addressed by using probit and OLS models with the Heckman correction and inverse probability weight with regression adjustment.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

While program enrollment was associated with poor infant health outcomes (low birthweight, very low birthweight, preterm delivery, and gestational age), correcting for sample selection substantially improved most of these outcomes. All infant health outcomes significantly improved as the number of weeks in the program increased. We found that a 1-week increase in program duration is associated with a 0.01 percentage point decrease in low birthweight and a 0.03 percentage point decrease in very low birthweight. Further, a 1-week increase in program duration decreases the probability of preterm delivery by 0.01 percentage points and increases gestational age by 0.14 days. Medicaid expenditures for maternity care and newborn delivery were not significantly or materially affected by program enrollment or program duration.

CONCLUSIONS

High-risk obstetrics care management appears to successfully identify individuals with high-risk pregnancies and improve health without substantially increasing medical expenses.

Incentives for increasing prenatal care use by women in order to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes

BACKGROUND

Prenatal care is recommended during pregnancy as a method to improve neonatal and maternal outcomes. Improving the use of prenatal care is important, particularly for women at moderate to high risk of adverse outcomes. Incentives are sometimes utilized to encourage women to attend prenatal care visits.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether incentives are an effective tool to increase utilization of timely prenatal care among women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 January 2015) and the reference lists of all retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs that utilized direct incentives to pregnant women explicitly linked to initiation and frequency of prenatal care were included. Incentives could include cash, vouchers, coupons or products not generally offered to women as a standard of prenatal care. Comparisons were to no incentives and to incentives not linked directly to utilization of care. We also planned to compare different types of interventions, i.e. monetary versus products or services.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and methodological quality. Two review authors independently extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 11 studies (19 reports), six of which we excluded. Five studies, involving 11,935 pregnancies were included, but only 1893 pregnancies contributed data regarding our specified outcomes. Incentives in the studies included cash, gift card, baby carrier, baby blanket or taxicab voucher and were compared with no incentives. Meta-analysis was performed for only one outcome 'Return for postpartum care' and this outcome was not pre-specified in our protocol. Other analyses were restricted to data from single studies.Trials were at a moderate risk of bias overall. Randomization and allocation were adequate and risk of selection bias was low in three studies and unclear in two studies. None of the studies were blinded to the participants. Blinding of outcome assessors was adequate in one study, but was limited or not described in the remaining four studies. Risk of attrition was deemed to be low in all studies that contributed data to the review. Two of the studies reported or analyzed data in a manner that was not consistent with the predetermined protocol and thus were deemed to be at high risk. The other three studies were low risk for reporting bias. The largest two of the five studies comprising the majority of participants took place in rural, low-income, homogenously Hispanic communities in Central America. This setting introduces a number of confounding factors that may affect generalizability of these findings to ethnically and economically diverse urban communities in developed countries.The five included studies of incentive programs did not report any of this review's primary outcomes: preterm birth, small-for-gestational age, or perinatal death.In terms of this review's secondary outcomes, pregnant women receiving incentives were no more likely to initiate prenatal care (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.38, one study, 104 pregnancies). Pregnant women receiving incentives were more likely to attend prenatal visits on a frequent basis (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.38, one study, 606 pregnancies) and obtain adequate prenatal care defined by number of "procedures" such as testing blood sugar or blood pressure, vaccinations and counseling about breastfeeding and birth control (mean difference (MD) 5.84, 95% CI 1.88 to 9.80, one study, 892 pregnancies). In contrast, women who received incentives were more likely to deliver by cesarean section (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.30, one study, 979 pregnancies) compared to those women who did not receive incentives.Women who received incentives were no more likely to return for postpartum care based on results of meta-analysis (average RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.64, two studies, 833 pregnancies, Tau² = 0.81, I² = 98%). However, there was substantial heterogeneity in this analysis so a subgroup analysis was performed and this identified a clear difference between subgroups based on the type of incentive being offered. In one study, women receiving non-cash incentives were more likely to return for postpartum care (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.47, 240 pregnancies) than women who did not receive non-cash incentives. In another study, women receiving cash incentives were less likely to return for postpartum care (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.62, 593 pregnancies) than women who did not receive cash incentives.No data were identified for the following secondary outcomes: frequency of prenatal care; pre-eclampsia; satisfaction with birth experience; maternal mortality; low birthweight (less than 2500 g); infant macrosomia (birthweight greater than 4000 g); or five-minute Apgar less than seven.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The included studies did not report on this review's main outcomes: preterm birth, small-for-gestational age, or perinatal death. There is limited evidence that incentives may increase utilization and quality of prenatal care, but may also increase cesarean rate. Overall, there is insufficient evidence to fully evaluate the impact of incentives on prenatal care initiation. There are conflicting data as to the impact of incentives on return for postpartum care. Two of the five studies which accounted for the majority of women in this review were conducted in rural, low-income, overwhelmingly Hispanic communities in Central America, thus limiting the external validity of these results.There is a need for high-quality RCTs to determine whether incentive program increase prenatal care use and improve maternal and neonatal outcomes. Incentive programs, in particular cash-based programs, as suggested in this review and in several observational studies may improve the frequency and ensure adequate quality of prenatal care. No peer-reviewed data have been made publicly available for one of the largest incentive-based prenatal programs - the statewide Medicaid-based programs within the United States. These observational data represent an important starting point for future research with significant implications for policy development and allocation of healthcare resources. The disparate findings related to attending postpartum care should also be further explored as the findings were limited by the number of studies. Future large RCTs are needed to focus on the outcomes of preterm birth, small-for-gestational age and perinatal outcomes.

Effects of maternity care coordination on pregnancy outcomes: propensity-weighted analyses

Care coordination services that link pregnant women to health-promoting resources, avoid duplication of effort, and improve communication between families and providers have been endorsed as a strategy for reducing disparities in adverse pregnancy outcomes, however empirical evidence regarding the effects of these services is contradictory and incomplete. This study investigates the effects of maternity care coordination (MCC) on pregnancy outcomes in North Carolina. Birth certificate and Medicaid claims data were analyzed for 7,124 women delivering live infants in North Carolina from October 2008 through September 2010, of whom 2,255 received MCC services. Propensity-weighted analyses were conducted to reduce the influence of selection bias in evaluating program participation. Sensitivity analyses compared these results to conventional ordinary least squares analyses. The unadjusted preterm birth rate was lower among women who received MCC services (7.0 % compared to 8.3 % among controls). Propensity-weighted analyses demonstrated that women receiving services had a 1.8 % point reduction in preterm birth risk; p < 0.05). MCC services were also associated with lower pregnancy weight gain (p = 0.10). No effects of MCC were seen for birthweight. These findings suggest that coordination of care in pregnancy can significantly reduce the risk of preterm delivery among Medicaid-enrolled women. Further research evaluating specific components of care coordination services and their effects on preterm birth risk among racial/ethnic and geographic subgroups of Medicaid enrolled mothers could inform efforts to reduce disparities in pregnancy outcome.

Physician awareness of enhanced prenatal services for medicaid-insured pregnant women

CONTEXT

Medicaid enhanced prenatal service (EPS) programs, including care coordination, were developed to improve birth outcomes for low-income pregnant women. In Michigan, less than a third of eligible pregnant women are enrolled in services. Physician or medical clinics provide referrals to community-based EPS.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine physician knowledge and perceptions of EPS.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey of obstetric providers was conducted in 2009. A questionnaire was created to assess understanding of the EPS program.

SETTING

The study was conducted in an urban Michigan community.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants included a convenience sample (N = 56) of community Obstetrics and Gynecology attending physicians and resident physicians within a single, large health system.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcome measures included knowledge of the program and patient participation, referral practices, perceptions of the program, value for patients and providers, appropriateness of physicians to provide program referrals, and barriers to referring.

RESULTS

Findings indicated that most physicians (84%) had little familiarity with EPS, 60% did not personally refer to EPS, 54% did not know whether other office staff referred to EPS, and 65% were unaware whether their patients received EPS. Yet, more than 90% of physicians reported that EPS would benefit their patients and believed that it was appropriate for them to refer all their eligible patients.

CONCLUSION

Further efforts should be made to better understand how physicians and EPS providers could function together on behalf of patients. Statewide Medicaid-sponsored EPS programs could serve as a valuable patient and physician resource for psychosocial risk screening, care management, education, and referral support if better utilized.

Measuring dosage: a key factor when assessing the relationship between prenatal case management and birth outcomes

To assess whether a measure of prenatal case management (PCM) dosage is more sensitive than a dichotomous PCM exposure measure when evaluating the effect of PCM on low birthweight (LBW) and preterm birth (PTB). We constructed a retrospective cohort study (N = 16,657) of Iowa Medicaid-insured women who had a singleton live birth from October 2005 to December 2006; 28 % of women received PCM. A PCM dosage measure was created to capture duration of enrollment, total time with a case manager, and intervention breadth. Propensity score (PS)-adjusted odds ratios (ORs), and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CIs) were calculated to assess the risk of each outcome by PCM dosage and the dichotomous PCM exposure measure. PS-adjusted ORs of PTB were 0.88 (95 % CI 0.70-1.11), 0.58 (95 % CI 0.47-0.72), and 1.43 (95 % CI 1.23-1.67) for high, medium, and low PCM dosage, respectively. For LBW, the PS-adjusted ORs were 0.76 (95 % CI 0.57-1.00), 0.64 (95 % CI 0.50-0.82), and 1.36 (95 % CI 1.14-1.63), for high, medium, and low PCM dosage, respectively. The PCM dichotomous participation measure was not significantly associated with LBW (OR = 0.95, 95 % CI 0.82-1.09) or PTB (0.97, 95 % CI 0.87-1.10). The reference group in each analysis is No PCM. PCM was associated with a reduced risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes for Medicaid-insured women in Iowa. PCM dosage appeared to be a more sensitive measure than the dichotomous measure of PCM participation.

Medicaid and preterm birth and low birth weight: the last two decades

OBJECTIVES

To determine if (1) birth outcomes among women on Medicaid differ significantly from outcomes of those with private insurance, after controlling for known risk factors, and (2) enhanced prenatal care influences care use and birth outcomes.

METHODS

This is a review of studies published between 1989 and 2009 that examined birth outcomes (1) between women on Medicaid and those with private insurance and (2) among Medicaid enrollees who received comprehensive prenatal care.

RESULTS

When corrected for risk variables, birth outcomes are not different between private insurance and Medicaid patients. The impact of comprehensive prenatal care programs on birth outcomes varies across states and regions.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for critical evaluation of comprehensive programs in a regional and state context to determine opportunities for improvement.

Changing trends in low birth weight rates among non-Hispanic black infants in the United States, 1991-2004

We examined trends in low birth weight (LBW, <2,500 g) rates among US singleton non-Hispanic black infants between 1991 and 2004. We conducted Joinpoint regression analyses, using birth certificate data, to describe trends in LBW, moderately LBW (MLBW, 1,500-2,499 g), and very LBW (VLBW, <1,500 g) rates. We then conducted cross-sectional and binomial regression analyses to relate these trends to changes in maternal or obstetric factors. Non-Hispanic black LBW rates declined -7.35% between 1991 and 2001 and then increased +4.23% through 2004. The LBW trends were not uniform across birth weight subcategories. Among MLBW births, the 1991-2001 decease was -10.20%; the 2001-2004 increase was +5.61%. VLBW did not follow this pattern, increasing +3.84% between 1991 and 1999 and then remaining relatively stable through 2004. In adjusted models, the 1991-2001 MLBW rate decrease was associated with changes in first-trimester prenatal care, cigarette smoking, education levels, maternal foreign-born status, and pregnancy weight gain. The 2001-2004 MLBW rate increase was independent of changes in observed maternal demographic characteristics, prenatal care, and obstetric variables. Between 1991 and 2001, progress occurred in reducing MLBW rates among non-Hispanic black infants. This progress was not maintained between 2001 and 2004 nor did it occur for VLBW infants between 1991 and 2004. Observed population changes in maternal socio-demographic and health-related factors were associated with the 1991-2001 decrease, suggesting multiple risk factors need to be simultaneously addressed to reduce non-Hispanic black LBW rates.

Alleviating perinatal depressive symptoms and stress: a nurse-community health worker randomized trial

To determine whether a Nurse-Community Health Worker (CHW) home visiting team, in the context of a Medicaid enhanced prenatal/postnatal services (EPS), would demonstrate greater reduction of depressive symptoms and stress and improvement of psychosocial resources (mastery, self-esteem, social support) when compared with usual Community Care (CC) that includes Medicaid EPS delivered by professionals. Greatest program benefits were expected for women who reported low psychosocial resources, high stress, or both at the time of enrollment. Medicaid eligible pregnant women (N = 613) were randomly assigned to either usual CC or the Nurse-CHW team. Mixed effects regression was used to analyze up to five prenatal and postnatal psychosocial assessments. Compared to usual CC, assignment to the Nurse-CHW team resulted in significantly fewer depressive symptoms, and as hypothesized, reductions in depressive symptoms were most pronounced for women with low psychosocial resources, high stress, or both high stress and low resources. Outcomes for mastery and stress approached statistical significance, with the women in the Nurse-CHW group reporting less stress and greater mastery. Women in the Nurse-CHW group with low psychosocial resources reported significantly less perceived stress than women in usual CC. No differences between the groups were found for self-esteem and social support. A Nurse-CHW team approach to EPS demonstrated advantage for alleviating depressive symptoms in Medicaid eligible women compared to CC, especially for women at higher risk.