Measuring quality in pediatrics: Florida's early experiences with the CHIPRA core measure set

What Factors Influence States' Capacity to Report Children's Health Care Quality Measures? A Multiple-Case Study

Objectives The objective of this study was to describe factors that influence the ability of state Medicaid agencies to report the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' (CMS) core set of children's health care quality measures (Child Core Set). Methods We conducted a multiple-case study of four high-performing states participating in the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA) Quality Demonstration Grant Program: Illinois, Maine, Pennsylvania, and Oregon. Cases were purposively selected for their diverse measurement approaches and used data from 2010 to 2015, including 154 interviews, semiannual grant progress reports, and annual public reports on Child Core Set measures. We followed Yin's multiple-case study methodology to describe how and why each state increased the number of measures reported to CMS. Results All four states increased the number of Child Core Set measures reported to CMS during the grant period. Each took a different approach to reporting, depending on the available technical, organizational, and behavioral inputs in the state. Reporting capacity was influenced by a state's Medicaid data availability, ability to link to other state data systems, past experience with quality measurement, staff time and technical expertise, and demand for the measures. These factors were enhanced by CHIPRA Quality Demonstration grant funding and other federal capacity building activities, as hypothesized in our conceptual framework. These and other states have made progress reporting the Child Core Set since 2010. Conclusion With financial support and investment in state data systems and organizational factors, states can overcome challenges to reporting most of the Child Core Set measures.

Variation in outcomes of quality measurement by data source

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate selected Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act claims-based quality measures using claims data alone, electronic health record (EHR) data alone, and both data sources combined.

METHODS

Our population included pediatric patients from 46 clinics in the OCHIN network of community health centers, who were continuously enrolled in Oregon's public health insurance program during 2010. Within this population, we calculated selected pediatric care quality measures according to the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act technical specifications within administrative claims. We then calculated these measures in the same cohort, by using EHR data, by using the technical specifications plus clinical data previously shown to enhance capture of a given measure. We used the k statistic to determine agreement in measurement when using claims versus EHR data. Finally, we measured quality of care delivered to the study population, when using a combined dataset of linked, patient-level administrative claims and EHR data.

RESULTS

When using administrative claims data, 1.0% of children (aged 3-17) had a BMI percentile recorded, compared with 71.9% based on the EHR data (k agreement [k] # 0.01), and 72.0% in the combined dataset. Among children turning 2 in 2010, 20.2% received all recommended immunizations according to the administrative claims data, 17.2% according to the EHR data (k = 0.82), and 21.4% according to the combined dataset.

CONCLUSIONS

Children's care quality measures may not be accurate when assessed using only administrative claims. Adding EHR data to administrative claims data may yield more complete measurement.