Preventive oral health care use for children with special health care needs aged 6 through 12 years enrolled in Medicaid: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

The authors aimed to assess preventive oral health care (POHC) use for children with special health care needs (CSHCN) aged 6 through 12 years enrolled in Medicaid and identify intervention strategies to improve oral health.

METHODS

In this sequential mixed methods study, the authors analyzed 2012 Medicaid data for children aged 6 through 12 years in Washington state. They used eligibility and claims data to identify special health care needs status (independent variable) and POHC use (outcome variable). They ran modified Poisson regression models to generate prevalence rate ratios. They coded data from 21 key informant interviews deductively using content analytic techniques.

RESULTS

Of the 208,648 children in the study, 18% were identified as CSHCN and 140,468 used POHC (67.3%). After adjusting for confounding variables, the authors found no difference in POHC use by special health care need status (prevalence rate ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.01; P = .91). In the qualitative analysis, the authors identified 5 themes: caries risk depends on a child's specific health condition, caries complicates overall health, having a special need creates a bigger barrier to care, legislation alone is "not going to make much of a dent," and improvements across all fronts are needed to promote the oral health of CSHCN in Medicaid.

CONCLUSIONS

CSHCN enrolled in Medicaid are just as likely as children without special health care needs to use POHC, although barriers to oral health care access persist for CSHCN.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Future efforts should focus on comprehensive strategies that address the varying levels of dental disease risk and difficulties accessing oral health care within the diverse group of CSHCN.

Impact of reimbursement rates on the length of stay in tertiary public hospitals: a retrospective cohort study in Shenzhen, China

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between reimbursement rates and the length of stay (LOS).

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

The study was conducted in Shenzhen, China by using health administrative database from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2017.

PARTICIPANTS

6583 patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), 12 395 patients with pneumonia and 10 485 patients who received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) surgery.

MEASURES

The reimbursement rate was defined as one minus the ratio of out-of-pocket to the total expenditure, multiplied by 100%. The outcome of interest was the LOS. Multilevel negative binomial regression models were constructed to control for patient-level and hospital-level characteristics, and the marginal effect was reported when non-linear terms were available.

RESULTS

Each additional unit of the reimbursement rate was associated with an average of an additional increase of 0.019 (95% CI, 0.015 to 0.023), 0.011 (95% CI, 0.009 to 0.014) and 0.013 (95% CI, 0.010 to 0.016) in the LOS for inpatients with AMI, pneumonia and PCI surgery, respectively. Adding the interaction term between the reimbursement rate and in-hospital survival, the average marginal effects for the deceased inpatients with AMI and PCI surgery were 0.044 (95% CI, 0.031 to 0.058) and 0.034 (95% CI, 0.017 to 0.051), respectively. However, there was no evidence that higher reimbursement rates prolonged the LOS of the patients who died of pneumonia (95% CI, -0.013 to 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate that the higher the reimbursement rate, the longer the LOS; and implementing dynamic supervision and improving the service capabilities of primary healthcare providers may be an important strategy for reducing moral hazard in low-income and middle-income countries including China.

Paying for Frequent Dialysis

In late 2017, the 7 regional contractors responsible for paying dialysis claims in Medicare proposed new payment rules that would restrict payment for hemodialysis treatments in excess of 3 weekly to exceptional acute-care circumstances. Frequent hemodialysis is performed more frequently than the traditional thrice-weekly pattern, and many stakeholders-patients, providers, dialysis machine manufacturers, and others-have expressed concern that these payment rules will inhibit the growth of this treatment modality's use among US dialysis patients. In this Perspective, we explain the role of these contractors in the context of Medicare's in-center hemodialysis-centric dialysis payment system and assess how well this system accommodates the higher treatment frequencies of both peritoneal dialysis and frequent hemodialysis. Then, given the available evidence concerning the relative effectiveness of these modalities versus thrice-weekly in-center hemodialysis and trends in their use, we discuss options for modifying Medicare's payment system to support frequent dialysis.

The Role of Big Data in the Development and Evaluation of US Dialysis Care

Rapid growth in electronic communications and digitalization, combined with advances in data management, analysis, and storage, have led to an era of "Big Data." The Social Security Amendments of 1972 turned end-stage renal disease (ESRD) care into a single-payer system for most patients requiring dialysis in the United States. As a result, there are few areas of medicine that have been as influenced by Big Data as dialysis care, for which Medicare's large administrative data sets have had a central role in the evaluation and development of public policy for several decades. In the 1970/1980s, Medicare data helped identify concerning trends in costs, access to dialysis care, and quality of care delivered. As the research community and policymakers made Medicare's administrative data increasingly accessible for investigation, analyses of Medicare claims have had a large role in facilitating policy synthesis and refinement. Efforts to address the skyrocketing cost of injectable drugs in the 1990s and 2000s exemplify this expanded role of Big Data. Although there are opportunities for large government and nongovernmental administrative data sets to continue serving a critical role in the evaluation and development of ESRD policies, it is important to understand challenges and limitations associated with their use.

Reimbursement rates and policies for primary molar pit-and-fissure sealants across state Medicaid programs

BACKGROUND

Little is known about Medicaid policies regarding reimbursement for placement of sealants on primary molars. The authors identified Medicaid programs that reimbursed dentists for placing primary molar sealants and hypothesized that these programs had higher reimbursement rates than did state programs that did not reimburse for primary molar sealants.

METHODS

The authors obtained Medicaid reimbursement data from online fee schedules and determined whether each state Medicaid program reimbursed for primary molar sealants (no or yes). The outcome measure was the reimbursement rate for permanent tooth sealants (calculated in 2012 U.S. dollars). The authors compared mean reimbursement rates by using the t test (α = .05).

RESULTS

Seventeen Medicaid programs reimbursed dentists for placing primary molar sealants (34 percent), and the mean reimbursement rate was $27.57 (range, $16.00 [Maine] to $49.68 [Alaska]). All 50 programs reimbursed dentists for placement of sealants on permanent teeth. The mean reimbursement for permanent tooth sealants was significantly higher in programs that reimbursed for primary molar sealants than in programs that did not ($28.51 and $23.67, respectively; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Most state Medicaid programs do not reimburse dentists for placing sealants on primary molars, but programs that do so have significantly higher reimbursement rates.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Medicaid reimbursement rates are related to dentists' participation in Medicaid and children's dental care use. Reimbursement for placement of sealants on primary molars is a proxy for Medicaid program generosity.