0

The full content of Annals is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >
Medicine and Public Policy |

The Effects of Capitation on Health and Functional Status of the Medicaid Elderly: A Randomized Trial

Nicole Lurie, MD, MSPH; Jon Christianson, PhD; Michael Finch, PhD; and Ira Moscovice, PhD
[+] Article and Author Information

From the University of Minnesota Schools of Medicine and Public Health and the Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Requests for Reprints: Nicole Lurie, MD, MSPH, Department of Medicine, Hennepin County Medical Center, 701 Park Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55415. Acknowledgments: The authors thank Muhammad R. Akhtar, PhD, and Charles Ng for help with data analysis; Ellen Benavides, MHA, for support from the Hennepin County Office of the Medicaid Demonstration Project, Steven Foldes, PhD, for help with the analysis of mortality data, and Willard Manning, PhD, for review of the manuscript. Grant Support: By Hennepin County (Minnesota), the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Bush Foundation, the Center for Urban and Regional Affairs, University of Minnesota, the University of Minnesota School of Public Health, and the Hennepin Faculty Associates Young Investigator Program.


Copyright ©2004 by the American College of Physicians


Ann Intern Med. 1994;120(6):506-511. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-120-6-199403150-00010
Text Size: A A A

Purpose: To determine the effect on health and functional status outcomes of enrollment of noninstitutionalized elderly Medicaid recipients in prepaid plans compared with traditional fee-for-service Medicaid.

Design: A randomized, controlled trial. Beneficiaries were randomly assigned to prepaid care in one of seven capitated health plans compared with fee-for-service care. Only the Medicaid portion of their care was capitated. Patients were followed for 1 year.

Setting: The Medicaid Demonstration Project in Hennepin County, Minnesota, which includes Minneapolis.

Patients: 800 Medicaid beneficiaries who were 65 years or older at the beginning of the evaluation. Beneficiaries were interviewed at baseline (time 1) and 1 year later (time 2). Ninety-six percent of beneficiaries were available for follow-up interviews at time 2.

Main Outcome Measures: General health status, physical functioning, mental health status, activities of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living, corrected visual acuity, and blood pressure and glycosylated hemoglobin measurements for hypertensive and diabetic persons, respectively.

Results: There were no differences between prepaid and fee-for-service groups in the number of deaths (20 compared with 24, P > 0.2), the proportion in fair or poor health (56.5% compared with 59.7%, P > 0.2), physical functioning, activities of daily living, visual acuity, or blood pressure or diabetic control. Patients in the prepaid group reported a trend toward better general health rating scores (10.2 compared with 9.8, P = 0.06) and well-being scores (10.0 compared with 9.7, P = 0.07) than patients in the fee-for-service group. The difference in the likelihood of a patient in the prepaid group having a physician visit relative to the fee-for-service group was −16.5%(adjusted odds ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.74) and for an inpatient visit was −11.2%(adjusted odds ratio, 0.55; CI, 0.32 to 0.94).

Conclusions: There was no evidence of harmful effects of enrolling elderly Medicaid patients in prepaid plans, at least in the short run. Whether these findings also apply to settings in which health maintenance organizations are formed exclusively for Medicaid patients should be studied further.

Figures

Tables

References

Letters

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Comments

Submit a Comment
Submit a Comment

Summary for Patients

Clinical Slide Sets

Terms of Use

The In the Clinic® slide sets are owned and copyrighted by the American College of Physicians (ACP). All text, graphics, trademarks, and other intellectual property incorporated into the slide sets remain the sole and exclusive property of the ACP. The slide sets may be used only by the person who downloads or purchases them and only for the purpose of presenting them during not-for-profit educational activities. Users may incorporate the entire slide set or selected individual slides into their own teaching presentations but may not alter the content of the slides in any way or remove the ACP copyright notice. Users may make print copies for use as hand-outs for the audience the user is personally addressing but may not otherwise reproduce or distribute the slides by any means or media, including but not limited to sending them as e-mail attachments, posting them on Internet or Intranet sites, publishing them in meeting proceedings, or making them available for sale or distribution in any unauthorized form, without the express written permission of the ACP. Unauthorized use of the In the Clinic slide sets will constitute copyright infringement.

Toolkit

Buy Now

to gain full access to the content and tools.

Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Advertisement
Related Articles
Topic Collections
PubMed Articles
Is managed care good or bad for geriatric medicine? J Am Geriatr Soc 1997;45(9):1123-7.

Buy Now

to gain full access to the content and tools.

Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Forgot your password?
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.
(Required)
(Required)