Policy Research Challenges in Comparing Care Models for Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries

Janet Van Cleave, Brian L. Egleston, Sarah Brosch, Elizabeth Wirth, Molly Lawson, Eileen Sullivan-Marx, Mary D. Naylor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Providing affordable, high-quality care for the 10 million persons who are dual-eligible beneficiaries of Medicare and Medicaid is an ongoing health-care policy challenge in the United States. However, the workforce and the care provided to dual-eligible beneficiaries are understudied. The purpose of this article is to provide a narrative of the challenges and lessons learned from an exploratory study in the use of clinical and administrative data to compare the workforce of two care models that deliver home- and community-based services to dual-eligible beneficiaries. The research challenges that the study team encountered were as follows: (a) comparing different care models, (b) standardizing data across care models, and (c) comparing patterns of health-care utilization. The methods used to meet these challenges included expert opinion to classify data and summative content analysis to compare and count data. Using descriptive statistics, a summary comparison of the two care models suggested that the coordinated care model workforce provided significantly greater hours of care per recipient than the integrated care model workforce. This likely represented the coordinated care model's focus on providing in-home services for one recipient, whereas the integrated care model focused on providing services in a day center with group activities. The lesson learned from this exploratory study is the need for standardized quality measures across home- and community-based services agencies to determine the workforce that best meets the needs of dual-eligible beneficiaries.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)72-83
Number of pages12
JournalPolicy, Politics, and Nursing Practice
Volume18
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2017

Fingerprint

Social Welfare
Patient Acceptance of Health Care
Quality of Health Care
Medicaid
Expert Testimony
Medicare
Health Policy
Research
Delivery of Health Care

Keywords

  • care coordination
  • dual-eligible beneficiaries
  • Medicaid
  • Medicare
  • nursing workforce
  • outcomes (measurement)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Leadership and Management
  • Issues, ethics and legal aspects

Cite this

Policy Research Challenges in Comparing Care Models for Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries. / Van Cleave, Janet; Egleston, Brian L.; Brosch, Sarah; Wirth, Elizabeth; Lawson, Molly; Sullivan-Marx, Eileen; Naylor, Mary D.

In: Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice, Vol. 18, No. 2, 01.05.2017, p. 72-83.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Van Cleave, Janet ; Egleston, Brian L. ; Brosch, Sarah ; Wirth, Elizabeth ; Lawson, Molly ; Sullivan-Marx, Eileen ; Naylor, Mary D. / Policy Research Challenges in Comparing Care Models for Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries. In: Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice. 2017 ; Vol. 18, No. 2. pp. 72-83.
@article{17f74582616243e295d5293b82e29123,
title = "Policy Research Challenges in Comparing Care Models for Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries",
abstract = "Providing affordable, high-quality care for the 10 million persons who are dual-eligible beneficiaries of Medicare and Medicaid is an ongoing health-care policy challenge in the United States. However, the workforce and the care provided to dual-eligible beneficiaries are understudied. The purpose of this article is to provide a narrative of the challenges and lessons learned from an exploratory study in the use of clinical and administrative data to compare the workforce of two care models that deliver home- and community-based services to dual-eligible beneficiaries. The research challenges that the study team encountered were as follows: (a) comparing different care models, (b) standardizing data across care models, and (c) comparing patterns of health-care utilization. The methods used to meet these challenges included expert opinion to classify data and summative content analysis to compare and count data. Using descriptive statistics, a summary comparison of the two care models suggested that the coordinated care model workforce provided significantly greater hours of care per recipient than the integrated care model workforce. This likely represented the coordinated care model's focus on providing in-home services for one recipient, whereas the integrated care model focused on providing services in a day center with group activities. The lesson learned from this exploratory study is the need for standardized quality measures across home- and community-based services agencies to determine the workforce that best meets the needs of dual-eligible beneficiaries.",
keywords = "care coordination, dual-eligible beneficiaries, Medicaid, Medicare, nursing workforce, outcomes (measurement)",
author = "{Van Cleave}, Janet and Egleston, {Brian L.} and Sarah Brosch and Elizabeth Wirth and Molly Lawson and Eileen Sullivan-Marx and Naylor, {Mary D.}",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1527154417721909",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "72--83",
journal = "Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice",
issn = "1527-1544",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Policy Research Challenges in Comparing Care Models for Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries

AU - Van Cleave, Janet

AU - Egleston, Brian L.

AU - Brosch, Sarah

AU - Wirth, Elizabeth

AU - Lawson, Molly

AU - Sullivan-Marx, Eileen

AU - Naylor, Mary D.

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - Providing affordable, high-quality care for the 10 million persons who are dual-eligible beneficiaries of Medicare and Medicaid is an ongoing health-care policy challenge in the United States. However, the workforce and the care provided to dual-eligible beneficiaries are understudied. The purpose of this article is to provide a narrative of the challenges and lessons learned from an exploratory study in the use of clinical and administrative data to compare the workforce of two care models that deliver home- and community-based services to dual-eligible beneficiaries. The research challenges that the study team encountered were as follows: (a) comparing different care models, (b) standardizing data across care models, and (c) comparing patterns of health-care utilization. The methods used to meet these challenges included expert opinion to classify data and summative content analysis to compare and count data. Using descriptive statistics, a summary comparison of the two care models suggested that the coordinated care model workforce provided significantly greater hours of care per recipient than the integrated care model workforce. This likely represented the coordinated care model's focus on providing in-home services for one recipient, whereas the integrated care model focused on providing services in a day center with group activities. The lesson learned from this exploratory study is the need for standardized quality measures across home- and community-based services agencies to determine the workforce that best meets the needs of dual-eligible beneficiaries.

AB - Providing affordable, high-quality care for the 10 million persons who are dual-eligible beneficiaries of Medicare and Medicaid is an ongoing health-care policy challenge in the United States. However, the workforce and the care provided to dual-eligible beneficiaries are understudied. The purpose of this article is to provide a narrative of the challenges and lessons learned from an exploratory study in the use of clinical and administrative data to compare the workforce of two care models that deliver home- and community-based services to dual-eligible beneficiaries. The research challenges that the study team encountered were as follows: (a) comparing different care models, (b) standardizing data across care models, and (c) comparing patterns of health-care utilization. The methods used to meet these challenges included expert opinion to classify data and summative content analysis to compare and count data. Using descriptive statistics, a summary comparison of the two care models suggested that the coordinated care model workforce provided significantly greater hours of care per recipient than the integrated care model workforce. This likely represented the coordinated care model's focus on providing in-home services for one recipient, whereas the integrated care model focused on providing services in a day center with group activities. The lesson learned from this exploratory study is the need for standardized quality measures across home- and community-based services agencies to determine the workforce that best meets the needs of dual-eligible beneficiaries.

KW - care coordination

KW - dual-eligible beneficiaries

KW - Medicaid

KW - Medicare

KW - nursing workforce

KW - outcomes (measurement)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85029688748&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85029688748&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1527154417721909

DO - 10.1177/1527154417721909

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 72

EP - 83

JO - Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice

JF - Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice

SN - 1527-1544

IS - 2

ER -