This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A Comparison of Risk-Adjustment Methods

Jinnet B. Fowles, PhD; Jonathan P. Weiner, DrPH; David Knutson; Elizabeth Fowler, PhD; Anthony M. Tucker, PhD; Marjorie Ireland, PhD

JAMA. 1996;276(16):1316-1321.

Abstract
Objective.
—To compare performance of different health status measures for risk-adjusting capitation rates.

Design.
—Cross-sectional study. Health status measures derived from 1 year were used to predict resources for that year and the next.

Setting.
—Group-network health maintenance organization in Minnesota.

Participants.
—Sample of 18- to 64-year-old (n=3825) and elderly (aged 65 years; n=1955) members enrolled in a network-model health maintenance organization in Minnesota.

Main Outcome Measures.
—Total expenditures in the year concurrent with the health status survey (July 1991 through June 1992) and total expenditures in the year following the survey (July 1992 through June 1993).

Results.
—Capitation adjustment based on demographic measures performed least well. Both self-reported health status measures and diagnoses predicted future expenditures twice as well as demographics. When predicting costs for groups of patients rather than individuals, the demographic model worked well for average groups but tended to overpredict healthier groups and underpredict sicker groups. Ambulatory Care Groups based on diagnoses performed better than self-reported health status both in the retrospective models and across healthier and sicker groups.

Conclustion.
—Without risk adjustment, capitation rates are likely to overpay or underpay physicians for certain patient groups. It is possible to improve prediction using health status measures for risk adjustment. When selection bias is suspected and administrative data are available, we recommend a risk-adjustment method based on diagnostic information. If diagnostic data are not available, we recommend a system based on simple self-reported measures, such as chronic conditions, rather than complex functional status measures.

Author Affiliations
From the Health Research Center, Institute for Research and Education, HealthSystem Minnesota, Minneapolis (Drs Fowles, Fowler, and Ireland and Mr Knutson); and Health Services Research and Development Center, School of Hygiene and Public Health, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md (Drs Weiner and Tucker). Dr Ireland is currently with the Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

Footnotes
The Johns Hopkins University has copyrighted software based on the Ambulatory Care Group Measure. Royalties are paid to the University when this software is used by insurance organizations and other commercial concerns.

The views expressed herein are those of the authors and should not be associated with the Physician Payment Review Commission.

Reprints: Jinnet B. Fowles, PhD, Institute for Research and Education, HealthSystem Minnesota, 3800 Park Nicollet Blvd, Minneapolis, MN 55416.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

The Association between Three Different Measures of Health Status and Satisfaction among Patients with Diabetes
Kerr et al.
Med Care Res Rev 2003;60:158-177.
ABSTRACT  

Applying a Risk-Adjustment Framework to Primary Care: Can We Improve on Existing Measures?
Rosen et al.
Ann Fam Med 2003;1:44-51.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Cost And Quality Trends In Direct Contracting Arrangements
Lyles et al.
Health Aff (Millwood) 2002;21:89-102.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Use of risk adjustment in setting budgets and measuring performance in primary care II: advantages, disadvantages, and practicalities
Majeed et al.
BMJ 2001;323:607-610.
FULL TEXT  

Risk Adjustment for Measuring Health Outcomes: An Application in VA Long term Care
Rosen et al.
American Journal of Medical Quality 2001;16:118-127.
ABSTRACT  

Influence of Patient Education on Profiles of Physician Practices
Fiscella and Franks
ANN INTERN MED 1999;131:745-751.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Academic Managed Care Organizations and Adverse Selection Under Medicaid Managed Care in Tennessee
Bailey et al.
JAMA 1999;282:1067-1072.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Can Adverse Selection be Avoided in a Market for Individual Health Insurance?
Swartz and Garnick
Med Care Res Rev 1999;56:373-388.
ABSTRACT  

Incremental Costs of Enrolling Cancer Patients in Clinical Trials: a Population-Based Study
Wagner et al.
JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:847-853.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Methods of Reducing the Financial Risk of Physicians Under Capitation
Anderson and Weller
Arch Fam Med 1999;8:149-155.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Commentary
Welch
Med Care Res Rev 1997;54:144-147.
 

Risk-Adjustment Methods Based on Health Status and Functional Status
Allman
JAMA 1997;277:530-531.
ABSTRACT