Risk Adjustment Using Administrative Data-Based and Survey-Derived Methods for Explaining Physician Utilization

2010 
Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate an administrative data-based risk adjustment method for predicting physician utilization and the contribution of survey-derived indicators of health status. The results of this study will support the use of administrative data for planning, reimbursement, and assessing equity of physician utilization. Methods: The Ontario portion of the 2000-2001 Canadian Community Health Survey was linked with administrative physician claims data from 2002-2003 and 2003-2004. Explanatory models of family physician (FP) and specialist physician (SP) utilization were run using demographic information and The Johns Hopkins University Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG) Case-mix System. Survey-based measures of health status were then added to the models. The coefficient of determination, R 2 , indicated the models' explanatory power. Results: The study sample consisted of 25,558 individuals aged 20 to 79 years representing approximately 7.8 million people. Over the 2 years of study period, 82.5% of the study population had a FP visit with a median of 6 visits and 53.2% had a SP visit with a median of 1 visit. The R 2 values based on administrative data alone were 33% and 21% for the frequency of FP and SP visits and 16% and 35% for having one or more visit to an FPs and SPs, respectively. The addition of the survey-based measures to the administrative data-based models produced less than a 2% increase in explanatory power for any outcome. Conclusion: Administrative data-based measures of morbidity burden are valid and useful indicators of future physician utilization. The survey-derived measures used in this study did not contribute significantly to models on the basis of administrative data-based measures. These findings support the future use of administrative data-based data and Adjusted Clinical Groups for planning, reimbursement, and research.
    • Correction
    • Source
    • Cite
    • Save
    • Machine Reading By IdeaReader
    18
    References
    46
    Citations
    NaN
    KQI
    []