Managed care and infant health: an evaluation of Medicaid in the US

The assessment of the adequacy of prenatal care utilization is heavily shaped by the way in which utilization is measured. Although it is widely used, the current major index of utilization, the Kessner/Institute of Medicine Index, has not been subjected to systematic examination. This paper provides such an examination. Data from the 1980 National Natality Survey are used to disaggregate the components of the Kessner Index for detailed analysis. An alternative two-part index, the Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization Index, is proposed that combines independent assessments of the timing of prenatal care initiation and the frequency of visits received after initiation. The Kessner Index is seriously flawed. It is heavily weighted toward timing of prenatal care initiation does not distinguish timing of initiation from poor subsequent utilization, inaccurately measures utilization for full- or post-term pregnancies, and lacks sufficient documentation for consistent computer programming. The Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization Index offers a more accurate and comprehensive set of measures of prenatal care utilization than the Kessner Index.

A longstanding issue in the health care industry is whether physicians' malpractice fears lead to defensive medicine. We use national birth certificate data from 1990 through 1992 to conduct a county fixed-effects analysis of the impact of malpractice claims risk on cesarean-section rates and infant health. Malpractice claims risk is measured by obstetricians' malpractice premiums. The study provides evidence that physicians practice defensive medicine in obstetrics but that the impact of increased cesarean sections that results from malpractice fears on total obstetric care costs is small. The study also finds that physicians' defensive response varies with the socioeconomic status of the mother.

Numerous studies have demonstrated that insurance status influences the amount of ambulatory care received by children, but few have assessed the role of insurance as a determinant of children's access to primary care. We studied the effect of health insurance on children's access to primary care. We analyzed a sample of 49,367 children under 18 years of age from the 1993-1994 National Health Interview Survey, a nationwide household survey. The overall rate of response was 86.5 percent. The survey included questions on insurance coverage and access to primary care. An estimated 13 percent of U.S. children did not have health insurance in 1993-1994. Uninsured children were less likely than insured children to have a usual source of care (75.9 percent vs. 96.2 percent, P<0.001). Among those with a usual source of care, uninsured children were more likely than insured children to have no regular physician (24.3 percent vs. 13.8 percent, P<0.001), to be without access to medical care after normal business hours (11.8 percent vs. 7.1 percent, P<0.001), and to have families that were dissatisfied with at least one aspect of their care (19.6 percent vs. 14.0 percent, P=0.01). Uninsured children were more likely than insured children to have gone without needed medical, dental, or other health care (22.2 percent vs. 6.1 percent, P<0.001). Uninsured children were also less likely than insured children to have had contact with a physician during the previous year (67.4 percent vs. 83.8 percent, P<0.001). All differences remained significant after we controlled for potential confounders using linear and logistic regression. Among children, having health insurance is strongly associated with access to primary care. The new children's health insurance program enacted as part of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 may substantially improve access to and use of primary care by children.