17 research outputs found

    Physician and facility drivers of spending variation in locoregional prostate cancer

    Full text link
    Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154672/1/cncr32719.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154672/2/cncr32719_am.pd

    Racial disparities in fifth-grade sun protection: Evidence from the Healthy Passages study

    Get PDF
    Background/Objectives: Despite rising skin cancer rates in children, multiple studies reveal inadequate youth sun-protective behavior (eg, sunscreen use). Using Healthy Passages data for fifth-graders, we set out to determine sunscreen adherence in these children and investigated factors related to sunscreen performance. Methods: Survey data were collected from 5119 fifth-graders and their primary caregivers. Logistic regression was used to assess associations between sunscreen adherence and performance of other preventive health behaviors (eg, flossing, helmet use) and examine predictors of sunscreen adherence. Analyses were repeated in non-Hispanic black, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic white subgroups. Results: Five thousand one hundred nineteen (23.4%) children almost always used sunscreen, 5.9% of non-Hispanic blacks (n = 1748), 23.7% of Hispanics (n = 1802), and 44.8% of non-Hispanic whites (n = 1249). Performing other preventive health behaviors was associated with higher odds of sunscreen adherence (all P \u3c.001), with the greatest association with flossing teeth (odds ratio = 2.41, 95% confidence interval = 1.86-3.13, P \u3c.001). Factors for lower odds of sunscreen adherence included being male and non-Hispanic black or Hispanic and having lower socioeconomic status. School-based sun-safety education and involvement in team sports were not significant factors. Conclusion: Our data confirm low use of sun protection among fifth-graders. Future research should explore how public health success in increasing prevalence of other preventive health behaviors may be applied to enhance sun protection messages. Identifying risk factors for poor adherence enables providers to target patients who need more education. Improving educational policies and content in schools may be an effective way to address sun safety

    Pay-for-performance in pediatrics: Proceed with caution

    No full text
    In response to overwhelming evidence of significant quality problems within adult and pediatric health care, pay-for-performance programs have proliferated rapidly in adult care settings and are beginning to spread into pediatrics.1\u966 Outpatient pediatric health care is being targeted by performance incentives in all 11 of the state Medicaid programs that currently use performance-incentive strategies and 33 of the 93 performance-incentive programs listed in the Leapfrog Compendium (the largest publicly available listing of performance-incentives programs in the country).7,8 We recognize that the current payment system contributes to our problems with quality, and we agree with the cautionary tone and measured approach suggested by Profit et al9 in the May 2007 issue of Pediatrics when considering whether performance incentives, in the form of pay-for-performance and/or public reporting, should be implemented to promote the quality of care provided by NICUs. Because these programs require tremendous effort on the part of a wide variety of stakeholders (employers, health plans, health care organizations, and physicians), it is important to consider whether they are worth the effort. Current evidence indicates that performance incentive strategies may only be modestly effective,10\u9612 are not necessarily connected . . . [Full Text of this Article </cgi/content/full/120/1/186>

    Did the Rising Tide Float All Boats?

    No full text

    A Cost Analysis of Universal versus Targeted Cholesterol Screening in Pediatrics.

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the number of children needed to screen to identify a case of childhood dyslipidemia and estimate costs under universal vs targeted screening approaches. STUDY DESIGN: We constructed a decision-analytic model comparing the health system costs of universal vs targeted screening for hyperlipidemia in US children aged 10 years over a 1-year time horizon. Targeted screening was defined by family history: dyslipidemia in a parent and/or early cardiovascular disease in a first-degree relative. Prevalence of any hyperlipidemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] ≥130 mg/dL) and severe hyperlipidemia (LDL ≥190 mg/dL or LDL ≥160 mg/dL with family history) were obtained from published estimates. Costs were estimated from the 2016 Maryland Medicaid fee schedule. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the influence of key variables on the incremental cost per case detected. RESULTS: For universal screening, the number needed to screen to identify 1 case was 12 for any hyperlipidemia and 111 for severe hyperlipidemia. For targeted screening, the number needed to screen was 7 for any hyperlipidemia and 49 for severe hyperlipidemia. The incremental cost per case detected for universal compared with targeted screening was 1980foranyhyperlipidemiaand1980 for any hyperlipidemia and 32 170 for severe hyperlipidemia. CONCLUSIONS: Our model suggests that universal cholesterol screening detects hyperlipidemia at a low cost per case, but may not be the most cost-efficient way to identify children with severe hyperlipidemia who are most likely to benefit from treatment
    corecore