title: A comparison of functional outcomes after hip fracture in group/staff HMOs and fee-for-service systems.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Previous studies examining differences in the quality of care between capitated and fee-for-service payment systems have focused on the care delivered in a single setting. No study to date has compared outcomes over an entire episode of care delivered across multiple settings.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To compare outcomes of care for patients receiving institutional rehabilitation for hip fracture in fee-for-service and group/staff HMO delivery systems.
  
  
  METHODS
  One-year prospective inception cohort.
  
  
  METHODS
  Six hospital-based, integrated care systems paid on a traditional fee-for-service model and five group/staff HMOs (paid fixed capitation rate by Medicare). The 11 delivery systems were selected because of their commitment to geriatric rehabilitation.
  
  
  METHODS
  196 fee-for-service and 140 group/staff HMO patients with acute hip fracture were identified on admission to inpatient rehabilitation.
  
  
  METHODS
  Four primary outcomes--recovery of activities of daily living, improvement in ambulation, return to community living, and mortality--were measured at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Service utilization was assessed in the acute-care hospital setting, rehabilitation setting, and at each 3-month follow-up interval. Risk adjustment was performed by using multiple and logistic regression.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Overall, no differences were found between patients in group/staff HMOs and fee-for-service patients. Group/staff HMO patients experienced improved functional recovery at 6 months (P < 0.01) and improved ambulation at 12 months (P = 0.05) compared with fee-for-service patients, although these were isolated findings. With regard to utilization, group/staff HMO delivery systems used physician services less intensively and substituted less-skilled allied health personnel.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Compared with fee-for-service delivery systems, with a similar commitment to excellence in geriatric rehabilitation, group/staff HMOs can achieve equivalent outcomes in older patients recovering from hip fracture with less-intense service utilization.
authors.affiliation: University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver, USA. Eric.Coleman@uchsc.edu
authors.forename: E A
authors.initials: EA
authors.lastname: Coleman
authors.forename: A M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Kramer
authors.forename: J C
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Kowalsky
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Eckhoff
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Lin
authors.forename: E J
authors.initials: EJ
authors.lastname: Hester
authors.forename: N
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Morgenstern
authors.forename: J F
authors.initials: JF
authors.lastname: Steiner
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D015331:Cohort Studies; D017050:Episode of Care; D018588:Fee-for-Service Plans / Q000592:standards*; D005260:Female; D006279:Health Maintenance Organizations / Q000592:standards*; D006620:Hip Fractures / Q000191:economics / Q000628:therapy*; D006801:Humans; D007902:Length of Stay; D008297:Male; D006278:Medicare; D011446:Prospective Studies; D020127:Recovery of Function; D012047:Rehabilitation Centers; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014481:United States