Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test the accuracy of various physicians' participation in Medicaid models. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Primary data on 221 obstetricians and gynecologists in the Chicago area by telephone interviews over a four-month period. These data were combined with secondary data from the American Medical Association Master File (1993) and U.S. Census data (1990). STUDY DESIGN: Telephone interviewers posing as the older sisters of a pregnant teenager who is a Medicaid recipient sought information regarding the care provided in a first prenatal care appointment (e.g., appointment duration, tests administered, delivery privileges, appointment availability). DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: A "receptionist helpfulness" variable was developed through pretesting on obstetricians in another city. Inter-interviewer reliability was enhanced through common interview technique education. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Only 81 obstetricians (36.7 percent) accepted new Medicaid patients. This finding is lower than previous research on physician participation in Medicaid. There was strong empirical support for both dimensions-cost containment and limited access-of the physicians' receptiveness model, the model introduced with this research. There was limited support for the dual market and residential segregation models of physician participation in Medicaid. CONCLUSIONS: It is argued that this study's research design is more accurate in reflecting the barriers that a pregnant Medicaid-eligible patient encounters when seeking office-based prenatal care. As such, combining the physicians' receptiveness model with other physician participation in Medicaid models provides a more complete picture of access barriers to prenatal care for our most needy populations.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Buescher P. A., Smith C., Holliday J. L., Levine R. H. Source of prenatal care and infant birth weight: the case of a North Carolina county. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987 Jan;156(1):204–210. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(87)90239-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fossett J. W., Perloff J. D., Peterson J. A., Kletke P. R. Medicaid in the inner city: the case of maternity care in Chicago. Milbank Q. 1990;68(1):111–141. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fossett J. W., Peterson J. A. Physician supply and Medicaid participation. The causes of market failure. Med Care. 1989 Apr;27(4):386–396. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198904000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Makinson C. The health consequences of teenage fertility. Fam Plann Perspect. 1985 May-Jun;17(3):132–139. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mitchell J. B., Schurman R. Access to private obstetrics/gynecology services under Medicaid. Med Care. 1984 Nov;22(11):1026–1037. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198411000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Morris L., Warren C. W., Aral S. O. Measuring adolescent sexual behaviors and related health outcomes. Public Health Rep. 1993;108 (Suppl 1):31–36. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Perloff J. D., Kletke P., Fossett J. W. Which physicians limit their Medicaid participation, and why. Health Serv Res. 1995 Apr;30(1):7–26. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ross C. E., Duff R. S. Returning to the doctor: the effect of client characteristics, type of practice, and experiences with care. J Health Soc Behav. 1982 Jun;23(2):119–131. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Stevens-Simon C., Fullar S., McAnarney E. R. Tangible differences between adolescent-oriented and adult-oriented prenatal care. J Adolesc Health. 1992 Jun;13(4):298–302. doi: 10.1016/1054-139x(92)90163-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Yudkowsky B. K., Cartland J. D., Flint S. S. Pediatrician participation in Medicaid: 1978 to 1989. Pediatrics. 1990 Apr;85(4):567–577. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]