Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Jun;16(2):115-28.
doi: 10.1177/1460458210364036.

Agreement between structured checklists and Medicaid claims for preventive dental visits in primary care medical offices

Bhavna T Pahel  1 , R Gary Rozier, Sally C Stearns
Affiliations

Agreement between structured checklists and Medicaid claims for preventive dental visits in primary care medical offices

Bhavna T Pahel et al. Health Informatics J. 2010 Jun.

Abstract

For program evaluation purposes, the feasibility of matching Medicaid claims with physician-completed structured checklists (encounter forms, EFs) was assessed in a pediatric office-based preventive dental program. We examined agreement on visits (weighted kappa) and predictors of a match between EFs and claims (multinomial logit model with practice-level clustering). In total, 34,171 matches occurred between 41,252 EFs and 40,909 claims, representing 82.8 per cent of EFs and 83.5 per cent of claims. Agreement on visits was 56 per cent (weighted kappa = 0.66). Pediatric practices provided the majority of visits (82.4%) and matches. Increasing age of child and residence in same county as the medical practice increased the likelihood of a match. Structured checklists can be combined with claims to better assess provision of preventive dental services in pediatric primary care. However, future research should examine strategies to improve the completion of structured checklists by primary care providers if data beyond claims are to be used for program evaluation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Process of matching patient encounter forms (EFs) with Medicaid enrollment and claims data
Figure 2
Figure 2
Match on preventive dental visits between patient encounter forms and Medicaid claims
Figure 3
Figure 3
Results of the multinomial logit model for predictors of a match between Medicaid claims and patient encounter forms
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Cooper GS, Schultz L, Simpkins J, Lafata JE. The utility of administrative data for measuring adherence to cancer surveillance care guidelines. Medical Care. 2007;45(1):66–72. - PubMed
    1. Leake JL, Werneck RI. The use of administrative databases to assess oral health care. Journal of Public Health Dentistry. 2005;65(1):21–35. - PubMed
    1. Warren JL, Harlan LC, Fahey A, Virnig BA, Freeman JL, Klabunde CN, et al. Utility of the SEER–Medicare data to identify chemotherapy use. Medical Care. 2002;40(8 suppl):IV-55–IV-61. - PubMed
    1. Bullano MF, Kamat S, Willey VJ, Barlas S, Watson DJ, Brenneman SK. Agreement between administrative claims and the medical record in identifying patients with a diagnosis of hypertension. Medical Care. 2006;44(5):486–90. - PubMed
    1. Zhan C, Miller MR. Administrative data based patient safety research: a critical review. Quality & Safety in Health Care. 2003;12(suppl 2):58–63. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types