Implementation Variation in Natural Experiments of State Health Policy Initiatives.

American journal of accountable care Pub Date : 2019-09-01 Epub Date: 2019-09-17
Diane R Rittenhouse, Aryn Z Phillips, Salma Bibi, Hector P Rodriguez
{"title":"Implementation Variation in Natural Experiments of State Health Policy Initiatives.","authors":"Diane R Rittenhouse, Aryn Z Phillips, Salma Bibi, Hector P Rodriguez","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>An increasing number of federal initiatives allow states flexibility in selecting the strategies used to achieve initiative-specific goals. Variation in the foci and intensity of implementation may explain why federal policy initiatives succeed in some states and fail in others. The CMS State Innovation Models (SIM) initiative is a complex policy intervention implemented with substantial variation across states and may have variable impacts. This paper presents a method to characterize and account for that variation in states' implementation foci and intensity in natural policy experiments.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A combination of quantitative and qualitative measures of SIM implementation was used to characterize the foci of payment and delivery system reforms across states.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A modified Delphi expert panel process was used to prioritize the features of SIM implementation that would differentiate grantee states with respect to improved health outcomes. Three researchers then reviewed summaries of published evaluations and reports to characterize and score states on each implementation feature. Expert panelists guided the researchers on developing the criteria and weights applied to the focus areas when calculating SIM implementation intensity scores for states.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over 3 years of an expert panel process, 4 dimensions of SIM implementation that would most affect health outcomes were prioritized: 1) extent and breadth of stakeholder engagement, (2) extent that SIM implementation was focused on improving behavioral health, (3) amount of SIM funding per capita, and (4) breadth and depth of value-based payment reforms. Scoring states based on the prioritized factors resulted in composite scores that differentiated states into 3 categories: high, moderate, and low implementation intensity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We developed a stakeholder-driven method to measure and account for variation in implementation foci and intensity in a federal policy initiative that was implemented heterogeneously across grantee states. Our method for characterizing state implementation variation may be useful for natural policy experiments examining the variable impact of policy initiatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":72160,"journal":{"name":"American journal of accountable care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6866654/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of accountable care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/9/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: An increasing number of federal initiatives allow states flexibility in selecting the strategies used to achieve initiative-specific goals. Variation in the foci and intensity of implementation may explain why federal policy initiatives succeed in some states and fail in others. The CMS State Innovation Models (SIM) initiative is a complex policy intervention implemented with substantial variation across states and may have variable impacts. This paper presents a method to characterize and account for that variation in states' implementation foci and intensity in natural policy experiments.

Study design: A combination of quantitative and qualitative measures of SIM implementation was used to characterize the foci of payment and delivery system reforms across states.

Methods: A modified Delphi expert panel process was used to prioritize the features of SIM implementation that would differentiate grantee states with respect to improved health outcomes. Three researchers then reviewed summaries of published evaluations and reports to characterize and score states on each implementation feature. Expert panelists guided the researchers on developing the criteria and weights applied to the focus areas when calculating SIM implementation intensity scores for states.

Results: Over 3 years of an expert panel process, 4 dimensions of SIM implementation that would most affect health outcomes were prioritized: 1) extent and breadth of stakeholder engagement, (2) extent that SIM implementation was focused on improving behavioral health, (3) amount of SIM funding per capita, and (4) breadth and depth of value-based payment reforms. Scoring states based on the prioritized factors resulted in composite scores that differentiated states into 3 categories: high, moderate, and low implementation intensity.

Conclusions: We developed a stakeholder-driven method to measure and account for variation in implementation foci and intensity in a federal policy initiative that was implemented heterogeneously across grantee states. Our method for characterizing state implementation variation may be useful for natural policy experiments examining the variable impact of policy initiatives.

州卫生政策倡议自然实验中的实施差异。
目标:越来越多的联邦倡议允许各州灵活选择用于实现倡议特定目标的战略。实施重点和力度的差异可能解释了为什么联邦政策措施在一些州取得成功,而在另一些州却失败了。CMS 州创新模式(SIM)计划是一项复杂的政策干预措施,各州的实施情况差异很大,可能产生不同的影响。本文介绍了一种方法,用于描述和解释自然政策实验中各州实施重点和力度的差异:研究设计:采用定量和定性相结合的 SIM 实施措施来描述各州支付和服务系统改革的重点:方法:采用修改后的德尔菲专家小组流程,优先考虑在改善医疗成果方面能够区分受资助州的 SIM 实施特点。然后,三位研究人员查阅了已发表的评估和报告摘要,对各州的每个实施特征进行了描述和评分。专家小组成员指导研究人员制定标准,并在计算各州 SIM 实施强度分数时对重点领域进行加权:经过 3 年的专家小组讨论,确定了 SIM 实施中对健康结果影响最大的 4 个方面的优先次序:1) 利益相关者参与的程度和广度;(2) SIM 实施对改善行为健康的关注程度;(3) 人均 SIM 资金额;(4) 基于价值的支付改革的广度和深度。根据优先考虑的因素对各州进行评分,得出综合分数,将各州分为三类:实施强度高、中等和低:我们开发了一种由利益相关者驱动的方法,用于衡量和解释在联邦政策倡议中实施重点和强度的差异,该倡议在各受赠州的实施情况不尽相同。我们描述各州实施情况差异的方法可能对研究政策措施的不同影响的自然政策实验有用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信