File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Consumer responses to the Wisconsin Partnership Program for elderly persons: A variation on the PACE model

TitleConsumer responses to the Wisconsin Partnership Program for elderly persons: A variation on the PACE model
Authors
Issue Date2002
PublisherOxford University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://biomed.gerontologyjournals.org/
Citation
Journals Of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences And Medical Sciences, 2002, v. 57 n. 4, p. M250-M258 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground. The Wisconsin Partnership Program (WPP) is a variation on the Program for All-inclusive Care of the Elderly (PACE) model that is designed to be more flexible by allowing frail elderly dual-eligible (for both Medicare and Medicaid) clients to use their regular primary care physicians instead of relying on the physician hired by PACE. Case management is provided by a team of nurse, social worker, and nurse practitioner. The latter is charged with communicating with the client's primary physician. Methods. We compared the functional status and satisfaction of WPP elderly enrollees with those of two sets of dually eligible controls drawn from the Medicaid waiver rosters. One set of controls came from persons in the same county who opted not to enroll in WPP. The second came from matched counties that did not have access to the WPP. Enrollees were interviewed in person. Family members were interviewed by telephone. Results. The prevalence of activities of daily living (ADLs) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) dependency was lower for the WPP sample than that for the controls. The pattern of unmet needs was generally comparable. About half of each sample had a written advance directive. Overall, there were few areas of significant difference in beneficiaries' satisfaction. The WPP families were more satisfied than either control group that services were provided when needed and were better coordinated. There were no significant differences in the prevalence of any aspect of care burden. Conclusions. The impact of WPP seems limited. There is some evidence that families perceive better coordinated care. A more complete evaluation will await the analysis of the differences in utilization patterns between WPP and the controls.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/172061
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 5.476
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.675
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKane, RLen_US
dc.contributor.authorHomyak, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorBershadsky, Ben_US
dc.contributor.authorLum, YSen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-10-30T06:19:53Z-
dc.date.available2012-10-30T06:19:53Z-
dc.date.issued2002en_US
dc.identifier.citationJournals Of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences And Medical Sciences, 2002, v. 57 n. 4, p. M250-M258en_US
dc.identifier.issn1079-5006en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/172061-
dc.description.abstractBackground. The Wisconsin Partnership Program (WPP) is a variation on the Program for All-inclusive Care of the Elderly (PACE) model that is designed to be more flexible by allowing frail elderly dual-eligible (for both Medicare and Medicaid) clients to use their regular primary care physicians instead of relying on the physician hired by PACE. Case management is provided by a team of nurse, social worker, and nurse practitioner. The latter is charged with communicating with the client's primary physician. Methods. We compared the functional status and satisfaction of WPP elderly enrollees with those of two sets of dually eligible controls drawn from the Medicaid waiver rosters. One set of controls came from persons in the same county who opted not to enroll in WPP. The second came from matched counties that did not have access to the WPP. Enrollees were interviewed in person. Family members were interviewed by telephone. Results. The prevalence of activities of daily living (ADLs) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) dependency was lower for the WPP sample than that for the controls. The pattern of unmet needs was generally comparable. About half of each sample had a written advance directive. Overall, there were few areas of significant difference in beneficiaries' satisfaction. The WPP families were more satisfied than either control group that services were provided when needed and were better coordinated. There were no significant differences in the prevalence of any aspect of care burden. Conclusions. The impact of WPP seems limited. There is some evidence that families perceive better coordinated care. A more complete evaluation will await the analysis of the differences in utilization patterns between WPP and the controls.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherOxford University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://biomed.gerontologyjournals.org/en_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.meshActivities Of Daily Livingen_US
dc.subject.meshAdvance Directivesen_US
dc.subject.meshAgeden_US
dc.subject.meshConsumer Satisfactionen_US
dc.subject.meshDelivery Of Health Careen_US
dc.subject.meshHealth Services For The Ageden_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.titleConsumer responses to the Wisconsin Partnership Program for elderly persons: A variation on the PACE modelen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailLum, YS: tlum@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityLum, YS=rp01513en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/gerona/57.4.M250-
dc.identifier.pmid11909892-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0036199216en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0036199216&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume57en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.spageM250en_US
dc.identifier.epageM258en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000174734200017-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridKane, RL=7402265271en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHomyak, P=8679284000en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBershadsky, B=6701611351en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLum, YS=8615080500en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats