HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Cited by other online articles Google Scholar Articles by Kane, R. L. Articles by Lum, Y.-S. Articles citing this Article PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kane, R. L. Articles by Lum, Y.-S.

Consumer Responses to the Wisconsin Partnership Program for Elderly Persons

A Variation on the PACE Model

^a University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Division of Health Services Research and Policy, Minneapolis
^b University of Minnesota School of Social Work, St. Paul

Robert L. Kane, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Division of Health Services Research and Policy, D351 Mayo (MMC 197), 420 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 E-mail: kanex001{at}umn.edu.

Background. 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.

This article has been cited by other articles: (Search Google Scholar for Other Citing Articles)

				J. H. Flaherty, B. Stalvey, and L. Rubenstein Guest Editorial: A Consensus Statement on Nonemergent Medical Transportation Services for Older Persons J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., September 1, 2003; 58(9): M826 - 831. [Full Text] [PDF]