View
5
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Looking Beyond the Expected
Amerigroup
Provider Satisfaction
Louisiana
2016 Results
Prepared by:
DSS Research
Tammy Austin
tammy.austin@dssresearch.com
Prepared for:
Anthem, Inc.November 2016
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com2
Table of contents
Background and objectives 3
Methodology 4
Executive summary 5
Detailed findings
Overall satisfaction 9
Claims processing and provider reimbursement 11
Utilization Management 12
Quality Management 13
Disease Management Centralized Care Unit (DMCCU) 16
Local health plan provider services 21
Communication and technology 23
Continuity and coordination of care 25
Respondent profile 29
Appendix: Correlation analysis 30
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com3
Background and objectives
Background. Anthem, Inc. has contracted with DSS Research to conduct provider satisfaction surveys
for each market. This research can be used to provide rational direction for efforts to strengthen provider
relationships.
Objectives. This research is designed to:
• Gauge satisfaction with Amerigroup overall and in the following areas:
− Provider enrollment process and complaint systems.
− Claims processing and provider reimbursement.
− Utilization Management.
− Quality Management.
− Disease Management Centralized Care Unit (DMCCU).
− Local health plan provider services.
− Communication and technology.
− Continuity and coordination of care.
• Identify changes in results from 2015 to 2016.
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com4
Methodology
Questionnaire. Anthem, Inc. developed the survey instrument. The survey was designed for mail,
telephone and Internet administration.
Data collection. Data collection information is detailed in the table below.
Sample design.
• Qualified respondents. The population surveyed includes providers affiliated or contracted with
Amerigroup.
• Sample source. Anthem, Inc. supplied the sample, including names and contact information, for
providers.
• Sample size and response rate.
Data processing and tabulation. DSS processed all completed surveys and produced detailed tables
that summarize the results.
Advanced analytics. Details regarding the correlation analysis are provided in the appendix.
Percentages lower than 5.0% are not labeled in charts or graphs where space does not permit.
Data collection details
Initial mailing July 22, 2016
Follow-up mailing August 12, 2016
Follow-up phone calls to non-responders September 2-23, 2016
Sample size Total undeliverable
recordsCompletes Response rate
Adjusted
response rate
1,000 77 93 9.3% 10.1%
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com5
Executive summary
Overall, the satisfaction composite score increased slightly among Louisiana providers.
• 78% are very or somewhat satisfied with Amerigroup overall and 82% are satisfied with the provider enrollment
process.
• A significantly higher percentage than in 2015 are satisfied with the provider complaint systems (73% vs. 57%).
• These changes resulted in a slight increase in the overall satisfaction composite score (78% vs. 72%). The
composite is the average of the scores for the three high-level satisfaction measures mentioned above.
Correlation analysis identifies several measures that are strongly associated with overall satisfaction.1
• Obtaining support towards Patient Centered Medical Home implementation has the highest correlation to overall
satisfaction, but with a score of 78%, satisfaction with Amerigroup performance on this measure is lower than on
many other measures.
• Among the remaining highly-correlated measures:
− Scores are highest for satisfaction with the accuracy and timeliness of claims payments and the clarity of the
remittance advice (94%, 93% and 91%, respectively).
− Satisfaction scores on these measures have the most room to improve:
The provider orientation and training process (71%).
The timeliness, clarity and accuracy of information exchange and the sufficiency of information to
coordinate care (scores range from 70% to 73%).
The provider complaint systems (73%).
In addition to the provider complaint systems, several other measures also increased significantly.
• The utilization management composite (83% vs. 73%), as well as three measures that make up that composite.
• The quality management composite (77% vs. 63%), as well as two measures that make up that composite.
• The local health plan provider services composite (80% vs. 69%), as well as one of the measures that make up that
composite.
• The quality of case management services (83% vs. 73%).
• Satisfaction with the accuracy of claims payments (94% vs. 86%).
• Several measures of usage and interest in the DMCCU programs.
• The frequency with which providers receive communication from hospitals, behavioral health facilities and other
practitioners (PCPs, specialists and behavioral health practitioners).
Note 1: See the correlation chart (illustrated on the following page). See the appendix for further explanation of correlation.
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com6
Executive summary
Correlation chart for overall satisfaction with Amerigroup
Lower
Higher
Lower HigherCorrelation
Note 1: See following page for legend detail.
C&R
UM
QM
QC
DMCCU
PS
C&T
CoC
EP
Complaints
SatisActionTM key driver
statistical modeling
analysis not performed
due to a low number of
completed surveys.
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com7
Executive summary
Claims processing and provider reimbursement (C&R)
Q1a.Timeliness of claims payment
Q1b.Accuracy of claims payment
Q1c.Clarity of the remittance advice
Utilization Management (UM)
Q2a.Obtaining precertification/authorization for members
Q2b.Efficiency of the UM process overall
Q2c.Timeliness of response to concerns
Q2d.Obtaining support
Quality Management (QM)
Q3c.Responsiveness during appeals process
Q4.Rating of HEDIS education
Quality care initiatives (QC)
Q5a.List of members needing services
Q5b. Seeing only members
Q5c. Provider incentive payments
Q5d. Appointment scheduling portal
Q5e. Educational fax blasts
Q5f. Periodic mailings
Disease Management Centralized Care Unit (DMCCU)
Q7aa.Telephonic assistance provided by staff
Q7ab.Member interventions by staff
Q7ac. Written program materials
Q7ad. Timing of distribution of program materials
Q7ae. Mode of delivery of program materials
Q7af. Frequency of delivery of program materials
Q7ag. Communications provided by case managers
Q7b. Helpfulness of staff providing services
Q7c. Helpfulness of Clinical Practice Guidelines in managing patients
Local health plan provider services (PS)
Q13a.Provider orientation and training process
Q13b. Information in the provider manual
Q13c. Quality of educational information
Communication and technology (C&T)
Q15a.Provider manuals
Q15b. Provider newsletters
Q15c.General provider communications
Continuity and coordination of care (CoC)
Q17a. Timeliness of information exchange
Q17b. Accuracy of information exchange
Q17c. Clarity of information exchange
Q17d. Sufficiency of information to coordinate care
Enrollment process (EP)
Q24.Satisfaction with provider enrollment process
Complaint systems (Complaints)
Q25.Satisfaction with provider complaint systems
The dependent variable is:
Q23.Overall satisfaction with Amerigroup
Correlation chart legend detail
Highlighted items have a correlation of 0.500 or higher.
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com8
2016
2015
An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level. * New in 2016.
Executive summary
Composite summary
Very/Somewhat satisfied
Very/Somewhat satisfied
Excellent/Very good/Good
Excellent/Good
Excellent/Very good/Good
Excellent/Very good/Good
Very/Somewhat satisfied
Very satisfied/Satisfied
Claims
Processing and
Provider
Reimbursement
(n=83)
(n=284)
Utilization
Management
(n=90)
(n=281)
Quality
Management
(n=88)
(n=283)
Quality Care
Initiatives*
(n=88)
Very/Somewhat satisfied
Overall
Satisfaction
(n=92)
(n=293)
Disease
Management
Centralized
Care Unit
(n=85)
(n=245)
Local Health
Plan Provider
Services
(n=89)
(n=270)
Communication
and
Technology
(n=88)
(n=273)
Continuity and
Coordination of
Care
(n=88)
(n=229)
88.9%
92.6%
71.5%
77.7%
72.7%
82.9%
62.5%
76.6%
81.1%
81.6%
81.3%
68.9%
79.6%
82.3%
83.1%
72.9%
71.6%
h
h
h
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com9
5.4%7.5%
12.0% 10.9%
41.3% 39.6%
37.0% 38.2%
78.3% 77.8%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015
Overall satisfaction
Overall satisfaction with Amerigroup is stable among providers in Louisiana
Overall satisfaction with Amerigroup
(n=92) (n=293)
Q23. Please rate your overall satisfaction with Amerigroup. An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
Very
satisfied
Somewhat
satisfied
Neither
Somewhat
dissatisfied
Very
dissatisfied
Top 2 box:
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com10
Overall satisfaction
Satisfaction with the provider enrollment process is stable, while satisfaction with the complaint systems
increased significantly.
Satisfaction with other provider services
Provider enrollment process Provider complaint systems
Q24. Please rate your overall satisfaction with the provider enrollment process. Q25. Please rate your overall satisfaction with the provider complaint systems. An arrow (hi) indicates
a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
14.6% 15.3%
44.9% 39.9%
37.1% 39.6%
82.0% 79.5%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015(n=89) (n=288)
Very
satisfied
Somewhat
satisfied
Neither
Somewhat
dissatisfied
Very
dissatisfied
5.7%
21.6%
33.2%
45.5%
34.3%
27.3% 23.0%
72.7% 57.2%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015(n=88) (n=283)
Top 2
box:
Top 2
box: h
i
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com11
Composite (n=83) 88.9%
Accuracy of claims payment (n=82) 85.7%
Timeliness of claims payment (n=83) 89.7%
Clarity of the remittance advice (n=79) 91.4%
Claims processing and provider reimbursement
Satisfaction increased significantly for the accuracy of claims payments and slightly for the timeliness of
claims payments, resulting in a slight increase in the average.
Satisfaction with claims payments and remittance advice
6.3% 31.6%
33.7%
39.0%
34.8%
59.5%
59.0%
54.9%
57.8%
91.1%
92.8%
93.9%
92.6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Verydissatisfied
Somewhatdissatisfied
Neither Somewhatsatisfied
Verysatisfied
Top 2 box:
2016 2015
Q1. How satisfied are you with Amerigroup performance in these areas: An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
h
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com12
Utilization Management
Satisfaction with the utilization management process increased significantly. Satisfaction with obtaining
support towards Patient Centered Medical Home implementation, a new measure this year, has the most
room for improvement.
Satisfaction with Utilization Management process
Q2. Please rate your satisfaction with: An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level. * New in 2016.
Composite (n=90) 72.7%
Efficiency of the Amerigroup
Utilization Management
process overall
(n=87) 74.4%
Timeliness of the Amerigroup
medical director's response
to your concerns
(n=78) 70.8%
Obtaining precertification
and/or authorization for
Amerigroup members
(n=86) 72.7%
Obtaining support towards
Patient Centered Medical Home
implementation*
(n=74)6.8%
5.8%
6.8%
5.8%
5.1%
5.7%
5.9%
8.1%
7.7%
6.3%
41.9%
39.5%
41.0%
46.0%
42.1%
36.5%
44.2%
43.6%
39.1%
40.8%
78.4%
83.7%
84.6%
85.1%
82.9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Verydissatisfied
Somewhatdissatisfied
Neither Somewhatsatisfied
Verysatisfied
Top 2 box:
2016 2015
h
h
h
h
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com13
Composite (n=88) 62.5%
Responsiveness during
the medical necessity
appeals process
(n=73) 63.1%
Members' understanding
of their benefits(n=88) 63.7%
Members' understanding
of preventive care and
wellness programs
(n=84) 60.6%
Quality Management
Satisfaction with all of these measures increased, two significantly so, resulting in a significant increase
in the average.
Ratings of experiences with Amerigroup
Q3. Please rate your experience with Amerigroup: An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
11.9%
12.5%
5.5%
10.0%
16.7%
11.4%
12.3%
13.5%
26.2%
30.7%
37.0%
31.3%
26.2%
26.1%
24.7%
25.7%
19.0%
19.3%
20.5%
19.6%
71.4%
76.1%
82.2%
76.6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent Top 3 box:
2016 2015
h
h
h
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com14
Quality Management
A slightly higher percentage than in 2015 gave Amerigroup a rating of excellent, very good or good for
the education provided about how to maximize HEDIS performance.
Rating of HEDIS® education
5.3%
9.2%13.7%
33.3%
33.6%
34.5%29.4%
18.4% 17.9%
86.2% 80.9%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015
(n=87) (n=262)
Top 3
box:
HEDIS is a registered trademark of the National Committee for Quality Assurance.
Q4. How would you describe the education provided to you by Amerigroup on data collection and reporting to maximize your HEDIS® performance? An arrow (hi) indicates a
significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
Excellent
Very
good
Good
Fair
Poor
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com15
Quality Management
Overall, more than eight in 10 rated these quality care initiatives as excellent or good.
Rating of quality care initiatives*
Q5. We have implemented several provider-focused improvement initiatives as part of our performance improvement projects. How beneficial are these interventions in helping you
provide quality care? * New in 2016.
Composite (n=88)
Monthly list of members needing
services from Amerigroup reps(n=80)
Educational fax blasts
on specific clinical topics(n=66)
Periodic letter mailings that include
lists of members needing services(n=67)
Setting aside all or part of the day
to see only Amerigroup members(n=50)
Appointment scheduling portal
(MyHealth-Direct)(n=54)
Provider incentive payments for
helping members get needed care(n=72) 9.7%
11.1%
12.0%
6.1%
6.3%
8.3%
12.5%
9.3%
8.0%
13.4%
10.6%
10.0%
10.6%
59.7%
61.1%
64.0%
55.2%
62.1%
57.5%
59.9%
18.1%
18.5%
16.0%
26.9%
21.2%
26.3%
21.2%
77.8%
79.6%
80.0%
82.1%
83.3%
83.8%
81.1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Poor Fair Good Excellent Top 2 box:
2016
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com16
Disease Management Centralized Care Unit (DMCCU)
Usage and interest in many of these programs increased significantly.
DMCCU programs
Programs in which provider enrolled patients Providers want more program information about …
55.3%
49.4%
44.7%
58.8%
41.2%
35.3%
35.3%
28.2%
29.4%
29.4%
31.8%
30.6%
23.5%
37.3%
41.4%
35.4%
39.2%
25.9%
19.8%
23.6%
19.0%
13.7%
19.4%
19.4%
22.4%
43.0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Q6. In which program(s) did you enroll your patients? Q11. Please check the DMCCU programs you would like more information about: An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different
result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
49.3%
47.9%
41.1%
41.1%
34.2%
31.5%
28.8%
26.0%
23.3%
21.9%
20.5%
20.5%
37.0%
23.8%
29.8%
24.2%
21.8%
13.3%
11.7%
17.7%
8.1%
7.3%
12.9%
10.1%
10.1%
55.6%
0%20%40%60%80%100%
2016
(n=73)
2015
(n=248)
2016
(n=85)
2015
(n=263)
h
i
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
i
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
Asthma
Diabetes
Hypertension
Obesity
Major depressive
disorder
Bipolar disorder
COPD
HIV/AIDS
Schizophrenia
CHF
CAD
Substance use
disorder (SUD)
None
h
h
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com17
DMCCU
A slightly higher percentage than in 2015 indicated that patient quality of life has improved since
enrollment in an Amerigroup DMCCU program.
Overall ratings of DMCCU programs
Patient quality of life has …
93.1% 95.3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015
Impact of disease management programs
(% Positive)
5.7%
35.8%41.4%
34.0%
33.1%
24.5%18.8%
58.5% 51.9%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015
Top 2
box:
Improved
greatly
Improved
some
Remained
the same
Declined
some
Declined
greatly
(n=53) (n=133)(n=72) (n=191)
In 2016, 7.5% indicated that program exposure
has not been long enough to measure changes.
Q10. Do you perceive disease management programs as having a positive or negative impact on a patient’s health status relative to their condition? Q8. In general, since enrollment
in the Amerigroup DMCCU program(s), has patient quality of life … An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com18
5.6%
62.5%56.5%
16.7%26.1%
12.5% 10.1%
29.2% 36.2%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015
86.5%83.2%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015
DMCCU
A slightly lower percentage than in 2015 indicated that Amerigroup DMCCU programs are better than
other plans, but a slightly higher percentage are likely to recommend the programs to other providers.
Overall ratings of DMCCU programs (cont’d)
Would recommend to other providers
(% Yes)
Amerigroup comparison to other plans
(n=74) (n=190)(n=72) (n=207)
Top 2
box:
Much
better
Better
Same as
Worse
Much
worse
Q12. How does the Amerigroup DMCCU compare to other Medicaid/Medicare Advantage plans? Q9. Would you recommend the Amerigroup DMCCU program(s) to other providers?
An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com19
DMCCU
A slightly higher percentage than in 2015 rated Amerigroup highly for the helpfulness of the Clinical
Practice Guidelines.
Rating of experience with DMCCU elements
Composite (n=85) 81.6%
Helpfulness of Amerigroup
Clinical Practice Guidelines in
managing your patients
(n=81) 79.5%
Satisfaction with helpfulness of
staff providing DMCCU services(n=72) 80.1%8.3%
6.3%
12.5%
9.9%
12.5%
43.1%
44.4%
41.4%
16.7%
21.0%
18.3%
19.4%
19.8%
21.6%
79.2%
85.2%
81.3%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent Top 3 box:
2016 2015
Q7. Please rate your experience with: An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com20
Telephonic assistance
provided by staff(n=81) 83.0%
Member interventions by staff (n=77) 82.0%
Written program materials (n=77) 82.6%
Timing of distribution
of program materials(n=77) 81.7%
Mode of delivery
of program materials(n=78) 82.1%
Frequency of delivery
of program materials(n=78) 82.3%
Communications provided by
DMCCU case managers(n=72) 81.0%
DMCCU
None of these measures shifted significantly.
Rating of experience with DMCCU elements (cont’d)
9.7%
6.4%
5.1%
5.2%
6.5%
6.2%
15.3%
15.4%
14.1%
13.0%
14.3%
10.4%
7.4%
40.3%
39.7%
41.0%
42.9%
39.0%
42.9%
39.5%
18.1%
16.7%
15.4%
16.9%
15.6%
20.8%
23.5%
16.7%
21.8%
24.4%
22.1%
27.3%
19.5%
23.5%
75.0%
78.2%
80.8%
81.8%
81.8%
83.1%
86.4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent
Usefulness of the overall program in:
Q7. Please rate your experience with: An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
Top 3 box:
2016 2015
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com21
Local health plan provider services
Satisfaction increased significantly for the information received in the provider manual and slightly for the
provider orientation and training process, resulting in a significant increase in the average.
Satisfaction with services
Q13. How satisfied were you with the following: An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level. * New in 2016.
Composite (n=89) 68.9%
Information you received
in the provider manual(n=85) 74.9%
Quality of educational
information provided
to you and your staff*
(n=85)
Provider orientation
and training process(n=85) 62.8%22.4%
9.4%
9.4%
13.7%
50.6%
60.0%
61.2%
57.3%
20.0%
23.5%
23.5%
22.4%
70.6%
83.5%
84.7%
79.6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Verydissatisfied
Dissatisfied Neither Satisfied Verysatisfied
Top 2 box:
2016 2015
h
h
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com22
Local health plan provider services
On average, more than one-third of office practice staff participated in cultural competency training in the
last year.
Staff who participated in cultural competency training*
35.9%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016
Q14. Within the last year, what percentage of office practice staff (administrative, clerical, and clinical) has participated in any type of cultural competency training? * New in 2016.
(Average percentage)
(n=68)
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com23
Composite (n=88) 82.3%
Provider manuals (n=84) 83.7%
Provider newsletters (n=83) 84.2%
General provider
communications(n=87) 79.2%
Communication and technology
Ratings of these Amerigroup materials are stable.
Ratings of Amerigroup materials
Q15. Please rate the quality and effectiveness of the following Amerigroup materials: An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95%
confidence level.
6.9%
5.5%
12.6%
10.8%
10.7%
11.4%
37.9%
36.1%
36.9%
37.0%
14.9%
20.5%
20.2%
18.6%
27.6%
27.7%
27.4%
27.6%
80.5%
84.3%
84.5%
83.1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent Top 3 box:
2016 2015
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com24
Communication and technology
Among those who would like to be contacted by a health plan representative, significantly higher
percentages than in 2015 would like to discuss their participation in a Quality Incentive Program. Interest
in other topics also increased, but not by significant margins.
Information providers want to discuss
(All mentions)2016 2015
Base: (n=48) (n=101)
Participation in a Quality Incentive Program 77.1%h 59.4%
Why HEDIS measures are important 45.8% 38.6%
Innovative programs my practice employs 37.5% 28.7%
Initiation of electronic claims processing 37.5% 31.7%
Providing after-hours care in my practice 31.3% 25.7%
Contact's name 4.2% 0.0%
Claims/denials/billing/payments (slow, inaccurate) 4.2% 2.0%
Fee schedule/reimbursement 2.1% 2.0%
Enrollment/credentialing/contracts 2.1% 0.0%
Network mentions 2.1% 1.0%
Need program information 2.1% 0.0%
Patient health issues 2.1% 0.0%
Interpreter/language barrier 2.1% 0.0%
Coordination of care 2.1% 0.0%
No need for contact/none/nothing/N/A 2.1%i 12.9%
Q26. I would like to be contacted by a health plan representative to discuss: An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com25
7.2% 6.0%
9.6%20.9%
36.1%
37.0%
31.3%
22.6%
15.7% 13.6%
83.1% 73.2%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015
5.8%
65.1% 59.1%
19.3% 24.8%
9.6% 8.7%
28.9% 33.5%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015
Continuity and coordination of care
The rating of the quality of Amerigroup case management services increased significantly, but a slightly
lower percentage than in 2015 indicated that Amerigroup coordination of care is better than that of other
plans.
Ratings of experience with continuity and coordination of care
Quality of case management services Amerigroup comparison to other plans
(n=83) (n=235)
Top 3
box:
Excellent
Very
good
Good
Fair
Poor
(n=83) (n=242)
Top 2
box:
Much
better
Better
Same as
Worse
Much
worse
Q18. Please rate your experience with the quality of case management services regarding continuity and coordination of care. Q19. How does the Amerigroup continuity and
coordination of care compare to other Medicaid/Medicare Advantage plans? An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
h
i
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com26
Continuity and coordination of care
Satisfaction with the clarity of information exchange decreased slightly.
Satisfaction with information exchange
Composite (n=88) 72.9%
Sufficiency of information
to coordinate care(n=85) 73.8%
Accuracy (n=86) 74.4%
Clarity (n=87) 75.8%
Timeliness (n=87) 67.5%5.7%
5.7%
5.9%
5.5%
20.7%
19.5%
18.6%
17.6%
19.1%
44.8%
37.9%
39.5%
37.6%
40.0%
25.3%
33.3%
32.6%
35.3%
31.6%
70.1%
71.3%
72.1%
72.9%
71.6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Verydissatisfied
Somewhatdissatisfied
Neither Somewhatsatisfied
Verysatisfied
Top 2 box:
2016 2015
Q17. Please rate your experience with Amerigroup in the following dimensions of information exchange for the coordination of medical and behavioral health care: An arrow (hi)
indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com27
Hospitals (n=87) 77.2%
PCPs (n=85) 75.1%
Specialty care practitioners
(not including behavioral health)(n=86) 74.4%
Outpatient therapy providers (n=86) 68.1%
Home health agencies (n=83) 69.0%
Behavioral health facilities (n=81) 57.5%
Behavioral health practitioners (n=86) 53.2%
Rehabilitation facilities (n=79) 55.5%
Skilled nursing facilities (n=75) 57.2%
Continuity and coordination of care
Communications from most of these sources increased, five significantly so.
Frequency of receiving verbal/written communication from other providers
28.0%
24.1%
15.1%
17.3%
12.0%
12.8%
9.3%
6.9%
16.0%
19.0%
12.8%
9.9%
13.3%
9.3%
9.4%
5.7%
21.3%
26.6%
34.9%
40.7%
27.7%
40.7%
25.6%
27.1%
25.3%
20.0%
17.7%
19.8%
17.3%
20.5%
20.9%
32.6%
24.7%
32.2%
14.7%
12.7%
17.4%
14.8%
26.5%
16.3%
27.9%
35.3%
29.9%
56.0%
57.0%
72.1%
72.8%
74.7%
77.9%
86.0%
87.1%
87.4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Never Rarely Sometimes Usually Always
Q16. How often do you receive verbal and/or written communication from other practitioners and providers regarding your patients? An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different
result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
Top 3 box:
2016 2015
h
h
h
h
h
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com28
8.0% 5.9%
10.0%9.3%
22.0% 23.7%
26.0%22.9%
34.0% 38.1%
82.0% 84.7%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015
16.7% 20.0%
66.7%
40.0%
16.7%
40.0%
100% 100%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2016 2015
Continuity and coordination of care
More than eight in 10 PCPs indicated that they typically initiate contact with behavioral health providers
to coordinate care, and all six of the behavioral health providers who responded indicated that they
typically initiate contact with a patient’s PCP.
Frequency of contact
Contact patient’s BH provider Contact patient’s PCP
Q20. When you are informed by an Amerigroup member that he or she is actively receiving services from a behavioral health provider, how often do you contact that provider to
coordinate care? Q21. When you receive an Amerigroup member as a new patient, how often do you contact the member's PCP to coordinate care? An arrow (hi) indicates a
significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level. A caret (^) indicates a base size smaller than 20. Interpret results with caution.
Among PCPs only Among behavioral health care providers only
(n=50) (n=118) (n=6)^ (n=5)^
Top 3
box:
Top 3
box:
Always
Usually
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com29
Respondent profile
An arrow (hi) indicates a significantly different result from the previous year at the 95% confidence level.
Individual completing survey 2016 2015Base: (n=90) (n=276)
Office Manager 57.8% 47.8%
Physician (PCP) 15.6% 12.7%
Behavioral Health Practitioner 1.1% 1.4%
Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) 1.1% 0.0%
Physician (Specialist) 0.0%i 6.2%
Physician (OB/GYN) 0.0%i 1.4%
Other Staff 24.4% 30.4%
Population servedBase: (n=93) (n=297)
All Medicaid 100% 100%
Provider typeBase: (n=93) (n=297)
BH 8.6%h 2.4%
OB/GYN 9.7% 10.8%
PCP 63.4%h 49.5%
Specialist 18.3%i 37.4%
Practice typeBase: (n=93) (n=297)
Group 94.6%h 76.8%
Solo 5.4%i 23.2%
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com30
Appendix: Correlation analysis
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com31
Correlation analysis
Correlation values describe the degree of linear association between two variables in numeric terms and
can range from -1 (perfect negative correlation) to +1 (perfect positive correlation). The closer the value
is to +/- 1, the stronger the degree of linear association between the two variables. If the value is equal to
zero, then there is no linear association. In general, values of .5000 or higher (and -.5000 or lower)
suggest high correlation between the variables compared.
The table on the following page lists the significant correlation values between each of the survey
attribute ratings and the overall satisfaction rating of Amerigroup, as well as their top-two or top-three-box
score.
Anthem, Inc. | Amerigroup Provider Satisfaction – LA | November 2016 dssresearch.com32
Correlation analysis
Top-three-box scores are shaded gray
Correlation
value
Top-two-box/
Top-three-box scores
Q23. Overall satisfaction with Amerigroup
Q2d Obtaining support 0.792 78.4%
Q17d Sufficiency of information to coordinate care 0.780 72.9%
Q17a Timeliness of information exchange 0.766 70.1%
Q25 Satisfaction with provider complaint systems 0.761 72.7%
Q7aa Telephonic assistance provided by staff 0.757 86.4%
Q2b Efficiency of the UM process overall 0.752 85.1%
Q17c Clarity of information exchange 0.748 71.3%
Q17b Accuracy of information exchange 0.742 72.1%
Q7ac Written program materials 0.724 81.8%
Q4 Rating of HEDIS education 0.716 86.2%
Q15c General provider communications 0.706 80.5%
Q5d Appointment scheduling portal 0.704 79.6%
Q13a Provider orientation and training process 0.697 70.6%
Q13c Quality of educational information 0.686 83.5%
Q5e Educational fax blasts 0.679 83.3%
Q2c Timeliness of response to concerns 0.676 84.6%
Q15a Provider manuals 0.675 84.5%
Q5b Seeing only members 0.670 80.0%
Q7c Helpfulness of Clinical Practice Guidelines in managing patients 0.665 85.2%
Q1b Accuracy of claims payment 0.665 93.9%
Q5c Provider incentive payments 0.664 77.8%
Q7b Helpfulness of staff providing services 0.662 79.2%
Q24 Satisfaction with provider enrollment process 0.659 82.0%
Q7af Frequency of delivery of program materials 0.656 78.2%
Q7ae Mode of delivery of program materials 0.653 80.8%
Q7ab Member interventions by staff 0.649 83.1%
Q3c Responsiveness during appeals process 0.647 82.2%
Q7ad Timing of distribution of program materials 0.645 81.8%
Q15b Provider newsletters 0.643 84.3%
Q2a Obtaining precertification/authorization for members 0.641 83.7%
Q7ag Communications provided by case managers 0.629 75.0%
Q13b Information in the provider manual 0.621 84.7%
Q1a Timeliness of claims payment 0.620 92.8%
Q1c Clarity of the remittance advice 0.531 91.1%
Q5f Periodic mailings 0.480 82.1%
Q5a List of members needing services 0.436 83.8%
Highlighted items have a correlation of 0.500 or higher.
Recommended