Use of behavioral health care in Medicaid managed care carve-out versus carve-in arrangements.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences in access to behavioral health services for Medicaid enrollees covered by a Medicaid entity that integrated the financing of behavioral and physical health care ("carve-in group") versus a Medicaid entity that separated this financing ("carve-out group"). DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Medicaid claims data from two Medicaid entities in the Portland, Oregon tri-county area in 2016. STUDY DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, we compared differences across enrollees in the carve-in versus carve-out group, using a machine learning approach to incorporate a large set of covariates and minimize potential selection bias. Our primary outcomes included behavioral health visits for a variety of different provider types. Secondary outcomes included inpatient, emergency department, and primary care visits. DATA COLLECTION: We used Medicaid claims, including adults with at least 9 months of enrollment. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The study population included 45,786 adults with mental health conditions. Relative to the carve-out group, individuals in the carve-in group were more likely to access outpatient behavioral health (2.39 percentage points, p < 0.0001, with a baseline rate of approximately 73%). The carve-in group was also more likely to access primary care physicians, psychologists, and social workers and less likely to access psychiatrists and behavioral health specialists. Access to outpatient behavioral health visits was more likely in the carve-in arrangement among individuals with mild or moderate mental health conditions (compared to individuals with severe mental illness) and among black enrollees (compared to white enrollees). CONCLUSIONS: Financial integration of physical and behavioral health in Medicaid managed care was associated with greater access to behavioral health services, particularly for individuals with mild or moderate mental health conditions and for black enrollees. Recent changes to incentivize financial integration should be monitored to assess differential impacts by illness severity, race and ethnicity, provider types, and other factors.

Managed care COVID-19 outcomes in a population health program.

OBJECTIVES: To determine (1) factors linked to hospitalizations among managed care patients (MCPs), (2) outcome improvement with use of outpatient off-label treatment, and (3) outcome comparison between MCPs and a mirror group. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study comparing MCPs with an age- and gender-matched mirror group in Florida from April 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. METHODS: A total of 38,193 MCPs in a Florida primary care group were monitored for COVID-19 incidence, hospitalization, and mortality. The highest-risk patients were managed by the medical group's COVID-19 Task Force. As part of a population health program, the COVID-19 Task Force contacted patients, conducted medical encounters, and tracked data including comorbidities and medical outcomes. The MCPs enrolled in the medical group were compared with a mirror group from the state of Florida. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age among the MCPs was 67.9 (15.2) years, and 60% were female. Older age and hypertension were the most important factors in predicting COVID-19. Obesity, chronic kidney disease (CKD), and congestive heart failure (CHF) were linked to higher rates of hospitalizations. Patients prescribed off-label outpatient medications had 73% lower likelihood of hospitalization (P < .05). Compared with the mirror group, MCPs had 60% lower COVID-19 mortality (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: MCPs have risk factors similar to the general population for COVID-19 incidence and progression, including older age, hypertension, obesity, CHF, and CKD. Outpatient treatment with off-label medicines decreased hospitalizations. A comprehensive population health program decreased COVID-19 mortality.

Medication Use in the Management of Comorbidities Among Individuals With Autism Spectrum Disorder From a Large Nationwide Insurance Database.

Importance: Although there is no pharmacological treatment for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) itself, behavioral and pharmacological therapies have been used to address its symptoms and common comorbidities. A better understanding of the medications used to manage comorbid conditions in this growing population is critical; however, most previous efforts have been limited in size, duration, and lack of broad representation. Objective: To use a nationally representative database to uncover trends in the prevalence of co-occurring conditions and medication use in the management of symptoms and comorbidities over time among US individuals with ASD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, population-based cohort study mined a nationwide, managed health plan claims database containing more than 86 million unique members. Data from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2019, were used to analyze prescription frequency and diagnoses of comorbidities. A total of 26 722 individuals with ASD who had been prescribed at least 1 of 24 medications most commonly prescribed to treat ASD symptoms or comorbidities during the 6-year study period were included in the analysis. Exposures: Diagnosis codes for ASD based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quantitative estimates of prescription frequency for the 24 most commonly prescribed medications among the study cohort and the most common comorbidities associated with each medication in this population. Results: Among the 26 722 individuals with ASD included in the analysis (77.7% male; mean [SD] age, 14.45 [9.40] years), polypharmacy was common, ranging from 28.6% to 31.5%. Individuals' prescription regimens changed frequently within medication classes, rather than between classes. The prescription frequency of a specific medication varied considerably, depending on the coexisting diagnosis of a given comorbidity. Of the 24 medications assessed, 15 were associated with at least a 15% prevalence of a mood disorder, and 11 were associated with at least a 15% prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. For patients taking antipsychotics, the 2 most common comorbidities were combined type attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (11.6%-17.8%) and anxiety disorder (13.1%-30.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: This study demonstrated considerable variability and transiency in the use of prescription medications by US clinicians to manage symptoms and comorbidities associated with ASD. These findings support the importance of early and ongoing surveillance of patients with ASD and co-occurring conditions and offer clinicians insight on the targeted therapies most commonly used to manage co-occurring conditions. Future research and policy efforts are critical to assess the extent to which pharmacological management of comorbidities affects quality of life and functioning in patients with ASD while continuing to optimize clinical guidelines, to ensure effective care for this growing population.

Impact of the 1115 behavioral health Medicaid waiver on adult Medicaid beneficiaries in New York State.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the Health and Recovery Plan (HARP), a capitated special needs Medicaid managed care product that fully integrates physical and behavioral health delivery systems in New York State. DATA SOURCES: 2013-2019 claims and encounters data on continuously enrolled individuals from the New York State Medicaid data system. STUDY DESIGN: We used a difference-in-difference approach with inverse probability of exposure weights to compare service use outcomes in individuals enrolled in the HARP versus HARP eligible comparison group in two regions, New York City (NYC) pre- (2013-2015) versus post- (2016-2018) intervention periods, and rest of the state (ROS) pre- (2014-2016) versus post- (2017-2019) intervention periods. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Not applicable. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: HARPs were associated with a relative decrease in all-cause (RR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.90), behavioral health-related (RR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.60-0.96), and nonbehavioral-related (RR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.97) stays in the NYC region. In the ROS region, HARPs were associated with a relative decrease in all-cause (RR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.94) and behavioral health-related (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.91) stays. Regarding outpatient visits, the HARPs benefit package were associated with a relative increase in behavioral health (RR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.13-1.28) and nonbehavioral health (RR = 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.15) clinic visits in the NYC region. In the ROS region, the HARPs were associated with relative increases in behavioral health (RR = 1.47, 95% CI 1.32-1.64) and nonbehavioral health (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.11-1.25) clinic visits. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to patients with similar clinical needs, HARPs were associated with a relative increase in services used and led to a better engagement in the HARPs group regardless of the overall decline in services used pre- to postperiod.

Patient experience after modifying visit delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To describe real-time changes in medical visits (MVs), visit mode, and patient-reported visit experience associated with rapidly deployed care reorganization during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional time series from September 29, 2019, through June 20, 2020. METHODS: Responding to official public health and clinical guidance, team-based systematic structural changes were implemented in a large, integrated health system to reorganize and transition delivery of care from office-based to virtual care platforms. Overall and discipline-specific weekly MVs, visit mode (office-based, telephone, or video), and associated aggregate measures of patient-reported visit experience were reported. A 38-week time-series analysis with March 8, 2020, and May 3, 2020, as the interruption dates was performed. RESULTS: After the first interruption, there was a decreased weekly visit trend for all visits (ß3 = -388.94; P < .05), an immediate decrease in office-based visits (ß2 = -25,175.16; P < .01), increase in telephone-based visits (ß2 = 17,179.60; P < .01), and increased video-based visit trend (ß3 = 282.02; P < .01). After the second interruption, there was an increased visit trend for all visits (ß5 = 565.76; P < .01), immediate increase in video-based visits (ß4 = 3523.79; P < .05), increased office-based visit trend (ß5 = 998.13; P < .01), and decreased trend in video-based visits (ß5 = -360.22; P < .01). After the second interruption, there were increased weekly long-term visit trends for the proportion of patients reporting "excellent" as to how well their visit needs were met for all visits (ß5 = 0.17; P < .01), telephone-based visits (ß5 = 0.34; P < .01), and video-based visits (ß5 = 0.32; P < .01). Video-based visits had the highest proportion of respondents rating "excellent" as to how well their scheduling and visit needs were met. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 required prompt organizational transformation to optimize the patient experience.

AMCP Partnership Forum: Preparing for and managing rare diseases.

Despite the opportunity for large health gains, there are many challenges associated with rare disease therapies. Among these are striking the appropriate balance between the urgency to respond to patient needs with the uncertainty that is often inherent in rare disease therapy datasets leading to concerns with developing and interpreting clinical data; uncertainty around financial impact, value determination, and affordability; and variation in approach to coverage and potential effects on access. To discuss these challenges and opportunities to address them, AMCP held a virtual multidisciplinary stakeholder forum on September 8-10, 2020. Forum participants represented diverse sectors of the health care industry, including integrated delivery systems, health plans, pharmacy benefit managers, employer groups, biopharmaceutical companies, patient advocacy organizations, health policy researchers, and consulting firms; they evaluated strategies to plan for and manage rare disease therapies and recommended best practices and next steps. DISCLOSURES: This forum was sponsored by the following: AstraZeneca, Dicerna, Genentech, National Pharmaceutical Council, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Precision Value, Sanofi, Sarepta Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Spark Therapeutics, and Takeda. These proceedings were prepared as a summary of the forum to represent common themes; they are not necessarily endorsed by all attendees nor should they be construed as reflecting group consensus.

COVID-19 telehealth expansion can help solve the health care underutilization challenge.

The telehealth policy changes enacted for short-term control of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic present an opportunity to address the fundamental gap in health care underutilization.

Differences in the use of telephone and video telemedicine visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced health systems to offer video and telephone visits as in-person visit alternatives. Although video visits offer some benefits compared with telephone visits, they require complex setup, which may disadvantage some patients due to the "digital divide." Our objective was to determine patient and neighborhood characteristics associated with visit modality. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study across 1652 primary care and specialty care practices of adult patients at an integrated health system from April 23 to June 1, 2020. METHODS: We used electronic health record and administrative data. Our primary outcome was visit modality (in-person, video, or telephone), which was captured using billing codes. We assessed predictors of using video vs telephone using multivariable logistic regression. We used hierarchical logistic regression to determine the contribution of patient-, physician-, and practice-level components of variance in the choice of video or telephone visits. RESULTS: We analyzed 231,596 visits by 162,102 patients. Sixty-five percent of the visits were virtual (31.7% telephone, 33.5% video). Patients who were older than 65 years (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.40-0.43), Black (AOR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.57-0.63), Hispanic (AOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.73-0.80), Spanish-speaking (AOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.61), and from areas with low broadband access (AOR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.98) were less likely to use video visits. Practices (38%) and clinicians (26%) drove more of the variation in video visit use than patients (9%). CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine access differences may compound disparities in chronic disease and COVID-19 outcomes. Institutions should monitor video visit use across demographics and equip patients, clinicians, and practices to promote telemedicine equity.

TeleConnect: digitally connecting physicians across the health care system.

OBJECTIVES: Prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, introductions between primary care physicians (PCPs) and specialists were conducted in person. These important meetings were integral to patient care, facilitated care coordination, and improved the managed care of the patient. During COVID-19 and beyond, these important relationships should be fostered via digital means. We aimed to identify opportunities of digital health integration for the optimization of physician integration. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Prior to COVID-19, we conducted a survey of PCPs at a large multidisciplinary group with more than 1500 physicians that staffs multiple hospitals within a health system. The survey was sent via email with only 1 reminder. RESULTS: Thirty-six PCPs responded to the survey; 25% (9/36) were very satisfied and 19.4% (7/36) were moderately satisfied with the current in-person introductions. The PCPs found introductions to specialists helpful; 83.7% (31/37) wanted to "put a name to the face," and 64.9% (24/37) wanted to "understand the range of service provided by the specialist." Fifty-one percent (19/37) and 54% (20/37) said "I can better manage patient care and know when to refer to a specialist" and "I learn more about a particular specialist," respectively, with specialist introductions. If made easy, 67.6% (25/37) of PCPs would be interested in TeleConnect to facilitate introductions to specialists. CONCLUSIONS: Referrals between PCPs and specialists have been an integral aspect of medical care within managed care organizations. With the advent of technology during COVID-19, and along with this brief survey, the need for digital means to introduce PCPs and specialists is underscored.

Cost Minimization Analysis of a Teledermatology Triage System in a Managed Care Setting.

Importance: Teledermatology (TD) enables remote triage and management of dermatology patients. Previous analyses of TD systems have demonstrated improved access to care but an inconsistent fiscal impact. Objective: To compare the organizationwide cost of managing newly referred dermatology patients within a TD triage system vs a conventional dermatology care model at the Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center (hereafter referred to as the ZSFG) in California. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cost minimization analysis was conducted of 2098 patients referred to the dermatology department at the ZSFG between June 1 and December 31, 2017. Intervention: Implementation of the TD triage system in January 2015. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was mean cost to the health care organization to manage newly referred dermatology patients with or without TD triage. To estimate costs, decision-tree models were constructed to characterize possible care paths with TD triage and within a conventional dermatology care model. Costs associated with primary care visits, dermatology visits, and TD visits were then applied to the decision-tree models to estimate the mean cost of managing patients following each care path for 6 months. The mean cost for each visit type incorporated personnel costs, with the mean cost per TD consultation also incorporating software implementation and maintenance costs. Finally, ZSFG patient data were applied within the models to evaluate branch probabilities, enabling calculation of mean cost per patient within each model. Results: The analysis captured 2098 patients (1154 men [55.0%]; mean [SD] age, 53.4 [16.8] years), with 1099 (52.4%) having Medi-Cal insurance and 879 (41.9%) identifying as non-White. In the decision-tree model with TD triage, the mean (SD) cost per patient to the health care organization was $559.84 ($319.29). In the decision-tree model for conventional dermatology care, the mean (SD) cost per patient was $699.96 ($390.24). Therefore, the TD model demonstrated a statistically significant mean (SE) cost savings of $140.12 ($11.01) per patient. Given an annual dermatology referral volume of 3150 patients, the analysis estimates an annual savings of $441 378. Conclusions and Relevance: Implementation of a TD triage system within the dermatology department at the ZSFG was associated with cost savings, suggesting that managed health care settings may experience significant cost savings from using TD to triage and manage patients.

Racial disparities in medication use: imperatives for managed care pharmacy.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the social unrest pervading U.S. cities in response to the killings of George Floyd and other Black citizens at the hands of police are historically significant. These events exemplify dismaying truths about race and equality in the United States. Racial health disparities are an inexcusable lesion on the U.S. health care system. Many health disparities involve medications, including antidepressants, anticoagulants, diabetes medications, drugs for dementia, and statins, to name a few. Managed care pharmacy has a role in perpetuating racial disparities in medication use. For example, pharmacy benefit designs are increasingly shifting costs of expensive medications to patients, creating affordability crises for lower income workers, who are disproportionally persons of color. In addition, the quest to maximize rebates serves to inflate list prices paid by the uninsured, among which Black and Hispanic people are overrepresented. While medication cost is a foremost barrier for many patients, other factors also propagate racial disparities in medication use. Even when cost sharing is minimal or zero, medication adherence rates have been documented to be lower among Blacks as compared with Whites. Deeper understandings are needed about how racial disparities in medication use are influenced by factors such as culture, provider bias, and patient trust in medical advice. Managed care pharmacy can address racial disparities in medication use in several ways. First, it should be acknowledged that racial disparities in medication use are pervasive and must be resolved urgently. We must not believe that entrenched health system, societal, and political structures are impermeable to change. Second, the voices of community members and their advocates must be amplified. Coverage policies, program designs, and quality initiatives should be developed in consultation with those directly affected by racial disparities. Third, the industry should commit to dramatically reducing patient cost sharing for essential medication therapies. Federal and state efforts to limit annual out-of-pocket pharmacy spending should be supported, even though increased premiums may be an undesirable (yet more equitable) consequence. Finally, information about race should be incorporated into all internal and external reporting and quality improvement activities. DISCLOSURES: No funding was received for the development of this manuscript. Kogut is partially supported by Institutional Development Award Numbers U54GM115677 and P20GM125507 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health, which funds Advance Clinical and Translational Research (Advance-CTR), and the RI Lifespan Center of Biomedical Research Excellence (COBRE) on Opioids and Overdose, respectively. The content is solely the responsibility of the author and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Managed Care Pharmacy Research on Inappropriate Opioid Use Interventions.

DISCLOSURES: No funding contributed to the writing of this commentary. The authors have nothing to disclose.

Economic outcomes of insurer-led care management for high-cost Medicaid patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of the Community-Based Care Management (CBCM) program on total costs of care and utilization among adult high-need, high-cost patients enrolled in a Medicaid managed care organization (MCO). CBCM was a Medicaid insurer-led care coordination and disease management program staffed by nurse care managers paired with community health workers. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis. METHODS: We obtained deidentified health plan claims data, enrollment information, and the MCO's monthly registry of the top 10% of costliest patients. The analysis included 896 patients enrolled in CBCM over the course of 2 years (January 2016 to December 2017) and a propensity score-matched cohort of high-cost patients (n = 2152) who received primary care at sites that did not participate in CBCM during the same time period. The primary outcomes were total costs of care and utilization in the 12-month period after enrollment. Secondary outcomes included utilization by care setting: outpatient, inpatient, emergency department, pharmacy, postacute care, and all other remaining sites. We used zero-inflated gamma and Poisson regression models to estimate average differences in postperiod costs and utilization between CBCM enrollees versus non-CBCM enrollees. RESULTS: We did not observe meaningful differences in total costs or visit frequency among CBCM enrollees relative to non-CBCM enrollees. CONCLUSIONS: Although our study found no association between the CBCM program and subsequent cost or utilization outcomes, understanding why these outcomes were not achieved will inform how future Medicaid programs are designed to achieve better patient outcomes and lower costs.

To Reform Pharmacy Reimbursement Begin with the Basics.

DISCLOSURES: No funding supported the writing of this commentary. The author has nothing to disclose.

Evolution of the AMCP Format for Formulary Submissions.

DISCLOSURES: No funding was required for this project. The authors are or have been members of the Format Executive Committee.

Managed Long-Term Services and Supports for Medicaid Only and Dually Eligible Individuals.

More and more states are addressing the long-term services and supports needs of Medicaid only and dually eligible persons by developing Managed Long-Term Services and Supports (MLTSS) programs. States are moving away from fee-for-service plans and coordinating care through these capitated programs. The goals of these programs include greater efficiency while maintaining quality and better coordination of care. For dually eligible persons, the expansion of MLTSS has been made possible through the creation of the Medicare-Medicaid Coordination Office at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services by the Affordable Care Act to improve communication and coordination between state and federal programs. MLTSS invest heavily into home and community-based services and care coordination to increase the efficiency of their organizations and improve person-centered care. Nurses who engage with this vulnerable population are in a prime position to further innovate this model to improve person and family outcomes. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 46(6), 7-11.].

Reflections on the Formulary System from 1997 to the Present.

DISCLOSURES: No funding was received for the writing of this reflection. Avey is a member of the AMCP Foundation and has recently retired from MedImpact Health Systems, where he served as Vice President of Specialty Clinical Solutions.