Access to Psychiatric Appointments for Medicaid Enrollees in 4 Large US Cities.

This audit study examines availability of and wait times for Medicaid enrollee appointments with psychiatric prescribing clinicians across 4 of the most populous US cities.

Safeguarding Research Using Federal Health Insurance Data.

This Viewpoint discusses the importance of researcher access to federal health care data following a CMS decision to limit the use of physical data and proposes solutions to maintain access and security.

Acquisitions of safety-net hospitals from 2016-2021: a case series.

Safety-net hospitals have recently become targets of acquisition by health systems with the stated purpose of improving their financial solvency and preserving access to safety-net services. Whether acquisition achieves these goals is unknown. In this descriptive case series, we sought to determine the factors that contribute to safety-net hospital acquisition, and identify whether safety-net services are preserved after acquisition. We examined 22 acquisitions of safety-net hospitals from 2016 to 2021 and described characteristics of the acquired safety-net hospitals, their acquiring systems, and the operational fate of acquired hospitals. Relative to other hospitals in the same Hospital Referral Region in the year prior to acquisition, acquired safety-net hospitals tended to be smaller and have lower occupancy rates. Acquiring systems were geographically concentrated, with only 6 of 20 systems operating in more than 1 state. Safety-net hospitals frequently offered typical safety-net services prior to acquisition. However, after acquisition, 2 of the 22 acquired safety-net hospitals lost safety-net services, 3 hospitals ceased inpatient services, and 1 hospital closed entirely. These findings suggest that acquisition of safety-net hospitals may be associated with trade-offs related to the provision of safety-net services for the communities that stand to benefit from them most.

Accountable Care Organization Leader Perspectives on the Medicare Shared Savings Program: A Qualitative Study.

Importance: The Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) includes more than 400 accountable care organizations (ACOs) and is among the largest and longest running value-based payment efforts in the US. However, given recent program reforms and other changes in the health care system, the experiences and perspectives of ACO leaders remain incompletely characterized. Objective: To understand the priorities, strategies, and challenges of ACO leaders in MSSP. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this qualitative study, interviews were conducted with leaders of 49 ACOs of differing sizes, leadership structures, and geographies from MSSP between September 29 and December 29, 2022. Participants were asked about their clinical and care management efforts; how they engaged frontline clinicians; the process by which they distributed shared savings and added or removed practices; and other factors that they believed influenced their success or failure in the program. Main Outcomes and Measures: Leader perspectives on major themes related to ACO initiatives, performance improvement, and the recruitment, engagement, and retention of clinicians. Results: Of the 49 ACOs interviewed, 34 were hospital-associated ACOs (69%), 35 were medium or large (>10 000 attributed beneficiaries) (71%), and 17 were rural (35%). The ACOs had a mean (SD) tenure of 8.1 (2.1) years in MSSP. Five major themes emerged: (1) ACO leaders reported a focus on annual wellness visits, coding practices, and care transitions; (2) leaders used both relationship-based and metrics-based strategies to promote clinician engagement; (3) ACOs generally distributed half or more of shared savings to participating practices; (4) ACO recruitment and retention efforts were increasingly influenced by market competition; and (5) some hospital-associated ACOs faced misaligned incentives. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the ACO leaders reported varied approaches to promoting clinician alignment with ACO goals, an emphasis on increasing annual wellness visits, and new pressures related to growth of other care models. Policymakers hoping to modify or expand the program may wish to incorporate these perspectives into future reforms.

Association Between State Medicaid Policies and Accrual of Black or Hispanic Patients to Cancer Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: It is unknown whether Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or state-level policies mandating Medicaid coverage of the routine costs of clinical trial participation have ameliorated longstanding racial and ethnic disparities in cancer clinical trial enrollment. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional difference-in-differences analysis examining the effect of Medicaid expansion on rates of enrollment for Black or Hispanic nonelderly adults in nonobservational, US cancer clinical trials using data from Medidata's Rave platform for 2012-2019. We examined heterogeneity in this effect on the basis of whether states had pre-existing mandates requiring Medicaid coverage of the routine costs of clinical trial participation. RESULTS: The study included 47,870 participants across 1,353 clinical trials and 344 clinical trial sites. In expansion states, the proportion of participants who were Black or Hispanic increased from 16.7% before expansion to 17.2% after Medicaid expansion (0.5 percentage point [PP] change [95% CI, -1.1 to 2.0]). In nonexpansion states, this proportion increased from 19.8% before 2014 (when the first states expanded eligibility under the ACA) to 20.4% after 2014 (0.6 PP change [95% CI, -2.3 to 3.5]). These trends yielded a nonsignificant difference-in-differences estimate of 0.9 PP (95% CI, -2.6 to 4.4). Medicaid expansion was associated with a 5.3 PP (95% CI, 1.9 to 8.7) increase in the enrollment of Black or Hispanic participants in states with mandates requiring Medicaid coverage of the routine costs of trial participation, but not in states without mandates (-0.3 PP [95% CI, -4.5 to 3.9]). CONCLUSION: Medicaid expansion was not associated with a significant increase in the proportion of Black or Hispanic oncology trial participants overall, but was associated with an increase specifically in states that mandated Medicaid coverage of the routine costs of trial participation.

Meeting The Needs Of Socially Vulnerable Patients: Views Of ACO Leaders On Moving From Intent To Action.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has placed growing emphasis on social drivers of health, but little is known about how accountable care organizations (ACOs) aim to meet the needs of vulnerable patients. During September-December 2022, we interviewed leaders of forty-nine ACOs participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP). Participants were asked about strategies to identify socially vulnerable patients, programs that addressed their needs, and Medicare reforms that could support their efforts. Seven themes emerged: ACOs were in the early stages of collecting social needs data; leaders were frustrated by an incomplete ability to act on such data; ACOs tended to stratify patients by medical, rather than social, risk; some ACOs have introduced pilot programs to address challenges, including social isolation and drug costs; programs were often payer agnostic; rural ACOs faced unique challenges; and Medicare reforms related to reimbursement, logistical support, quality metrics, and patient benefits could support ACO efforts. These findings suggest that the MSSP alone has not been sufficient to promote consistent investment in social needs provision at most ACOs. Policy makers may want to consider more direct support and incentives for health care organizations, or greater investment in non-health care sectors, to help socially vulnerable patients.