[Asymmetries between national articulation and the autonomy of state governments in implementing health technologies to fight COVID-19 in Argentina]. / Asimetrías entre la coordinación nacional y la autonomía de los gobiernos estatales en la adopción de tecnologías sanitarias frente a la COVID-19 en Argentina.

Argentina, as other countries, showed several public policies related to the health technologies implemented to fight and treat the COVID-19 pandemic. This study sought to analyze how articulation vs. cooperation and autonomy vs. division of powers between entities occurred in Argentina, exploring asymmetries between several entities in implementing public policies related to health technologies during the pandemic and the influences of other actors. For this, a documentary research was carried out related to 2020-2021 (technical reports published by the World Health Organization, national agencies and scientific societies, laws, court decisions, press, and research and in-depth interviews with members of the Argentine Ministries of Health). The processes and results of decision-making in the Ministries of Health were analyzed, outlining the coverage and orientations of each technology and the political party in power in the province. This study found heterogeneous results and processes between Ministries and disputes within them. It also observed the poor adherence to official guidelines due to technical-political criteria (power relations, social, media, academic, judiciary, and legislative pressure). Some cases showed a strong tension between the government and its opposition over the discussion of technologies. Each province in Argentina has autonomously defined its policies on health technologies for COVID-19, and decision-making in public administration was disorderly, complex, and non-linear during the pandemic.

En pandemia, en Argentina y en otros países se observó variabilidad en las políticas públicas implementadas sobre tecnologías sanitarias para prevención y tratamiento de la COVID-19. El objetivo fue analizar cómo se procesaron en Argentina los movimientos de coordinación vs. cooperación, y de autonomía vs. reparto de autoridad entre entidades, explorando asimetrías entre diferentes entidades en la implementación de políticas públicas sobre tecnologías sanitarias en pandemia y las influencias de otros actores. Se realizó una revisión documental del período 2020-2021 (informes técnicos publicados por la Organización Mundial de la Salud, organismos nacionales y sociedades científicas, leyes, fallos judiciales, prensa, encuestas y entrevistas en profundidad a miembros de los Ministerios de Salud de Argentina). Se indagó sobre procesos y resultados de la toma de decisiones en los Ministerios de Salud, mapeando la cobertura y recomendación de cada tecnología y el partido político provincial gobernante. Hubo heterogeneidad en resultados y procesos entre los Ministerios, y disputas en el interior de los mismos. La adherencia a recomendaciones oficiales fue baja, influyendo distintos criterios técnico-políticos (relaciones de poder, presión social, de los medios, académicos, poder Judicial y Legislativo). En algunos casos se observó una fuerte tensión entre oficialismo y oposición al partido gobernante a partir de la discusión sobre tecnologías. Cada provincia argentina definió sus políticas sobre tecnologías sanitarias para COVID-19 con autonomía, y la toma de decisiones en la administración pública en pandemia fue desordenada, compleja y no lineal.

Na Argentina, assim como em outros países, houve uma variabilidade de políticas públicas relacionadas às tecnologias de saúde implementadas no combate e tratamento da COVID-19 durante a pandemia. Este estudo buscou analisar como ocorreram a articulação vs. cooperação, e a autonomia vs. divisão de poderes entre as entidades na Argentina, explorando assimetrias entre diferentes entidades na implementação de políticas públicas relacionadas a tecnologias de saúde na pandemia, bem como as influências de outros atores. Para tanto, realizou-se uma pesquisa documental para o período de 2020-2021 (relatórios técnicos publicados pela Organização Mundial da Saúde, agências nacionais e sociedades científicas, leis, decisões judiciais, imprensa, pesquisas e entrevistas em profundidade com membros dos Ministérios da Saúde da Argentina). Os processos e os resultados da tomada de decisão nos Ministérios da Saúde foram analisados, traçando a cobertura e orientações de cada tecnologia e o partido político no poder na província. Observou-se uma heterogeneidade nos resultados e processos entre os Ministérios, e disputas em seu interior. Houve uma baixa adesão às orientações oficiais, influenciada por diferentes critérios técnico-políticos (relações de poder, pressão social, midiática, acadêmica, do poder Judiciário e do Legislativo). Em alguns casos, observou-se uma forte tensão entre governo e oposição a partir da discussão das tecnologias. Cada província da Argentina definiu suas políticas sobre tecnologias de saúde para a COVID-19 de forma autônoma, e a tomada de decisões na administração pública foi desordenada, complexa e não linear durante a pandemia.

An Asset Framework to Guide Nonhealth Policy for Population Health.

This JAMA Forum discusses 3 types of assets (financial, physical, and social) that unlock access to resources and shape population health.

State-level policies and receipt of CDC-informed opioid thresholds among commercially insured new chronic opioid users.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association of state-level policies on receipt of opioid regimens informed by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) morphine milligram equivalent (MME)/day recommendations. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of new chronic opioid users (NCOUs). SETTING: Commercially insured plans across the United States using IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus for Academics database with new chronic use between January 2014 and March 2015. PARTICIPANTS: NCOUs with ≥60-day coverage of opioids within a 90-day period with ≥30-day opioid-free period prior to the date of the first qualifying opioid prescription. INTERVENTIONS: State-level policies including Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) robustness and cannabis policies involving the presence of medical dispensaries and state-wide decriminalization. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: NCOUs were placed in three-tiered risk-based average MME/day thresholds: low (>0 to <50), medium (≥50 to <90), and high (≥90). Multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate the association of state-level policies with the thresholds while adjusting for relevant patient-specific factors. RESULTS: NCOUs in states with medium or high PDMP robustness had lower odds of receiving medium (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.74; 95 percent confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.69) and high (AOR 0.74; 95 percent CI: 0.59-0.92) thresholds. With respect to cannabis policies, NCOUs in states with medical cannabis dispensaries had lower odds of receiving high (AOR 0.75; 95 percent CI: 0.60-0.93) thresholds, while cannabis decriminalization had higher odds of receiving high (AOR 1.24; 95 percent CI: 1.04-1.49) thresholds. CONCLUSION: States with highly robust PDMPs and medical cannabis dispensaries had lower odds of receiving higher opioid thresholds, while cannabis decriminalization correlated with higher odds of receiving high opioid thresholds.

Prevention of child sexual abuse in the United States: Scoping review of United States legislative policies.

BACKGROUND: States in the United States (US) have passed and enacted legislation for the purpose of preventing child sexual abuse (CSA) since 2000, but it is unknown whether these legislative policies reduce adult-perpetrated CSA. OBJECTIVE: Review the literature from 2000 to 2023 to understand which US CSA prevention policies have been evaluated, the effectiveness of these policies, study populations, and barriers and facilitators associated with the implementation of CSA prevention policies. METHODS: The study protocol was published prior to undertaking the review: PMC10603531. The review follows Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and is reported according to the PRISMA-ScR Checklist. We searched 27 databases, hand searched reference lists of included studies, and sent notice via listserv to other researchers in the field. Articles were included if the content focused on CSA prevention policies and the effects. No limits to methodology were applied. Methodological rigor was assessed. RESULTS: 2209 potentially relevant articles were identified; 20 articles advanced to full-text review, three satisfied the inclusion criteria. Three eligible studies focused on CSA prevention education policies, while the other focused on mandated reporting policies. Effects of these policies were mixed in relation to CSA reporting and substantiation rates. No study considered child demographics. CONCLUSIONS: Despite decades of legislative action for CSA prevention across the US, only a few studies have assessed the effects of these policies. These findings highlight the need for additional research to ensure that CSA prevention policies such as CSA prevention education in schools and mandated reporting practices are working as intended.

A Comprehensive Analysis of Litigation in Organ Transplantation for Allegations of Insufficient Policy Coverage, Discrimination and Malpractice.

Introduction: Transplantation is a field with unique medical and administrative challenges that involve an equally diverse array of stakeholders. Expectantly, the litigation stemming from this field should be similarly nuanced. There is a paucity of comprehensive reviews characterizing this medicolegal landscape. Design: The Caselaw Access Project Database was used to collect official court briefs of 2053 lawsuits related to kidney, liver, heart, lung, and pancreas transplantation. A thematic analysis was undertaken to characterize grounds for litigation, defendant type, and outcomes. Cases were grouped into policy, discrimination, poor or unsuccessful outcome, or other categories. Results: One hundred sixty-four court cases were included for analysis. Cases involving disputes over policy coverage were the most common across all organ types (N = 55, 33.5%). This was followed by poor outcomes (N = 51, 31.1%), allegations of discrimination against prison systems and employers (N = 37, 22.6%) and other (N = 21, 12.8%). Defendants involved in discrimination trials won with the greatest frequency (N = 29, 90.62%). Defendants implicated in policy suits won 65.3% (N = 32), poor outcomes 62.2% (N = 28), and other 70% (N = 14). Of the 51 cases involving poor outcomes, plaintiffs indicated lack of informed consent in 23 (45.1%). Conclusion: Reconsidering the informed consent process may be a viable means of mitigating future legal action. Most discrimination suits favoring defendants suggested previous concerns of structural injustices in transplantation may not be founded. The prevalence of policy-related cases could be an indication of financial burden on patients. Future work and advocacy will need to substantiate these concerns and address change where legal recourse falls short.

Expand and extend postpartum Medicaid to support maternal and child health.

Most early maternal deaths are preventable, with many occurring within the first year postpartum (we use the terms "maternal" and "mother" broadly to include all individuals who experience pregnancy or postpartum and frame our recognition of need and policy recommendations in gender-neutral terms. To acknowledge limitations inherent in existing policy and the composition of samples in prior research, we use the term "women" when applicable). Black, Hispanic, and Native American individuals are at the most significant risk of pregnancy-related death. They are more commonly covered by Medicaid, highlighting likely contributions of structural racism and consequent social inequities. State-level length and eligibility requirements for postpartum Medicaid vary considerably. Federal policy requires 60 days of Medicaid continuation postpartum, risking healthcare coverage loss during a critical period of heightened morbidity and mortality risk. This policy position paper aims to outline urgent risks to maternal health, detail existing federal and state-level efforts, summarize proposed legislation addressing the issue, and offer policy recommendations for legislative consideration and future study. A team of maternal health researchers and clinicians reviewed and summarized recent research and current policy pertaining to postpartum Medicaid continuation coverage, proposing policy solutions to address this critical issue. Multiple legislative avenues currently exist to support and advance relevant policy to improve and sustain maternal health for those receiving Medicaid during pregnancy, including legislation aligned with the Biden-Harris Maternal Health Blueprint, state-focused options via the American Rescue Plan of 2021 (Public Law 117-2), and recently proposed acts (HR3407, S1542) which were last reintroduced in 2021. Recommendations include (i) reintroducing previously considered legislation requiring states to provide 12 months of continuous postpartum coverage, regardless of pregnancy outcome, and (ii) enacting a revised, permanent federal mandate equalizing Medicaid eligibility across states to ensure consistent access to postpartum healthcare offerings nationwide.

Many maternal deaths happen within the first year postpartum and can be prevented. Black, Hispanic, and Native American mothers are at more risk for many reasons, including unfair systems and insufficient healthcare coverage from government insurance (Medicaid). Rules for getting Medicaid can be very different across states and in postpartum compared to pregnancy. The US government only requires states to continue providing Medicaid for 60 days postpartum, after which it is up to each state. If mothers are required to re-qualify for Medicaid shortly after giving birth, they could lose healthcare when they are at more risk of dying or getting sick. In this policy position paper, a team of maternal health researchers and clinicians reviewed and summarized recent research and current laws related to postpartum Medicaid to propose future laws that could address these issues. Some proposed laws would expand Medicaid coverage during postpartum, but lawmakers have not recently discussed them. This position paper recommends that lawmakers (i) consider laws that require states to provide 12 months of postpartum healthcare coverage and (ii) have the US government make the same rules to qualify for postpartum Medicaid across all states.

How Do Policymakers Regulate AI and Accommodate Innovation in Research and Medicine?

In this Medical News article, JAMA Editor in Chief Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, PhD, MD, MAS, and Alondra Nelson, PhD, the Harold F. Linder Professor at the Institute for Advanced Study, discuss effective AI regulation frameworks to accommodate innovation.

Kindergarten Vaccination Status in California After Changes to Medical Exemption Policy.

This study evaluates changes in medical exemptions and geographic distribution of kindergarteners in California not up to date on vaccination after changes to state legislation.

State Public Insurance Coverage Policies and Postpartum Care Among Immigrants.

Importance: Professional medical organizations recommend that adults receive routine postpartum care. Yet, some states restrict public insurance coverage for undocumented immigrants and recently documented immigrants (those who received legal documentation status within the past 5 years). Objective: To examine the association between public insurance coverage and postpartum care among low-income immigrants and the difference in receipt of postpartum care among immigrants relative to nonimmigrants. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pooled, cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System for 19 states and New York City including low-income adults with a live birth between 2012 and 2019. Exposure: Giving birth in a state that offered public insurance coverage for postpartum care to recently documented or undocumented immigrants. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported receipt of postpartum care by the category of coverage offered (full coverage: states that offered publicly funded postpartum care regardless of immigration status; moderate coverage: states that offered publicly funded postpartum care to lawfully residing immigrants without a 5-year waiting period, but did not offer postpartum care to undocumented immigrants; no coverage: states that did not offer publicly funded postpartum care to lawfully present immigrants before 5 years of legal residence or to undocumented immigrants). Results: The study included 72 981 low-income adults (20 971 immigrants [29%] and 52 010 nonimmigrants [71%]). Of the 19 included states and New York City, 6 offered full coverage, 9 offered moderate coverage, and 4 offered no coverage; 1 state (Oregon) switched from offering moderate coverage to offering full coverage. Compared with the states that offered full coverage, receipt of postpartum care among immigrants was 7.0-percentage-points lower (95% CI, -10.6 to -3.4 percentage points) in the states that offered moderate coverage and 11.3-percentage-points lower (95% CI, -13.9 to -8.8 percentage points) in the states that offered no coverage. The differences in the receipt of postpartum care among immigrants relative to nonimmigrants were also associated with the coverage categories. Compared with the states that offered full coverage, there was a 3.3-percentage-point larger difference (95% CI, -5.3 to -1.4 percentage points) in the states that offered moderate coverage and a 7.7-percentage-point larger difference (95% CI, -10.3 to -5.0 percentage points) in the states that offered no coverage. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with states without insurance restrictions, immigrants living in states with public insurance restrictions were less likely to receive postpartum care. Restricting public insurance coverage may be an important policy-driven barrier to receipt of recommended pregnancy care and improved maternal health among immigrants.

A Policy Framework for the Growing Influence of Private Equity in Health Care Delivery.

This Viewpoint details how and why improved oversight of private equity acquisition of physician practices and hospitals is needed to mitigate the effects on health care costs, clinicians' jobs, and patients' access to care.