Predeductible Coverage and Receipt of Telemental Health Visits.

This cohort study examines the utilization changes associated with the reintroduction of cost sharing for patients receiving telemental health services.

Medicare Payment for Opioid Treatment Programs.

Importance: Medicare began paying for medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) that dispense methadone and other MOUD in January 2020. There has been little research describing the response to this payment change and whether it resulted in more patients receiving MOUD or just a shift in who pays for this care. Objective: To describe how many and which Medicare beneficiaries receive care from OTPs and how this compares to those receiving MOUD in other settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included all patients receiving MOUD care identified in 2019-2022 100% US Medicare Parts B and D claims. Patients receiving care in an OTP who were dually insured with Medicare and Medicaid in the 2019-2020 Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System were also included. Exposure: Receiving MOUD care in an OTP. Main Outcomes and Measures: Comparisons of 2022 beneficiaries treated in OTPs vs other non-OTP settings in 2022. Results: The share of Medicare beneficiaries treated by OTPs rose steadily from 4 per 10 000 (14 160 beneficiaries) in January 2020 to 7 per 10 000 (25 596 beneficiaries) in August 2020, then plateaued through December 2022; of 38 870 patients (23% ≥66 years; 35% female) treated at an OTP in 2022, 96% received methadone. Patients in OTPs, compared to those receiving MOUD in other settings, were more likely be 65 years and younger (65% vs 62%; P < .001), less likely to be White (72% vs 82%; P < .001), and more likely to be an urban resident (86% vs 74%; P < .001). When Medicare OTP coverage began, there was no associated drop in the number of dually insured patients with Medicaid with an OTP claim. Of the 1854 OTPs, 1115 (60%) billed Medicare in 2022, with the share billing Medicare ranging from 13% to 100% across states. Conclusions and Relevance: This study showed that since the initiation of Medicare OTP coverage in 2020, there has been a rapid increase in the number of Medicare beneficiaries with claims for OTP services for MOUD, and most OTPs have begun billing Medicare. Patients in OTPs were more likely to be urban residents and members of racial or ethnic minority groups than the patients receiving other forms of MOUD.

Perceptions of stimulant and buprenorphine diversion and strategies to address it.

There is ongoing policy debate on the prescribing of controlled substances such as buprenorphine and stimulants via telemedicine. The goal of federal and state policymakers is to ensure access to care while limiting diversion risk. However, there is little evidence on how clinicians view and address diversion and on telemedicine's role in diversion. From December 2023 to January 2024, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 psychiatrists and primary care physicians engaged in hybrid (telemedicine and in-person) care models in which we explored perceptions of diversion and strategies used to monitor for diversion. Most physicians reported monitoring for diversion, but there was little consistency on how monitoring was done and reported strategies did not differ between telemedicine vs in-person care. When physicians suspected diversion, there was also wide variation in responses: some clinicians did not immediately take any action while others imposed more requirements on patients (e.g., more frequent visits), no longer prescribed the controlled substance, or terminated the patient from their practice. Few physicians had ever reported a case of suspected diversion to law enforcement. Our findings suggest that the Drug Enforcement Administration could clarify reporting requirements and professional societies could provide additional guidance on how to respond to suspected diversion, given the current variation in practice across clinicians could be exploited by individuals who want to divert.

In-Person Visits Before Initiation of Telemedicine for Mental Illness.

This cross-sectional study examines how often patients had an in-person visit before initiating telemedicine for mental illness between 2019 and 2022.

Changes in Healthcare Spending Attributable to High Deductible Health Plan Offer Among Enrollees with Comorbid Substance Use Disorder and Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: The rise in prevalence of high deductible health plans (HDHPs) in the United States may raise concerns for high-need, high-utilization populations such as those with comorbid chronic conditions. In this study, we examine changes in total and out-of-pocket (OOP) spending attributable to HDHPs for enrollees with comorbid substance use disorder (SUD) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: We used de-identified administrative claims data from 2007 to 2017. SUD and CVD were defined using algorithms of ICD 9 and 10 codes and HEDIS guidelines. The main outcome measures of interest were spending measure for all non-SUD/CVD-related services, SUD-specific services, and CVD-specific services, for all services and medications specifically. We assessed both total and OOP spending. We used an intent-to-treat two-part model approach to model spending and computed the marginal effect of HDHP offer as both the dollar change and percent change in spending attributable to HDHP offer. RESULTS: Our sample included 33,684 enrollee-years and was predominantly white and male with a mean age of 53 years. The sample had high demonstrated substantial healthcare utilization with 94% using any non-SUD/CVD services, and 84% and 78% using SUD and CVD services, respectively. HDHP offer was associated with a 17.0% (95% CI = [0.07, 0.27] increase in OOP spending for all non-SUD/CVD services, a 21.1% (95% CI = [0.11, 0.31]) increase in OOP spending for all SUD-specific services, and a 13.1% (95% CI = [0.04, 0.23]) increase in OOP spending for all CVD-specific services. HDHP offer was also associated with a significant increase in OOP spending on non-SUD/CVD-specific medications and SUD-specific medications, but not CVD-specific medications. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that while HDHPs do not change overall levels of annual spending among enrollees with comorbid CVD and SUD, they may increase the financial burden of healthcare services by raising OOP costs, which could negatively impact this high-need and high-utilization population.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Telemedicine Use.

Importance: Individuals of racial and ethnic minority groups may be less likely to use telemedicine in part due to lack of access to technology (ie, digital divide). To date, some studies have found less telemedicine use by individuals of racial and ethnic minority groups compared with White individuals, and others have found the opposite. What explains these different findings is unclear. Objective: To quantify racial and ethnic differences in the receipt of telemedicine and total visits with and without accounting for demographic and clinical characteristics and geography. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included individuals who were continuously enrolled in traditional Medicare from March 2020 to February 2022 or until death. Exposure: Race and ethnicity, which was categorized as Black non-Hispanic, Hispanic, White non-Hispanic, other (defined as American Indian/Pacific Islander, Alaska Native, and Asian), and unknown/missing. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total telemedicine visits (audio-video or audio); total visits (telemedicine or in-person) per individual during the study period. Multivariable models were used that sequentially adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics and geographic area to examine their association with differences in telemedicine and total visit utilization by documented race and ethnicity. Results: In this national sample of 14 305 819 individuals, 7.4% reported that they were Black, 5.6% Hispanic, and 4.2% other race. In unadjusted results, compared with White individuals, Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals of other racial groups had 16.7 (95% CI, 16.1-17.3), 32.9 (95% CI, 32.3-33.6), and 20.9 (95% CI, 20.2-21.7) more telemedicine visits per 100 beneficiaries, respectively. After adjustment for clinical and demographic characteristics and geography, compared with White individuals, Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals of other racial groups had 7.9 (95% CI, -8.5 to -7.3), 13.2 (95% CI, -13.9 to -12.6), and 9.2 (95% CI, -10.0 to -8.5) fewer telemedicine visits per 100 beneficiaries, respectively. In unadjusted and fully adjusted models, and in 2019 and the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals of other racial groups continued to have fewer total visits than White individuals. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cross-sectional study of US Medicare enrollees suggest that although nationally, Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals of other racial groups received more telemedicine visits during the pandemic and disproportionately lived in geographic regions with higher telemedicine use, after controlling for geographic region, Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals of other racial groups received fewer telemedicine visits than White individuals.

Trends in Use of Telemedicine for Stimulant Initiation Among Children and Adults.

OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to examine trends in stimulant initiation and follow-up care for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) via telemedicine. METHODS: This retrospective longitudinal study used national, deidentified commercial health insurance outpatient claims among children (ages 2-17 years; N=535,629) and adults (ages 18-64 years; N=2,116,160) from January 2019 through April 2022. Regression analyses were used to examine risk for stimulant initiation, whether initiation occurred via telemedicine or in-person care, and receipt of a follow-up visit. RESULTS: The mean monthly adjusted number of stimulant initiations per 100,000 enrollees was similar for children before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (prepandemic, 57 initiations; during pandemic, 56 initiations) but increased for adults (prepandemic, 27 initiations; during pandemic, 33 initiations). Initiations via telemedicine peaked at 53%-57% in April 2020 and dropped to about 14% among children and 28% among adults in April 2022. Telemedicine initiations were significantly more common among psychiatrists than among other prescribers (OR=3.70, 95% CI=3.38-4.06 [children]; OR=3.02, 95% CI=2.87-3.17 [adults]) and less common for rural residents (OR=0.57, 95% CI=0.40-0.82 [children]; OR=0.75, 95% CI=0.61-0.92 [adults]). Follow-up care was significantly more common among individuals whose care was initiated via telemedicine than among those receiving in-person care (OR=1.09, 95% CI=1.00-1.19 [children]; OR=1.61, 95% CI=1.53-1.69 [adults]). CONCLUSIONS: Many stimulant treatments were initiated via telemedicine. Proposed rules to prohibit controlled substance prescribing without an in-person evaluation would require significant changes in current practice, potentially limiting access to stimulant medications for ADHD.

Characteristics of Mental Health Specialists Who Shifted Their Practice Entirely to Telemedicine.

This cohort study investigates the number and characteristics of US mental health specialists who had shifted to a fully virtual practice as of 2022.

Use of Telemedicine and Quality of Care Among Medicare Enrollees With Serious Mental Illness.

Importance: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a large fraction of mental health care was provided via telemedicine. The implications of this shift in care for use of mental health service and quality of care have not been characterized. Objective: To compare changes in care patterns and quality during the first year of the pandemic among Medicare beneficiaries with serious mental illness (schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder) cared for at practices with higher vs lower telemedicine use. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder were attributed to specialty mental health practices that delivered the majority of their mental health care in 2019. Practices were categorized into 3 groups based on the proportion of telemental health visits provided during the first year of the pandemic (March 2020-February 2021): lowest use (0%-49%), middle use (50%-89%), or highest use (90%-100%). Across the 3 groups of practices, differential changes in patient outcomes were calculated from the year before the pandemic started to the year after. These changes were also compared with differential changes from a 2-year prepandemic period. Analyses were conducted in November 2022. Exposure: Practice-level use of telemedicine during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the total number of mental health visits (telemedicine plus in-person) per person. Secondary outcomes included the number of acute hospital and emergency department encounters, all-cause mortality, and quality outcomes, including adherence to antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medications (as measured by the number of months of medication fills) and 7- and 30-day outpatient follow-up rates after discharge for a mental health hospitalization. Results: The pandemic cohort included 120 050 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 56.5 [14.5] years; 66 638 females [55.5%]) with serious mental illness. Compared with prepandemic changes and relative to patients receiving care at practices with the lowest telemedicine use: patients receiving care at practices in the middle and highest telemedicine use groups had 1.11 (95% CI, 0.45-1.76) and 1.94 (95% CI, 1.28-2.59) more mental health visits per patient per year (or 7.5% [95% CI, 3.0%-11.9%] and 13.0% [95% CI, 8.6%-17.4%] more mental health visits per year, respectively). Among patients of practices with middle and highest telemedicine use, changes in adherence to antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medications were -0.4% (95% CI, -1.3% to 0.5%) and -0.1% (95% CI, -1.0% to 0.8%), and hospital and emergency department use for any reason changed by 2.4% (95% CI, -1.5% to 6.2%) and 2.8% (95% CI, -1.2% to 6.8%), respectively. There were no significant differential changes in postdischarge follow-up or mortality rates according to the level of telemedicine use. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with serious mental illness, patients receiving care from practices that had a higher level of telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic had more mental health visits per year compared with prepandemic levels, with no differential changes in other observed quality metrics over the same period.

Choosing Or Losing In Behavioral Health: A Study Of Patients' Experiences Selecting Telehealth Versus In-Person Care.

It is not known how the growth of telehealth has affected patients' choice of visit modalities (telehealth versus in person). In 2023 we conducted a mixed-methods study that paired a nationally representative survey of 2,071 adults (including 571 who used behavioral health services) and semistructured interviews with twenty-six people with depression or bipolar disorder. We explored patients' experiences with visit modality selection and their agency in the decision. Approximately one-third of patients receiving therapy or medication visits reported that their clinicians did not offer both modalities. Thirty-two percent reported that they did not typically receive their preferred modality, and 45 percent did not believe that their clinician considered their modality preferences. Qualitative findings revealed that some clinicians did not elicit patients' modality preferences. Perceived lack of choice affected satisfaction and rapport with clinicians and encouraged some people to seek care elsewhere. These findings highlight trade-offs in policies to preserve patient choice and approaches that clinicians can take to identify and accommodate patients' preferences.

Provision of evaluation and management visits by nurse practitioners and physician assistants in the USA from 2013 to 2019: cross-sectional time series study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the proportion of healthcare visits are delivered by nurse practitioners and physician assistants versus physicians and how this has changed over time and by clinical setting, diagnosis, and patient demographics. DESIGN: Cross-sectional time series study. SETTING: National data from the traditional Medicare insurance program in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Of people using Medicare (ie, those older than 65 years, permanently disabled, and people with end stage renal disease), a 20% random sample was taken. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of physician, nurse practitioner, and physician assistant visits in the outpatient and skilled nursing facility settings delivered by physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants, and how this proportion varies by type of visit and diagnosis. RESULTS: From 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2019, 276 million visits were included in the sample. The proportion of all visits delivered by nurse practitioners and physician assistants in a year increased from 14.0% (95% confidence interval 14.0% to 14.0%) to 25.6% (25.6% to 25.6%). In 2019, the proportion of visits delivered by a nurse practitioner or physician assistant varied across conditions, ranging from 13.2% for eye disorders and 20.4% for hypertension to 36.7% for anxiety disorders and 41.5% for respiratory infections. Among all patients with at least one visit in 2019, 41.9% had one or more nurse practitioner or physician assistant visits. Compared with patients who had no visits from a nurse practitioner or physician assistant, the likelihood of receiving any care was greatest among patients who were lower income (2.9% greater), rural residents (19.7%), and disabled (5.6%). CONCLUSION: The proportion of visits delivered by nurse practitioners and physician assistants in the USA is increasing rapidly and now accounts for a quarter of all healthcare visits.

Alcohol Use Disorder Treatment in Sexually and Gender Diverse Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Objective: While sexually and gender diverse (SGD) people have higher odds of alcohol use disorder (AUD) compared to heterosexual and cisgender people, AUD treatment access and use disparities are not well characterized. The purpose of this study is to assess differences in AUD treatment among SGD versus non-SGD populations.Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed using data from a federally qualified health center electronic health record system in Boston, Massachusetts. Patients were 18 years or older with an International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 or ICD-10 AUD diagnosis and any clinic visit from January 2013 until June 2021 (N = 3,607). Treatment for AUD was identified using binary variables for medication prescription orders and visits for AUD.Results: Among patients identifying as lesbian/gay, 6.9% had an AUD diagnosis, as compared to 2.6% of patients identifying as straight/heterosexual (P < .001). The prevalence of AUD was higher in the gender diverse group as compared to the cisgender group (5.5% vs 4.4%, P < .001). There were no significant differences in receipt of a prescription for injectable naltrexone, acamprosate, or disulfiram between SGD and non-SGD patients. For oral naltrexone, 16.1% of sexually diverse patients received a prescription, as compared to 9.8% of straight/heterosexual patients (P < .001). For visits, both the straight/heterosexual cohort and the cisgender cohorts had the lowest proportion of AUD-related pharmacotherapy and individual psychotherapy visits, as compared to SGD cohorts.Conclusions: SGD patients had higher proportions of AUD diagnosis and AUD care utilization through behavioral health as compared to non-SGD patients.

Choice of high-deductible health plans among enrollees with a substance use disorder.

INTRODUCTION: High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) expose enrollees to increased out-of-pocket costs for their medical care, which can exacerbate the undertreatment of substance use disorders (SUDs). However, the factors that influence whether an enrollee with SUD chooses an HDHP are not well understood. In this study, we examine the factors associated with an individual with an SUD's decision to enroll in an HDHP. METHODS: Using de-identified administrative commercial claims and enrollment data from OptumLabs (2007-2017), we identified individuals at employers offering at least one HDHP and one non-HDHP plan. We modeled whether an enrollee chose an HDHP using linear regression on plan and enrollee demographic characteristics. Key plan characteristics included whether a plan had a health savings account (HSA) or a health reimbursement arrangement (HRA). Key demographic variables included age, race/ethnicity, census block income range, census block highest educational attainment, and sex. We separately investigate new enrollment decisions (i.e., not previously enrolled in an HDHP) and re-enrollment decisions, as well as decisions among single enrollees and families of differing sizes. The study also adjusted models for additional plan characteristics, employer and year fixed effects, and census division. Robust standard errors were clustered at the employer level. RESULTS: The sample comprised 30,832 plans and 318,334 enrollees. Among enrollees with new enrollment decisions, 24.6 % chose an HDHP; 93.8 % of HDHP enrollees chose to re-enroll in an HDHP. The study found the presence of a plan HRA to be associated with a higher probability of new and re-enrollment in an HDHP. We found that older enrollees with SUD were less likely to newly enroll in an HDHP, while enrollees who were non-White, living in lower-income census blocks, and living in lower educational attainment census blocks were more likely to newly enroll in an HDHP. Higher levels of health care utilization in the prior year were associated with a lower probability of newly enrolling in an HDHP but associated with a higher probability of re-enrolling. CONCLUSION: Given the emerging evidence that HDHPs may discourage SUD treatment, greater HDHP enrollment could exacerbate health disparities.

High-deductible Health Plans and Nonfatal Opioid Overdose.

OBJECTIVES: Opioid-related overdose is a public health emergency in the United States. Meanwhile, high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) have become more prevalent in the United States over the last 2 decades, raising concern about their potential for discouraging high-need populations, like those with opioid use disorder (OUD), from engaging in care that may mitigate the probability of overdose. This study assesses the impact of an employer offering an HDHP on nonfatal opioid overdose among commercially insured individuals with OUD in the United States. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used deidentified insurance claims data from 2007 to 2017 with 97,788 person-years. We used an intent-to-treat, difference-in-differences regression framework to estimate the change in the probability of a nonfatal opioid overdose among enrollees with OUD whose employers began offering an HDHP insurance option during the study period compared with the change among those whose employer never offered an HDHP. We also used an event-study model to account for dynamic time-varying treatment effects. RESULTS: Across both comparison and treatment groups, 2% of the sample experienced a nonfatal opioid overdose during the study period. Our primary model and robustness checks revealed no impact of HDHP offer on the probability of a nonfatal overdose. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that HDHP offer was not associated with an observed increase in the probability of nonfatal opioid overdose among commercially insured person-years with OUD. However, given the strong evidence that medications for OUD (MOUD) can reduce the risk of overdose, research should explore which facets of insurance design may impact MOUD use.

Trends in Acute Care Use for Mental Health Conditions Among Youth During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Understanding how children's utilization of acute mental health care changed during the COVID-19 pandemic is critical for directing resources. Objective: To examine youth acute mental health care use (emergency department [ED], boarding, and subsequent inpatient care) during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis of national, deidentified commercial health insurance claims of youth mental health ED and hospital care took place between March 2019 and February 2022. Among 4.1 million commercial insurance enrollees aged 5 to 17 years, 17 614 and 16 815 youth had at least 1 mental health ED visit in the baseline year (March 2019-February 2020) and pandemic year 2 (March 2021-February 2022), respectively. Exposure: The COVID-19 pandemic. Main outcomes and measures: The relative change from baseline to pandemic year 2 was determined in (1) fraction of youth with 1 or more mental health ED visits; (2) percentage of mental health ED visits resulting in inpatient psychiatry admission; (3) mean length of inpatient psychiatric stay following ED visit; and (4) frequency of prolonged boarding (≥2 midnights) in the ED or a medical unit before admission to an inpatient psychiatric unit. Results: Of 4.1 million enrollees, 51% were males and 41% were aged 13 to 17 years (vs 5-12 years) with 88 665 mental health ED visits. Comparing baseline to pandemic year 2, there was a 6.7% increase in youth with any mental health ED visits (95% CI, 4.7%-8.8%). Among adolescent females, there was a larger increase (22.1%; 95% CI, 19.2%-24.9%). The fraction of ED visits that resulted in a psychiatric admission increased by 8.4% (95% CI, 5.5%-11.2%). Mean length of inpatient psychiatric stay increased 3.8% (95% CI, 1.8%-5.7%). The fraction of episodes with prolonged boarding increased 76.4% (95% CI, 71.0%-81.0%). Conclusions and relevance: Into the second year of the pandemic, mental health ED visits increased notably among adolescent females, and there was an increase in prolonged boarding of youth awaiting inpatient psychiatric care. Interventions are needed to increase inpatient child psychiatry capacity and reduce strain on the acute mental health care system.

Prescribing Medications for Alcohol Use Disorder: A Qualitative Study of Primary Care Physician Decision Making.

PURPOSE: Over 29 million Americans have alcohol use disorder (AUD). Though there are effective medications for AUD (MAUD) that can be prescribed within primary care, they are underutilized. We aimed to explore how primary care physicians familiar with MAUD make prescribing decisions and to identify reasons for underuse of MAUD within primary care. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 19 primary care physicians recruited from a large online database of medical professionals. Physicians had to have started a patient on MAUD within the last 6 months in an outpatient setting. Inductive and deductive thematic analysis was informed by the theory of planned behavior. RESULTS: Physicians endorsed that it is challenging to prescribe MAUD due to several reasons, including: (1) somewhat negative personal beliefs about medication effectiveness and likelihood of patient adherence; (2) competing demands in primary care that make MAUD a lower priority; and, (3) few positive subjective norms around prescribing. To make MAUD prescribing a smaller component of their practice, physicians reported applying various rules of thumb to select patients for MAUD. These included recommending MAUD to the patients who seemed the most motivated to reduce drinking, those with the most severe AUD, and those who were also receiving other treatments for AUD. CONCLUSIONS: There is a challenging implementation context for MAUD due to competing demands within primary care. Future research should explore which strategies for identifying a subset of patients for MAUD are the most appropriate and most likely to improve population health and health equity.

Trends in Use of Medication to Treat Opioid Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic in 10 State Medicaid Programs.

Importance: Federal and state agencies granted temporary regulatory waivers to prevent disruptions in access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) during the COVID-19 pandemic, including expanding access to telehealth for MOUD. Little is known about changes in MOUD receipt and initiation among Medicaid enrollees during the pandemic. Objectives: To examine changes in receipt of any MOUD, initiation of MOUD (in-person vs telehealth), and the proportion of days covered (PDC) with MOUD after initiation from before to after declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE). Design, Setting, and Participants: This serial cross-sectional study included Medicaid enrollees aged 18 to 64 years in 10 states from May 2019 through December 2020. Analyses were conducted from January through March 2022. Exposures: Ten months before the COVID-19 PHE (May 2019 through February 2020) vs 10 months after the PHE was declared (March through December 2020). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes included receipt of any MOUD and outpatient initiation of MOUD via prescriptions and office- or facility-based administrations. Secondary outcomes included in-person vs telehealth MOUD initiation and PDC with MOUD after initiation. Results: Among a total of 8 167 497 Medicaid enrollees before the PHE and 8 181 144 after the PHE, 58.6% were female in both periods and most enrollees were aged 21 to 34 years (40.1% before the PHE; 40.7% after the PHE). Monthly rates of MOUD initiation, representing 7% to 10% of all MOUD receipt, decreased immediately after the PHE primarily due to reductions in in-person initiations (from 231.3 per 100 000 enrollees in March 2020 to 171.8 per 100 000 enrollees in April 2020) that were partially offset by increases in telehealth initiations (from 5.6 per 100 000 enrollees in March 2020 to 21.1 per 100 000 enrollees in April 2020). Mean monthly PDC with MOUD in the 90 days after initiation decreased after the PHE (from 64.5% in March 2020 to 59.5% in September 2020). In adjusted analyses, there was no immediate change (odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01) or change in the trend (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01) in the likelihood of receipt of any MOUD after the PHE compared with before the PHE. There was an immediate decrease in the likelihood of outpatient MOUD initiation (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.96) and no change in the trend in the likelihood of outpatient MOUD initiation (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.00) after the PHE compared with before the PHE. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Medicaid enrollees, the likelihood of receipt of any MOUD was stable from May 2019 through December 2020 despite concerns about potential COVID-19 pandemic-related disruptions in care. However, immediately after the PHE was declared, there was a reduction in overall MOUD initiations, including a reduction in in-person MOUD initiations that was only partially offset by increased use of telehealth.

Do High-Deductible Health Plans Incentivize Changing the Timing of Substance Use Disorder Treatment?

A high-deductible health plan (HDHP) may incentivize enrollees to limit health care use at the beginning of a plan year, when they are responsible for 100% of costs, or to increase the use of care at the end of the year, when enrollees may have less cost exposure. We investigated both the impact of the deductible reset that occurs at the beginning of a plan year and the option to enroll in an HDHP on the use of substance use disorder (SUD) treatment services over the course of a health plan year. We found decreases in SUD treatment use following the increase in cost exposure related to a deductible reset. There was no variation in this behavior between HDHP offer enrollees and comparison enrollees who were not offered an HDHP. These findings reinforce that cost-sharing poses a barrier to SUD care and continuity of care, which can increase the risk of adverse clinical outcomes.

Impact of High Deductible Health Plans on U.S. Adults With Chronic Pain.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pain affects an estimated 20% of U.S. adults. Because high-deductible health plans have captured a growing share of the commercial insurance market, it is unknown how high-deductible health plans impact care for chronic pain. METHODS: Using 2007-2017 claims data from a large national commercial insurer, statistical analyses conducted in 2022-2023 estimated changes in enrollee outcomes before and after their firm began offering a high-deductible health plan compared with changes in outcomes in a comparison group of enrollees at firms never offering a high-deductible health plan. The sample included 757,530 commercially insured adults aged 18-64 years with headache, low back pain, arthritis, neuropathic pain, or fibromyalgia. Outcomes, measured at the enrollee year level, included the probability of receiving any chronic pain treatment, nonpharmacologic pain treatment, and opioid and nonopioid prescriptions; the number of nonpharmacologic pain treatment days; number and days' supply of opioid and nonopioid prescriptions; and total annual spending and out-of-pocket spending. RESULTS: High-deductible health plan offer was associated with a 1.2 percentage point reduction (95% CI= -1.8, -0.5) in the probability of any chronic pain treatment and an $11 increase (95% CI=$6, $15) in annual out-of-pocket spending on chronic pain treatments among those with any use, representing a 16% increase in average annual out-of-pocket spending over the pre-high deductible health plan offer annual average. Results were driven by changes in nonpharmacologic treatment use. CONCLUSIONS: By reducing the use of nonpharmacologic chronic pain treatments and marginally increasing out-of-pocket costs among those using these services, high-deductible health plans may discourage more holistic, integrated approaches to caring for patients with chronic pain conditions.