ABSTRACT
An empiric evidence base is lacking regarding the relationship between insurance status, payment source, and outcomes among patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) on telehealth platforms. Such information gaps may lead to unintended impacts of policy changes. Following the phase-out of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency, states were allowed to redetermine Medicaid eligibility and disenroll individuals. Yet, financial barriers remain a common and significant hurdle for patients with OUD and are associated with worse outcomes. We studied 3842 patients entering care in 2022 at Ophelia Health, one of the nation's largest OUD telehealth companies, to assess associations between insurance status and 6-month retention. In multivariable analyses, in-network patients who could use insurance benefits were more likely to be retained compared with cash-pay patients (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.40-1.62; P < .001). Among a subsample of 882 patients for whom more detailed insurance data were available (due to phased-in electronic health record updates), in-network patients were also more likely to be retained at 6 months compared with insured, yet out-of-network patients (aRR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.54-2.23; P < .001). Findings show that insurance status, and specifically the use of in-network benefits, is associated with superior retention and suggest that Medicaid disenrollment and insurance plan hesitation to engage with telehealth providers may undermine the nation's response to the opioid crisis.
ABSTRACT
Substance use disorders (SUD) are associated with increased risk of worse COVID-19 outcomes. Likewise, racial/ethnic minority patients experience greater risk of severe COVID-19 disease compared to white patients. Providers should understand the role of race and ethnicity as an effect modifier on COVID-19 severity among individuals with SUD. This retrospective cohort study assessed patient race/ethnicity as an effect modifier of the risk of severe COVID-19 disease among patients with histories of SUD and overdose. We used merged electronic health record data from 116,471 adult patients with a COVID-19 encounter between March 2020 and February 2021 across five healthcare systems in New York City. Exposures were patient histories of SUD and overdose. Outcomes were risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and subsequent COVID-19-related ventilation, acute kidney failure, sepsis, and mortality. Risk factors included patient age, sex, and race/ethnicity, as well as medical comorbidities associated with COVID-19 severity. We tested for interaction between SUD and patient race/ethnicity on COVID-19 outcomes. Findings showed that Non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients experienced a higher prevalence of all adverse COVID-19 outcomes compared to non-Hispanic white patients. Past-year alcohol (OR 1.24 [1.01-1.53]) and opioid use disorders (OR 1.91 [1.46-2.49]), as well as overdose history (OR 4.45 [3.62-5.46]), were predictive of COVID-19 mortality, as well as other adverse COVID-19 outcomes. Among patients with SUD, significant differences in outcome risk were detected between patients of different race/ethnicity groups. Findings indicate that providers should consider multiple dimensions of vulnerability to adequately manage COVID-19 disease among populations with SUDs.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Drug Overdose , Substance-Related Disorders , Adult , Humans , Ethnicity , Electronic Health Records , Retrospective Studies , New York City/epidemiology , Race Factors , Minority Groups , Substance-Related Disorders/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) suffer disproportionately from COVID-19. To inform clinical management of OUD patients, research is needed to identify characteristics associated with COVID-19 progression and death among this population. We aimed to investigate the role of OUD and specific comorbidities on COVID-19 progression among hospitalized OUD patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of merged electronic health records (EHR) from five large private health systems. SETTING: New York City, New York, USA, 2011-21. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with a COVID-19 encounter and OUD or opioid overdose diagnosis between March 2020 and February 2021. MEASUREMENTS: Primary exposure included diagnosis of OUD/opioid overdose. Risk factors included age, sex, race/ethnicity and common medical, substance use and psychiatric comorbidities known to be associated with COVID-19 severity. Outcomes included COVID-19 hospitalization and subsequent intubation, acute kidney failure, severe sepsis and death. FINDINGS: Of 110 917 COVID-19+ adults, 1.17% were ever diagnosed with OUD/opioid overdose. OUD patients had higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalization [adjusted risk ratio (aRR) = 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.33, 1.47], intubation [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 2.05, 95% CI = 1.74, 2.42], kidney failure (aRR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.34, 1.70), sepsis (aRR = 2.30, 95% CI = 1.88, 2.81) and death (aRR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.84, 2.40). Among hospitalized OUD patients, risks for worse COVID-19 outcomes included being male; older; of a race/ethnicity other than white, black or Hispanic; and having comorbid chronic kidney disease, diabetes, obesity or cancer. Protective factors included having asthma, hepatitis-C and chronic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid use disorder patients appear to have a substantial risk for COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality, with particular comorbidities and treatments moderating this risk.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Opiate Overdose , Opioid-Related Disorders , Adult , Humans , Male , Female , COVID-19/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Opiate Overdose/epidemiology , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Hospitals , New York City/epidemiologyABSTRACT
This Viewpoint discusses behavioral health and its transition to value-based payment models.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Psychiatry , Humans , United States , MedicareABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: It is unknown how hospital- and systems-level factors have impacted patient safety in the intensive care unit (ICU) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to understand how the pandemic has exacerbated preexisting patient safety issues and created novel patient safety challenges in ICUs in the United States. METHODS: We performed a national, multi-institutional, mixed-methods survey of critical care clinicians to elicit experiences related to patient safety during the pandemic. The survey was disseminated via email through the Society of Critical Care Medicine listserv. Data were reported as valid percentages, compared by COVID caseload and peak of the pandemic; free-text responses were analyzed and coded for themes. RESULTS: We received 335 survey responses. On general patient safety, 61% felt that conditions were more hazardous when compared with the prepandemic period. Those who took care of mostly COVID-19 patients were more likely to perceive that care was more hazardous (odds ratio, 4.89; 95% CI, 2.49-9.59) compared with those who took care of mostly non-COVID-19 or no COVID-19 patients. In free-text responses, providers identified patient safety risks related to pandemic adaptations, such as ventilator-related lung injury, medication and diagnostic errors, oversedation, oxygen device removal, and falls. CONCLUSIONS: Increased COVID-19 case burden was significantly associated with perceptions of a less safe patient care environment by frontline ICU clinicians. Results of the qualitative analysis identified specific patient safety hazards in ICUs across the United States as downstream consequences of hospital and provider strain during periods of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pandemics , Patient Safety , Critical Care , Intensive Care UnitsABSTRACT
Unintentional overdose deaths, most involving opioids, have eclipsed all other causes of US deaths for individuals less than 50 years of age. An estimated 2.4 to 5 million individuals have opioid use disorder (OUD) yet a minority receive treatment in a given year. Medications for OUD (MOUD) are the gold standard treatment for OUD however early dropout remains a major challenge for improving clinical outcomes. A Cascade of Care (CoC) framework, first popularized as a public health accountability strategy to stem the spread of HIV, has been adapted specifically for OUD. The CoC framework has been promoted by the NIH and several states and jurisdictions for organizing quality improvement efforts through clinical, policy, and administrative levers to improve OUD treatment initiation and retention. This roadmap details CoC design domains based on available data and potential linkages as individual state agencies and health systems typically rely on limited datasets subject to diverse legal and regulatory requirements constraining options for evaluations. Both graphical decision trees and catalogued studies are provided to help guide efforts by state agencies and health systems to improve data collection and monitoring efforts under the OUD CoC framework.
Subject(s)
Buprenorphine , Drug Overdose , Opioid-Related Disorders , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Buprenorphine/therapeutic use , Drug Overdose/drug therapy , Humans , Opiate Substitution Treatment , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Public HealthABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To synthesize and critically evaluate evidence on the effectiveness of integrated psychological care models for children with complex chronic illness within pediatric hospital settings and provide recommendations for successful implementation. DESIGN: Six electronic databases (Medline, Cochrane, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL) were systematically searched for English language studies including families of children aged 0-17 years with complex chronic illness. Eligible studies reported on psychology or neuropsychology screening, assessment, intervention, or services provided within a pediatric hospital setting. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were identified for review; nine assessed a psychological service, five examined psychosocial screening, and one examined a neuropsychology service. Three studies demonstrated the effectiveness of integrated psychological services in improving child or parent physical, psychological, or behavioral health outcomes. Uptake of psychosocial screening was high (84-96%), but only 25-37% of children or families identified as 'at-risk' engaged with on-site psychology services. Integrated psychological services offering consultations at the same time and location as the child's medical visit reported the highest rates of uptake (77-100%). CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence supports co-location of child medical and psychological services. A more consistent and comprehensive approach to the assessment of patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes and implementation effectiveness is recommended.
ABSTRACT
ICD-11 provides a promising new way to capture healthcare-related harm or injury. In this paper, we elaborate on the framework for describing healthcare-related events where there is a presumed causal link between an event and underlying healthcare-related factors. The three-part model for describing healthcare-related harm or injury in ICD-11 consists of (1) a healthcare-related activity that is the cause of injury or other harm (selected from Chapter 23 of ICD-11); (2) a mode or mechanism of injury or harm, related to the underlying cause (also from Chapter 23 of ICD-11); and (3) the harmful consequences of the event to the patient, selected from any of Chapters 1 through 22 of ICD-11 (most importantly, the injury or harm experienced by the patient). Concepts from these three elements are linked/clustered through postcoordination to reflect the three-part model in a single coded expression. ICD-11 contains many novel features, and the three-part model described here for healthcare-related adverse events is a notable example.
Subject(s)
Health Facilities , International Classification of Diseases , Delivery of Health Care , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Inpatient psychiatry discharge planning through careful transition documentation may reduce adverse patient outcomes and decrease hospital readmissions. In 2017 a national psychiatry reporting program instituted a quality metric called the Transition Record with Specified Elements Received by Discharged Patients (TR-1). At Yale New Haven Psychiatric Hospital, the TR-1 metric had 0% provider compliance when the quality metric was instituted. The primary goal of this quality improvement project was to increase the TR-1 metric compliance through use of a structured clinical decision support (CDS) tool and, by extension, reduce the readmission rate. METHODS: This was a quality improvement project conducted in a 118-bed psych hospital from August 1, 2017, to July 31, 2020, and the preintervention period was from January 1 to July 31, 2017. Demographic and clinical diagnosis data were collected pre- and postintervention. A CDS tool composed of 11 discharge elements was developed and implemented. Primary measures were monthly TR-1 compliance rate as a process metric, and 30-day all-cause readmission rate as an outcome metric. RESULTS: The TR-1 compliance rate increased after CDS tool implementation, with a process mean of 48% in year 1, 56% in year 2, and 65% in year 3. The readmission rate was 9.6% for August 2017 to July 2018, 9.9% for August 2018 to July 2019, and 10.3% for August 2019 to July 2020. A slight upward trend in readmissions was observed over the course of the study, but this was not significant (pâ¯=â¯0.95). CONCLUSION: We found that implementing a CDS tool improved care transition documentation, which was sustained over time. However, the change was not associated with a decrease in 30-day readmission.
Subject(s)
Patient Readmission , Patient Transfer , Hospitals, Psychiatric , Humans , Patient Discharge , Quality ImprovementABSTRACT
This study aims to describe which substance use service (SUS) organizations and who within these organizations support the maintenance of policies targeted at improving substance use treatment services. An online survey assessing respondent, organizational and program demographics, and knowledge and support regarding policy changes was distributed to all certified SUS and harm reduction programs in NYS. Bivariate and latent class analyses were used to identify patterns and associations to policy choices. Across the 227 respondents, there was a support for maintaining expansion of insurance coverage, virtual behavioral health/counseling and medication initiation/maintenance visits, reductions in prior authorizations, and access to prevention/harm reduction services. Three classes of support for policies were derived: (1) high-supporters (n = 49; 21%), (2) low-supporters (n = 66; 29%), and (3) selective-supporters. Having knowledge of policy changes was associated with membership in the high-supporters class. Implications regarding the role of knowledge in behavioral health policies dissemination structures, decision-making, and long-term expansion of SUS are discussed.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Substance-Related Disorders , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Policy , Humans , Insurance Coverage , New York , Substance-Related Disorders/therapyABSTRACT
Initiatives that support and incentivize the integration of behavioral health and general medical care have become a focus of government strategies to achieve the triple aim of improved health, better patient experience, and reduced costs. The authors describe the components of four large-scale national initiatives aimed at integrating care for a wide range of behavioral health needs. Commonalities across these national initiatives highlight health care and social services needs that must be addressed to improve care for people with co-occurring behavioral health and general medical conditions. These findings can inform how to design, test, select, and align the most promising strategies for integrated care in a variety of settings.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Psychiatry , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Primary Health Care , Social WorkABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, regulations for substance use services changed to accommodate stay-at-home orders and physical distancing guidelines. METHODS: Using in-depth interviews (N = 14) and framework analysis, we describe how policymakers developed, adopted, and implemented regulations governing services for substance use disorders during COVID-19, and how policymakers' perceived the impacts of these regulations in New York State. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, policymakers shifted to more inclusive approaches of knowledge generation and co-production of recommendations. Barriers to adoption and implementation of new regulations included medication/services supply, lack of integration, stigma, and overcriminalization. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study highlight the potential feasibility and benefits of co-produced policies for substance use services and the need for consistent service supply, better integration with health care services, reduced stigma, improved funding structures, best practice guidelines, criminal justice reform, and harm reduction support. These considerations should inform future policy maintenance and modifications to substance use services related to COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Substance-Related Disorders , Humans , Pandemics , Policy , Policy Making , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Although evidence-based behavioral health integration models have been demonstrated to work well when implemented properly, primary care practices need practical guidance on the steps they can take to build behavioral health integration capacities. This is especially true for practice settings with fewer resources. This study is a pilot field test of a framework continuum composed of core components of behavioral health integration that can be used to translate the implementation of behavioral health into diverse clinical settings guided by a practice's priorities and available resources. This framework, in combination with technical assistance by the study team, was piloted in 11 small primary care sites (defined as ≤5 primary care providers) throughout New York State. Surveys were collected at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Informal check-in calls and site visits using qualitative semistructured individual and group interviews were conducted with 10 of the 11 sites. A mixed-methods approach was used to incorporate the survey data and qualitative thematic analysis. All practices advanced at least one level of behavioral health integration along various components of the framework. These advances included implementing depression screening, standardizing workflows for positive screens, integrating patient tracking tools for follow-up behavioral health visits, incorporating warm hand-offs to on-site or off-site behavioral health providers, and formalized external referrals using collaborative agreements. Practices reported they had overall positive experiences using the framework and offered feedback for how to improve future iterations. The framework continuum, in combination with technical assistance, was shown to be useful for primary care practices to advance integrated behavioral health care based on their priorities and resource availability. The results combined with feedback from the practices have yielded a revised "Framework 2.0" that includes a new organization as well as the addition of a "Sustainability" domain.
Subject(s)
Primary Health Care , Referral and Consultation , Delivery of Health Care , HumansABSTRACT
The United States is facing both the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and an ongoing epidemic of opioid overdose. Opioid use disorder is associated with other mental health problems, trauma, and social and health disparities. While the United States has acted to improve access to treatment for mental health and opioid use, research will be needed to understand the effectiveness of new policies in the context of COVID-19. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Drug Overdose/psychology , Opioid Epidemic , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Opioid-Related Disorders/psychology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Social Isolation , Adult , COVID-19 , Humans , Opiate Substitution Treatment , United States , United States Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services AdministrationABSTRACT
(Reprinted with permission from Current Psychiatry Reports (2020) 21: 35).
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to investigate providers' perspectives on how medical, mental health, and social services are coordinated for people with serious mental illnesses and general medical conditions in 2 predominantly rural states. METHOD: To achieve multiple perspectives on service coordination, this study includes perspectives from providers employed in community mental health centers, social service agencies, and primary care settings in 2 northern rural New England states with contrasting approaches to financing and organizing services. We conducted 29 individual semistructured interviews and 1 focus group, which included administrative leaders, team leaders, primary care providers, social workers, and case managers who provide services for people with serious mental illness. Data were analyzed using qualitative thematic content analysis. RESULTS: We identified key themes at 3 levels: (a) provider-level coordination: bridging across services; managing interprofessional communications; and contrasting perspectives on the locus of responsibility for coordination; (b) individual-level coordination: support for self-management and care navigation; trusting and continuous relationships; and the right to individual choice and autonomy; (c) system-level coordination: linking appropriate residential and care provision services, funding, recruiting and retaining staff, policy enablers, and integration solutions. CONCLUSIONS: Three levels of provider-reported coordination themes are described for the 2 states, reflecting efforts to coordinate and integrate service delivery across medical, mental health, and social services. IMPLICATIONS: Improvements in patient outcomes will need additional actions that target key social determinants of health. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).