State Medicaid Initiatives Targeting Substance Use Disorder in Criminal Legal Settings, 2021.

Objectives. To document state Medicaid pre- and postrelease initiatives for individuals in the criminal legal system with substance use disorder (SUD). Methods. An Internet-based survey was sent in 2021 to Medicaid directors in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia to determine whether they were pursuing initiatives for persons with SUD across 3 criminal legal settings: jails, prisons, and community corrections. A 90% response rate was obtained. Results. In 2021, the majority of states did not report any targeted Medicaid initiatives for persons with SUD residing in criminal legal settings. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia adopted at least 1 Medicaid initiative for persons with SUD across the 3 criminal legal settings. The most commonly adopted initiatives were in the areas of medication for opioid use disorder treatment and Medicaid enrollment. Out of 24 possible initiatives for each state (8 initiatives across 3 criminal legal settings), the 2 most commonly adopted were (1) provision of medication treatment of opioid use disorder before release from criminal legal settings (16 states) and (2) facilitation of Medicaid enrollment through suspension rather than termination of Medicaid enrollment upon entry to a criminal legal setting (14 states). Initiatives pertaining to Medicaid SUD care coordination were adopted by the fewest (9) states. Conclusions. In 2021, states' involvement in Medicaid SUD initiatives for criminal legal populations remained low. Increased adoption of Medicaid SUD initiatives across criminal legal settings is needed, especially knowing the high rate of overdose mortality among this group. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(5):527-530. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307604).

Substance use disorder treatment carve outs in Medicaid managed care.

INTRODUCTION: Medicaid managed care organizations (MCO) play a major role in addressing the nation's epidemic of drug overdose and mortality by administering substance use disorder (SUD) treatment benefits for over 50 million Americans. While it is known that some Medicaid MCO plans delegate responsibility for managing SUD treatment benefits to an outside "carve out" entity, the extent and structure of such carve out arrangements are unknown. This is an important gap in knowledge, given that carve outs have been linked to reductions in rates of SUD treatment receipt in several studies. To address this gap, we examined carve out arrangements used by Medicaid MCO plans to administer SUD treatment benefits in ten states. METHODS: Data for this study was gleaned using a purposive sampling approach through content analysis of publicly available benefits information (e.g., member handbooks, provider manuals, prescription drug formularies) from 70 comprehensive Medicaid MCO plans in 10 selected states (FL, GA, IL, MD, MI, NH, OH, PA, UT, and WV) active in 2018. Each Medicaid MCO plan's documents were reviewed and coded to indicate whether a range of SUD treatment services (e.g., inpatient treatment, outpatient treatment, residential treatment) and medications were carved out, and if so, to what type of entity (e.g., behavioral health organization). RESULTS: A large majority of Medicaid MCO plans carved out at least some (28.6 %) or all (40.0 %) SUD treatment services, with nearly all plans carving out some (77.1 %) or all (14.3 %) medications, mainly due to the carving out of methadone treatment. Medicaid MCO plans most commonly carved out SUD treatment services to behavioral health organizations, while most medications were carved out to state Medicaid fee-for-service plans. CONCLUSIONS: Carve out arrangements for SUD treatment vary dramatically across states, across plans, and even within plans. Given that some studies have linked carve out arrangements to reductions in treatment access, their widespread use among Medicaid MCO plans is cause for further consideration by policymakers and other key interest groups. Moreover, reliance on such complex arrangements for administering care may create challenges for enrollees who seek to learn about and access plan benefits.

The Impact of State Medicaid Eligibility and Benefits Policy on Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome Hospitalizations.

Rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) resulting from opioid misuse are rising. However, policies to treat opioid misuse during pregnancy are unclear. We apply a difference-in-differences design to national pediatric discharge records to examine the effects of state Medicaid policies on NAS. Among states in which Medicaid covered two clinically-recommended medications for treating opioid misuse (buprenorphine, methadone), the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion reduced Medicaid-covered NAS hospitalizations. Medicaid expansion did not affect NAS hospitalizations in other expansion states. These findings imply a nuanced relationship between Medicaid policy and NAS that should be considered in addressing opioid misuse among pregnant women.

Statewide efforts to address the opioid epidemic: Results from a national survey of single state agencies.

BACKGROUND: Single State Agencies (SSAs) are at the forefront of efforts to address the nation's opioid epidemic, responsible for allocating billions of dollars in federal, state, and local funds to ensure service quality, promote best practices, and expand access to care. Federal expenditures to SSAs have more than tripled since the early years of the epidemic, yet, it is unclear what initiatives SSAs have undertaken to address the crisis and how they are financing these efforts. METHODS: This study used data from an internet-based survey of SSAs, conducted by the University of Chicago Survey Lab from January to December 2021 (response rate of 94 %). The survey included a set of 14 items identifying statewide efforts to address the opioid epidemic and six funding sources. We calculated the percentage of SSAs that supported each statewide effort and the percentage of SSAs reporting use of each source of funding across the 14 statewide efforts. RESULTS: Treatment of opioid-related overdose figured most prominently among statewide efforts, with all SSAs providing funding for naloxone distribution and all but one SSA supporting naloxone training. Recovery support services, Project ECHO, and Hub and Spoke models were supported by the vast majority of SSAs. Statewide efforts related to expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) received somewhat less support, with 45 % of SSAs supporting mobile methadone/MOUD clinics/programs and 70 % supporting buprenorphine in emergency departments. A relatively low proportion of SSAs (54 %) provided support for syringe services programs. State Opioid Response (SOR) funds were the most common funding source reported by SSAs (57 % of SSAs), followed by block grant funds (19 %) and other state funding (15 %). CONCLUSION: Results highlight a range of SSA efforts to address the nation's opioid epidemic. Limited adoption of efforts to expand access to MOUD and harm reduction services may represent missed opportunities. The uncertainty over reauthorization of the SOR grant post-2025 also raises concerns over sustainability of funding for many of these statewide initiatives.

Medicaid Managed Care Prior Authorization For Buprenorphine Tied To State Partisanship And Health Plan Profit Status, 2018.

Buprenorphine is among the most effective drugs for treating opioid use disorder, yet only a quarter of Americans who need it receive it. Requiring prior authorization has been identified as an important barrier to buprenorphine access. However, the practice remains widespread in Medicaid-the largest insurer of Americans with opioid use disorder. In this study, we examined how prior authorization for buprenorphine is related to plan structure and state political environment, using data on all 266 comprehensive Medicaid managed care plans active in 2018. We found substantial variation in prior authorization use across states, with all plans requiring prior authorization in eleven states and no plans requiring it in thirteen other states. We found that for-profit plans and those located in Republican states were more likely to impose prior authorization policies. Our findings suggest that managed care plans' decisions regarding use of prior authorization may be shaped by internal pressures to control costs, as well as by differing partisan stances regarding the need to prevent criminal diversion of buprenorphine.

Changes in Medicaid Fee-for-Service Benefit Design for Substance Use Disorder Treatment During the Opioid Crisis, 2014 to 2021.

Importance: Medicaid is the largest payer of substance use disorder treatment in the US and plays a key role in responding to the opioid epidemic. However, as recently as 2017, many state Medicaid programs still did not cover the full continuum of clinically recommended care. Objective: To determine whether state Medicaid fee-for-service (FFS) programs have expanded coverage and loosened restrictions on access to substance use disorder treatment in recent years. Design, Setting, and Participants: In 2014, 2017, and 2021, a survey on coverage for substance use disorder treatment was conducted among state Medicaid programs and the District of Columbia with FFS programs. This survey was completed by Medicaid program directors or knowledgeable staff. Data analysis was performed in 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The following were calculated for a variety of substance use disorder treatment services (individual and group outpatient, intensive outpatient, short-term and long-term residential, recovery support, inpatient treatment and detoxification, and outpatient detoxification) and medications (methadone, oral and injectable naltrexone, and buprenorphine): (1) the percentage of Medicaid FFS programs covering these services and medications and (2) the percentage of Medicaid FFS programs using utilization management policies, such as copayments, prior authorizations, and annual maximums. Results: This study had response rates of 92% in 2014 and 2017 (47 of 51 states) and 90% in 2021 (46 of 51 states). For the 2021 wave, data are reported for the 38 non-managed care organization plan-only states. Between 2017 and 2021, coverage of individual and group outpatient treatment increased to 100% of states, and use of annual maximums for medications decreased to 3% or less (n ≤ 1). However, important gaps in coverage persisted, particularly for more intensive services: 10% of Medicaid FFS programs (n = 4) did not cover intensive outpatient treatment, 13% (n = 5) did not cover short-term residential care, and 33% (n = 13) did not cover long-term residential care. Use of utilization controls, such as copays, prior authorizations, and annual maximums, decreased but continued to be widespread. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of state Medicaid FFS programs, increases in coverage and decreases in use of utilization management policies over time were observed for substance use disorder treatment and medications. However, these findings suggest that some states still lag behind and impose barriers to treatment. Future research should work to identify the long-term ramifications of these barriers for patients.

State Funding For Substance Use Disorder Treatment Declined In The Wake Of Medicaid Expansion.

The US continues to grapple with an escalating epidemic of opioid-related overdose and mortality. State funds, which are the second-largest source of public funding for substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and prevention, play a critically important role in responding to this crisis. Despite their importance, little is known about how these funds are allocated and how they have changed over time, particularly within the context of Medicaid expansion. In this study we assessed trends in state funds during the period 2010-19, using difference-in-differences regression and event history models. Our findings reveal dramatic variation in state funding across states, from a low of $0.61 per capita in Arizona to a high of $51.11 per capita in Wyoming in 2019. Moreover, state funding declined during the period after Medicaid expansion by an average of $9.95 million in expansion states (relative to nonexpansion states), especially in states that expanded eligibility under Republican-controlled legislatures, where it declined by an average of $15.94 million. Medicaid substitution strategies, which, in effect, shift some of the financial burden for financing SUD treatment from the state to the federal level, may erode resources for broader system-level efforts that are urgently needed in the midst of the opioid epidemic.

Allocation of federal funding to address the opioid overdose crisis in the criminal legal system.

INTRODUCTION: The opioid overdose crisis remains a chief public health concern in the United States, and people involved in the criminal legal system are among the most vulnerable to opioid related harms. This study aimed to identify all discretionary federal funding allocated to states, cities, and counties targeting the overdose crisis for criminal legal system-involved populations in fiscal year (FY) 2019. We then aimed to assess the extent to which federal funding was allocated to states with the highest need. METHODS: We collected data from publicly available government databases (N = 22) to identify federal funding targeting opioid use disorder in criminal legal system-involved populations. Descriptive analyses examined the extent to which funding allocated per person in the criminal legal system-involved population was associated with funding need, proxied by a composite measure of opioid mortality and drug-related arrests. We created a generosity measure and dissimilarity index to assess the degree to which funding matched need across states. RESULTS: More than 590 million dollars were allocated across 517 grants by 10 federal agencies in FY 2019. About half of states received less than $100.00 dollars per capita in the state criminal legal system-involved population. Funding generosity ranged from 0 % to 504.2 %, with more than half of states (52.9 %, n = 27) receiving fewer dollars per opioid problem than the US average. Further, a dissimilarity index indicated that about 34.2 % of funding (~$202.3 million) would have to be reallocated to distribute funding more evenly across states. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that additional efforts are needed to more equitably distribute funds to meet the needs of states with more severe opioid problems.

Ethical Issues With Patient-Provider Interactions in an Evolving Social Media Landscape.

Billions of people use social media, including many patients, families, and providers. As social media has evolved, so have the challenges users face when choosing to share or view content. These challenges are even more complex when providers care for patients and families who post publicly about their experience in the medical system, especially when they have many followers. In this Ethics Rounds, we present a case of a resident physician caring for a medically complex child whose parent has hundreds of thousands of followers on her social media accounts where she posts details of her child's medical experience. The resident is considering viewing the parent's posts. An ethicist, a family advocate, and a pediatric resident provide commentaries. The first discusses issues of privacy, influencer culture, and decision-making. The second addresses communication and the difficulties families face as they interact with the medical system. The third discusses outdated policies and risks to the therapeutic relationship. The commentators generally agree that it is preferable for providers to discuss their concerns with patients or parents/guardians directly rather than view their social media surreptitiously. Although there may be some benefits to viewing someone's posts, such as gaining a better understanding of their life at home, it would be best for the provider to view them with the patient/parent to allow them to provide context.

Association of Selected State Policies and Requirements for Buprenorphine Treatment With Per Capita Months of Treatment.

Importance: Expanding the use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder is a critical component of the US response to the opioid crisis, but few studies have examined how state policies are associated with buprenorphine dispensing. Objective: To examine the association of 6 selected state policies with the rate of individuals receiving buprenorphine per 1000 county residents. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used 2006 to 2018 US retail pharmacy claims data for individuals dispensed buprenorphine formulations indicated for treating opioid use disorder. Exposures: State implementation of policies requiring additional education for buprenorphine prescribers beyond waiver training, continuing medical education related to substance misuse and addiction, Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine, Medicaid expansion, mandatory prescriber use of prescription drug monitoring programs, and pain management clinic laws were examined. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was buprenorphine treatment months per 1000 county residents as measured using multivariable longitudinal models. Statistical analyses were conducted from September 1, 2021, through April 30, 2022, with revised analyses conducted through February 28, 2023. Results: The mean (SD) number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 persons nationally increased steadily from 1.47 (0.04) in 2006 to 22.80 (0.55) in 2018. Requiring that buprenorphine prescribers receive additional education beyond that required to obtain the federal X-waiver was associated with significant increases in the number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in the 5 years following implementation of the requirement (from 8.51 [95% CI, 2.36-14.64] months in year 1 to 14.43 [95% CI, 2.61-26.26] months in year 5). Requiring continuing medical education for physician licensure related to substance misuse or addiction was associated with significant increases in buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in each of the 5 years following policy implementation (from 7.01 [95% CI, 3.17-10.86] months in the first year to 11.43 [95% CI, 0.61-22.25] months in the fifth year). None of the other policies examined was associated with a significant change in buprenorphine months of treatment per 1000 county residents. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of US pharmacy claims, state-mandated educational requirements beyond the initial training required to prescribe buprenorphine were associated with increased buprenorphine use over time. The findings suggest requiring education for buprenorphine prescribers and training in substance use disorder treatment for all controlled substance prescribers as an actionable proposal for increasing buprenorphine use, ultimately serving more patients. No single policy lever can ensure adequate buprenorphine supply; however, policy maker attention to the benefits of enhancing clinician education and knowledge may help to expand buprenorphine access.

Geographic variations in driving time to US mental health care, digital access to technology, and household crowdedness.

Rural residents face significant barriers in accessing mental health care, particularly as the demand for such services grows. Telemedicine has been proposed as an answer to rural gaps, but this service requires both access to appropriate technology and private space in the home to be useful. Our study documented longer travel time to mental health facilities in rural areas and greater barriers to digital devices for telemedicine access in those same areas. However, urban areas demonstrated greater household crowdedness than rural noncore areas when looking at private space within the home. Across ZIP Code Tabulation Areas located more than an estimated 30 minutes from the nearest outpatient care, 675 950 (13.1%) rural households vs 329 950 (6.4%) urban households had no broadband internet. The current Affordable Connectivity Program should target mental health-underserved communities, especially in rural America, where the scarcity of digital access compounds travel burdens to mental health care.

How Does Medicaid Managed Care Address the Needs of Beneficiaries with Opioid Use Disorders? A Deep Dive into Contract Design.

Many people who experience opioid use disorder rely on Medicaid. The high penetration of managed care systems into Medicaid raises the importance of understanding states' expectations regarding coverage, access to care, and health system performance and effectively elevates agreements between states and plans into blueprints for coverage and care. Federal law broadly regulates these structured agreements while leaving a high degree of discretion to states and plans. In this study, researchers reviewed the provisions of 15 state Medicaid managed care contract related to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment to identify whether certain elements of SUD treatment were a stated expectation and the extent to which the details of those expectations varied across states in ways that ultimately could affect evaluation of performance and health outcomes. We found that while all states include SUD treatment as a stated contract expectation, discussions around coverage of specific services and nationally recognized guidelines varied. These variations reflect key state choices regarding how much deference to afford their plans in coverage design and plan administration and reveal important differences in purchasing expectations that could carry implications for efforts to examine similarities and differences in access, quality, and health outcomes within managed care across the states.

Coverage and Prior Authorization Policies for Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Medicaid Managed Care.

Importance: Medicaid is a key policy lever to improve opioid use disorder treatment, covering approximately 40% of Americans with opioid use disorder. Although approximately 70% of Medicaid beneficiaries are enrolled in comprehensive managed care organization (MCO) plans, little is known about coverage and prior authorization (PA) policies for medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in these plans. Objective: To compare coverage and PA policies for buprenorphine, methadone, and injectable naltrexone across Medicaid MCO plans and fee-for-service (FFS) programs and across states. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed MOUD data from 266 Medicaid MCO plans and FFS programs in 38 states and the District of Columbia in 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: For each medication, the percentages of MCO plans and FFS programs that covered the medication without PA, covered the medication with PA, and did not cover the medication were calculated, as were the percentages of MCO, FFS, and all (MCO and FFS) beneficiaries who were covered with no PA, covered with PA, and not covered. In addition, MCO plan coverage and PA policies were mapped by state. Analyses were conducted from January 1 through May 31, 2022. Results: Coverage and PA policies were compared for MOUD in 266 MCO plans and 39 FFS programs, representing approximately 70 million Medicaid beneficiaries. Overall, FFS programs had more generous MOUD coverage than MCO plans. However, a higher percentage of FFS programs imposed PA for the 3 medications (47.0%) than did MCOs (35.9%). Furthermore, although most Medicaid beneficiaries were enrolled in a plan that covered MOUD, 53.2% of all MCO- and FFS-enrolled beneficiaries were subject to PA. Results also showed wide state variation in MCO plan coverage and PA policies for MOUD and the percentage of Medicaid beneficiaries subject to PA. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found variation in MOUD coverage and PA policies across Medicaid MCO plans and FFS programs and across states. Thus, Medicaid beneficiaries' access to MOUD may be heavily influenced by their state of residency and the Medicaid plan in which they are enrolled. Left unaddressed, PA policies are likely to remain a barrier to MOUD access in the nation's Medicaid programs.

Differential patterns of opioid misuse between younger and older adults - a retrospective observational study using data from South Carolina's prescription drug monitoring program.

Background: Most research on opioid misuse focuses on younger adults, yet opioid-related mortality has risen fastest among older Americans over age 55.Objectives: To assess whether there are differential patterns of opioid misuse over time between younger and older adults and whether South Carolina's mandatory Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) affected opioid misuse differentially between the two groups.Methods: We used South Carolina's Reporting and Identification Prescription Tracking System from 2010 to 2018 to calculate an opioid misuse score for 193,073 patients (sex unknown) using days' supply, morphine milligram equivalents (MME), and the numbers of unique prescribers and dispensaries. Multivariable regression was used to assess differential opioid misuse patterns by age group over time and in response to implementation of South Carolina's mandatory PDMP in 2017.Results: We found that between 2011 and 2018, older adults received 57% (p < .01) more in total MME and 25.4 days more (p < .01) in supply, but received prescriptions from fewer doctors (-0.063 doctors, p < 01) and pharmacies (-0.11 pharmacies, p < 01) per year versus younger adults. However, older adults had lower odds of receiving a high misuse score (OR 0.88, p < .01). After the 2017 legislation, misuse scores fell among younger adults (OR 0.79, p < .01) relative to 2011, but not among older adults.Conclusion: Older adults may misuse opioids differently compared to younger adults. Assessment of policies to reduce opioid misuse should take into account subgroup differences that may be masked at the population level.

Association of Medicaid Expansion With Emergency Department Visits by Medical Urgency.

Importance: Relatively little is known about the association of the Medicaid eligibility expansion under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act with emergency department (ED) visits categorized by medical urgency. Objective: To estimate the association between state Medicaid expansions and ED visits by the urgency of presenting conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Emergency Department Databases from January 2011 to December 2017 for 2 states that expanded Medicaid in 2014 (New York and Massachusetts) and 2 states that did not (Florida and Georgia). Difference-in-differences regression models were used to estimate the changes in ED visits overall and further stratified by the urgency of the conditions using an updated version of the New York University ED algorithm between the states that expanded Medicaid and those that did not, before and after the expansion. Data were analyzed between June 7 and December 12, 2021. Exposure: State-level Medicaid eligibility expansion. Main Outcomes and Measures: Emergency department visits per 1000 population overall and stratified by medical urgency of the conditions. Results: In total, 80.6 million ED visits by 26.0 million individuals were analyzed. Emergency department visits were concentrated among women (59.3%), non-Hispanic Black individuals (28.3%), non-Hispanic White individuals (47.8%), and those aged 18 to 34 years (47.5%) and 35 to 44 years (20.4%). The rates of ED visits increased by a mean of 2.4 visits in nonexpansion states and decreased by a mean of 2.2 visits in expansion states after 2014, resulting in a significant regression-adjusted decrease of 4.7 visits per 1000 population (95% CI, -7.7 to -1.5; P = .003) in expansion states. Most of this decrease was associated with decreases in ED visits by conditions classified as not emergent (-1.5 visits; 95% CI, -2.4 to -0.7; P < .001), primary care treatable (-1.1 visits; 95% CI, -1.6 to -0.5; P < .001), and potentially preventable (-0.3 visits; 95% CI, -0.5 to -0.1; P = .02). No significant changes were observed for ED visits related to injuries and conditions classified as not preventable (-1.4; 95% CI, -3.1 to 0.3; P = .10), as well as for substance use and mental health disorders (0.0; 95% CI, -0.2 to 0.2; P = .94). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that Medicaid expansion was associated with decreases in ED visits, for which decreases in ED visits for less medically emergent ED conditions may have been a factor.

The experimental method in Public Administration: lessons from replication in Psychology / O método experimental na Administração Pública: algumas lições das replicações na Psicologia

Abstract In recent years, an increasing number of studies adopting the experimental method have appeared in Public Administration journals. It has been argued that the advantage of experiments in behavioral sciences is that researchers can control contextual factors while investigating the effect of manipulations on a variable of interest. Another point is that experiments can be replicated and, thus, increase confidence in research results. However, replications are rarely undertaken, especially in the behavioral sciences. This article examines the results of the "Open Science Reproducibility Project: Psychology," which replicated 100 experiments previously published in leading Psychology journals. Based on the findings of this project, we present seven recommendations to Public Administration scholars that can improve the quality of their experiments.

Resumen En los últimos años, han aparecido en revistas de Administración Pública un número creciente de estudios que adoptan el método experimental. Se ha argumentado que la ventaja de los experimentos en las ciencias del comportamiento es que permiten a los investigadores controlar los factores contextuales mientras investigan el efecto de las manipulaciones en una variable de interés. Otro argumento es que los experimentos se pueden reproducir y, por tanto, aumentar la confianza en los resultados de la investigación. Sin embargo, las repeticiones rara vez se realizan, especialmente en las ciencias del comportamiento. En este artículo examinamos los resultados del Open Science Reproducibility Project: Psychology, que repitió 100 experimentos publicados anteriormente en las principales revistas de Psicología. Con base en los hallazgos de este proyecto, presentamos siete recomendaciones a los académicos del área de Administración Pública que pueden mejorar la calidad de sus experimentos.

Resumo: Nos últimos anos, um número crescente de estudos adotando o método experimental tem surgido em periódicos de Administração Pública. Tem-se argumentado que a vantagem dos experimentos nas ciências comportamentais é que este permite aos pesquisadores controlar os fatores contextuais enquanto investigam o efeito das manipulações em uma variável de interesse. Outro argumento é que os experimentos podem ser replicados e, assim, aumentar a confiança nos resultados da pesquisa. No entanto, replicações raramente são realizadas, especialmente nas ciências comportamentais. Neste artigo, examinamos os resultados do Open Science Reproducibility Project: Psychology, que replicou 100 experimentos publicados anteriormente nas principais revistas de Psicologia. Com base nas conclusões deste projeto, apresentamos sete recomendações a acadêmicos da área de Administração Pública que podem melhorar a qualidade de seus experimentos.

Identification and Treatment of Addiction in Medicaid Health Homes.

OBJECTIVE: Coordinated care models, such as the Medicaid health home, may be well positioned to identify and address addiction, yet little is known about the strategies health home plans use to identify and treat this condition. This study examined state requirements of active Medicaid health home plans. METHODS: Content analyses of all 35 active Medicaid health home plans were conducted to identify state requirements related to enrollment eligibility; provision of addiction screening, treatment, and prevention services; inclusion of addiction treatment professionals within the health home provider care team; and outcomes monitoring. RESULTS: Apart from health homes specifically focused on addiction, few states require health home plans to screen (44% of primary care-based and 33% of psychiatric health homes), treat (0% and 13%, respectively), and monitor treatment services for addiction (25% and 13%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Limited screening and treatment of addiction within health homes may limit the model's effectiveness in improving overall health.

Medicaid Expansion and Availability of Opioid Medications in the Specialty Substance Use Disorder Treatment System.

OBJECTIVE: Research has examined the effect of Medicaid expansion on access to physicians with buprenorphine waivers, but less attention has been paid to Medicaid's impact on opioid use disorder medication availability within the specialty substance use disorder treatment system. To address this gap in the literature, this study examined the impact of Medicaid expansion on availability of opioid medications in specialty programs. METHODS: This study used data from the National Survey of the Substance Abuse Treatment Services (2002-2017), containing all known substance use disorder treatment programs in the United States, to examine the effect of Medicaid expansion on the availability of opioid use disorder medications by treatment program ownership type (publicly owned, private for profit, and private nonprofit) among opioid treatment programs (OTPs) and non-OTPs. RESULTS: The effects of Medicaid expansion were limited to nonprofit and for-profit OTPs. Medicaid expansion was associated with 135.1% and 57.5% increases in the number of nonprofit and for-profit OTPs offering injectable naltrexone, respectively, and with a 64.4% increase in the number of nonprofit OTPs offering buprenorphine. Nonprofit and for-profit OTPs compose <10% of the treatment system, indicating that improvements in opioid use disorder treatment associated with Medicaid expansion were limited to a small share of the specialty system. CONCLUSIONS: The limited impact of Medicaid expansion on the specialty treatment system may perpetuate disparities in the accessibility and quality of opioid use disorder treatment for Medicaid enrollees and fail to alleviate high rates of opioid use disorder and opioid overdose deaths in this vulnerable population.