Impact of mental health in persons living with rare disease: Findings from the AMCP Market Insights Program.

Within the framework of its Market Insights Program, AMCP convened a panel of experts representing diverse stakeholders to identify alterations to plan design and/or coverage options geared toward improving the diagnosis and treatment of mental health conditions among persons living with rare diseases (PLWRD). PLWRD face unique mental health challenges because of the misunderstood nature of their conditions, potential misdiagnosis, and limited treatment options. Economic burdens arise from increased medical needs, reliance on caregivers, and work disruptions. The interplay of these factors, along with health insurance coverage, creates a distinctive mental health landscape for PLWRD and a need to prioritize mental health support for this patient population. This article aims to (1) summarize expert perspectives on health care system challenges and areas of agreement concerning the management of mental health conditions and (2) advance payers' understanding of their role in supporting mental health care for patients with rare diseases. Addressing mental health needs of PLWRD presents multifaceted challenges. Managed care organizations play a pivotal role in supporting mental health care for PLWRD through their quality improvement initiatives and policies for coverage and reimbursement, which can impact both the rare disease treatment and mental health services PLWRD receive.

Optimizing the management of inherited blood disorders in a changing market: Findings from the AMCP Market Insights Program.

In this market insights program, AMCP brought together a panel of experts representing various stakeholders: national and regional health plans, integrated health care systems, employer benefits groups, clinical experts, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and patient advocacy organizations. The objectives were to gain insights into the current and evolving treatments in hemophilia, sickle cell disease, and ß-thalassemia; measure the effects of recently approved therapies on clinicians, payers, and patients; recognize emerging trends within the stop-loss market; address potential issues and obstacles related to monitoring and reporting outcomes; and identify concerns associated with both existing and emerging contracting and reimbursement models. This article aims to summarize expert perspectives on health care system challenges and strategies concerning the management of inherited blood disorders and to advance managed care professionals' understanding of their role in supporting care for these patients. The experts emphasized that when shaping coverage policies, a patient-centered approach is crucial, focusing on preserving organ function to maintain eligibility for future gene therapies among individuals with inherited blood disorders. These strategies, including benefit design modifications, specialized provider networks, and centralized mechanisms like registries, are vital for evaluating effectiveness, facilitating decision-making, and managing costs and risks associated with new and emerging treatment options for inherited blood disorders.

Racial and social inequities in medication use: A review of articles responding to the Journal of Managed Care + Specialty Pharmacy's Call to Action.

This article provides a summary of Viewpoint and Research articles responding to the 2020 Journal of Managed Care + Specialty Pharmacy Call to Action to address racial and social inequities in medication use. We find great heterogeneity in terms of topic, clinical condition examined, and health disparity addressed. Common recommendations across Viewpoint articles include the need to increase racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trial participants, the need to address drug affordability and health insurance literacy, and the need to incentivize providers and plans to participate in diversity initiatives, such as the better capture of information on social determinants of health (SDOH) in claims data to be able to address SDOH needs. Across research articles, we also find a large range of approaches and study designs, spanning from randomized controlled trials to surveys to observational studies. These articles identify disparities in which minoritized beneficiaries are shown to be less likely to receive medications and vaccines, as well as less likely to be adherent to medications, across a variety of conditions. Finally, we discuss Healthy People 2030 as a potential framework for future health disparity researchers.

Reducing disparities in medication use: Responding to managed care pharmacy's imperatives.

Although disparities and inequities in health status and access to health care services have long existed in our nation, the COVID-19 pandemic cast a bright spotlight on them. Communities of color and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations were disproportionally affected by the pandemic. These same populations suffer from higher prevalences of chronic illnesses, which puts them at greater risk for poor outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2. At long last, in the wake of the pandemic, the health care community began to acknowledge improving health equity as a public health imperative. In a November 2020 JMCP Viewpoints article, Dr Stephen Kogut of the University of Rhode Island College of Pharmacy presented an insightful analysis of disparities in medication use (DMU) and offered 4 suggestions on how the managed care pharmacy community can help eliminate DMU. This Viewpoints article assesses what progress has been made in addressing those imperatives and proposes further steps that should be taken. Although the managed care pharmacy community has broadly acknowledged the existence of DMU and taken steps to mitigate them, there is much work to do in examining and improving benefit design and coverage policies; collecting and reporting data on race and ethnicity and DMU; incorporating the perspectives of patients, including those representing minority populations, in benefit design and coverage policies; and addressing the challenges associated with traditional cost-sharing models. The entire managed care pharmacy community, including AMCP and other membership organizations, must remain steadfast in its efforts to improve health equity and eliminate DMU.

Most States Allow Medicaid Managed Care Plans Discretion To Restrict Substance Use Disorder Treatment Benefits.

Managed care plans, which contract with states to cover three-quarters of Medicaid enrollees, play a crucial role in addressing the drug epidemic in the United States. However, substance use disorder benefits vary across Medicaid managed care plans, and it is unclear what role states play in regulating their activities. To address this question, we surveyed thirty-three states and Washington, D.C., regarding their substance use disorder treatment coverage and utilization management requirements for Medicaid managed care plans in 2021. Most states mandated coverage of common forms of substance use disorder treatment and prohibited annual maximums and enrollee cost sharing in managed care. Fewer than one-third of states forbade managed care plans from imposing prior authorization for each treatment service. For most treatment medications, fewer than two-thirds of states prohibited prior authorization, drug testing, "fail first," or psychosocial therapy requirements in managed care. Our findings suggest that many states give managed care plans broad discretion to impose requirements on covered substance use disorder treatments, which may affect access to lifesaving care.

Overlap In Carriers And Networks In Medicaid And The Individual Marketplaces.

As people lose Medicaid because of the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency, many states will route former Medicaid managed care enrollees into Affordable Care Act Marketplace coverage with the same carrier. In 2021, 52.1 percent of Medicaid managed care enrollees were enrolled by a carrier that also had a plan on the Marketplace in the same county.

Beneficiary Experience of Care by Level of Integration in Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans.

Importance: Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs) are private managed care plans designed to promote Medicare and Medicaid integration for full-benefit, dually eligible beneficiaries. Currently, the highest level of D-SNP integration occurs in plans with exclusively aligned enrollment (EAE). Objective: To compare patient experience of care, out-of-pocket spending, and satisfaction among dually enrolled Medicaid beneficiaries in D-SNPs with EAE, those in D-SNPs without EAE, and those with traditional Medicare. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included respondents to a mail survey fielded to a stratified random sample of full-benefit, community-dwelling, dual-eligible Medicaid beneficiaries who qualified for receipt of home and community-based services in the Virginia Medicaid Commonwealth Coordinated Care Plus program between March and October 2022. Exposure: Enrollment in a D-SNP with EAE or a D-SNP without EAE vs traditional Medicare. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were self-reported measures of access and delays in receiving plan approvals, out-of-pocket spending, and satisfaction with health plans' customer service and choice of primary care and specialist physicians. Results: Of 7200 surveys sent, 2226 were completed (response rate, 30.9%). The analytic sample consisted of 1913 Medicaid beneficiaries with nonmissing data on covariates (mean [SD] age, 70.8 [15.6] years; 1367 [71.5%] female). Of these, 583 (30.5%) were enrolled in D-SNPs with EAE, 757 (39.6%) in D-SNPs without EAE, and 573 (30.0%) in traditional Medicare. Compared with respondents enrolled in D-SNPs without EAE, those in D-SNPs with the highest level of integration (EAE) were 6.77 percentage points (95% CI, 8.81-12.66 percentage points) more likely to report being treated with courtesy and respect and 5.83 percentage points (95% CI, 0.21-11.46 percentage points) more likely to know who to call when they had a health problem. No statistically significant differences were found between members in either type of D-SNP and between those in D-SNPs and traditional Medicare in terms of their difficulty accessing care, delays in care, and satisfaction with care coordination and physician choice. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found some benefits of integrating administrative processes under Medicare and Medicaid but suggests that care coordination and access improvements under full integration require additional time and/or efforts to achieve.

Incentives and Operations of Medicaid Managed Care Plans in New York State: Implications for Procurement Design and Market Evolution.

Several states are considering competitive procurement to help shape Medicaid managed care markets. In New York state, the focus of our study, regulators propose contracts that reward quality improvement and simplify state administration by rewarding plans that operate across several of the state's 62 counties. This case analysis uses novel regulatory data from New York state, obtained via public records request, to examine incentives underlying Medicaid markets and help inform contracting design. The data report plan enrollment by county and plan spending across administrative activities for all 16 Medicaid plans in New York state for 2018. We examine the counties in which plans operate, profitability, and administrative resource allocation. We compare outcomes by tertile of plan profitability, measured as net income per member-month. Plan profitability ranged widely, with the most profitable plan realizing nearly $30 per member-month while the least profitable 5 plans realized net negative earnings. Operational differences across plan profitability emerged most clearly in administrative spending. The most profitable plans reported greater spending on salaries overall and for executive management, and taxes, while the least profitable plans spent more on operational functions including utilization management/ quality improvement, claims processing, and informational systems. We observe modest differences in county rurality and little in geographic breadth. Procurement design that rewards capacity-building in key administrative functions might impact market evolution, given that on average, highly profitable firms spent less on these activities in New York's Medicaid managed care market in 2018.

Medicaid Managed Care and Pediatric Dental Emergency Department Visits.

Importance: Millions of economically disadvantaged children depend on Medicaid for dental care, with states differing in whether they deliver these benefits using fee-for-service or capitated managed care payment models. However, there is limited research examining the association between managed care and the accessibility of dental services. Objective: To estimate the association between the adoption of managed care for dental services in Florida's Medicaid program and nontraumatic dental emergency department visits and associated charges. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used an event-study difference-in-differences design, leveraging Florida Medicaid's staggered adoption of managed care to examine its association with pediatric nontraumatic dental emergency department visits and associated charges. This study included all Florida emergency department visits from 2010 to 2014 in which the patient was 17 years or younger, the patient was a Florida resident, Medicaid paid for the visit, and a primary or secondary International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, code was used to classify a nontraumatic dental condition. Analyses were conducted between May 2023 and April 2024. Exposure: The county of residence transitioning Medicaid dental services from fee-for-service to a fully capitated managed care program managed by a dental plan. Main Outcomes and Measures: The rate of nontraumatic dental emergency department visits per 100 000 pediatric Medicaid enrollees and the associated mean charges per visit. Nontraumatic dental emergency department visits are a well-documented proxy for access to dental care. Data on emergency department visit counts came from the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration. Medicaid population denominators were derived from the American Community Survey's 5-year estimates. Results: Among the 34 414 pediatric nontraumatic dental emergency department visits that met inclusion criteria across Florida's 67 counties, the mean (SD) age of patients was 8.11 (5.28) years, and 50.8% of patients were male. Of these, 10 087 visits occurred in control counties and 24 327 in treatment counties. Control counties generally had lower rates of NTDC ED visits per 100 000 enrollees compared with treatment counties (123.5 vs 132.7). Over the first 2.5 years of implementation, the adoption of managed care was associated with an 11.3% (95% CI, 4.0%-18.4%; P = .002) increase in nontraumatic dental emergency department visits compared with pre-implementation levels. There was no evidence that the average charge per visit changed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, Florida Medicaid's adoption of managed care for pediatric dental services was associated with increased emergency department visits for children, which could be associated with decreased access to dental care.

Factors Associated with Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment Services in a Medicaid Managed Care Pediatric Population.

Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment (EPSDT) services is a Medicaid benefit for children that addresses their health problems before they become advanced, debilitating, and expensive. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of pediatric beneficiaries (newborn to younger than 21 years) enrolled in a Medicaid managed care organization to examine the factors associated with EPSDT screening services completion. We obtained 2018 administrative claims data for beneficiaries continuously enrolled for a minimum of 90 days (n=156,108). Completion of EPSDT screening services among our Medicaid managed care beneficiaries was low. Those having more emergency department visits and hospitalizations, having family medicine practitioners as primary care physicians, belonging to the racial/ethnic group Asian/Pacific Islander/Hawaiian/Alaskan Native/Native American, and 18 to younger than 21 years age group were less likely than others to complete EPSDT services. Our results provide information on segments of pediatric beneficiaries that can be targeted to increase EPSDT screening services completion.

A primer on brand-name prescription drug contracting.

Prescription drug contracting in the United States has evolved over decades from discounts provided to members of early health maintenance organization plans to rebate contracts to more complex value-based purchasing arrangements. This primer describes the history of contracting between pharmaceutical manufacturers and managed care pharmacy organizations and details the various contracting methods used today.

Evaluation of a collaborative model between managed care and affordable housing on acute care costs.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated a collaborative service model between the largest Medicaid managed care organization (MCO) in Texas, Superior HealthPlan, and the affordable housing provider Prospera Housing Community Services. STUDY DESIGN: Using a quasi-experimental 2-groups research design, we compared health care outcomes and costs between a sample of 104 participants served by the Prospera+Superior collaborative model and a group of 104 participants who had health care coverage through the Superior HealthPlan Medicaid MCO but did not live at Prospera properties (ie, Superior-only group). METHODS: Data from medical claims were analyzed to examine change in outcomes 12 months before and after implementation of the Prospera+Superior collaborative model in 2019. RESULTS: The Prospera+Superior group had a 56% lower rate of emergency department/urgent care visits and spent $2061 less in prescription costs than the Superior-only group after implementation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide needed evidence of the clinical and economic value of forming multisector collaborative models between MCOs and other community providers.

Fostering Flexibility: How Medicare Advantage Potentially Accelerated Telehealth Benefits.

In 2018, the US Congress enacted a policy permitting Medicare Advantage (MA) plans to cover telehealth services in a beneficiary's home and through audio-only means as part of the basic benefit package of services, where prior to the policy change such benefits were only allowed to be covered as a supplemental benefit. MA plans were afforded 2 years of lead time for strategizing, negotiating, and capital investment prior to the start date (January 1, 2020) of the new coverage option. Our data analysis found basic benefit telehealth was offered by plans comprising 71% of enrollment in 2020 and increased to 95% in 2021. At the same time, remote access telehealth was offered as a supplemental benefit for 69% of enrollees in 2020, a decrease of 23% compared to 2019. These efforts by MA plans may have enabled traditional Medicare (TM) to leverage an existing telehealth infrastructure as a solution to the access issues created by public health policies requiring sheltering in place and social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. The success of this MA policy prompts consideration of additional flexibility beyond the standard basic benefit package, and whether such benefits reduce costs while improving access and/or outcomes in the context of a managed care environment like MA. Subject to oversight, such flexibility could potentially improve value in MA, and facilitate future changes in TM, as appropriate.

Technology, data, people, and partnerships in addressing unmet social needs within Medicaid Managed Care.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with unmet social needs experience adverse health outcomes and are subject to greater inequities in health and social outcomes. Given the high prevalence of unmet needs among Medicaid enrollees, many Medicaid managed care organizations (MCOs) are now screening enrollees for unmet social needs and connecting them to community-based organizations (CBOs) with knowledge and resources to address identified needs. The use of screening and referral technology and data sharing are often considered key components in programs integrating health and social services. Despite this emphasis on technology and data collection, research suggests substantial barriers exist in operationalizing effective systems. METHODS: We used qualitative methods to examine cross-sector perspectives on the use of data and technology to facilitate MCO and CBO partnerships in Kentucky, a state with high Medicaid enrollment, to address enrollee social needs. We recruited participants through targeted sampling, and conducted 46 in-depth interviews with 26 representatives from all six Kentucky MCOs and 20 CBO leaders. Qualitative descriptive analysis, an inductive approach, was used to identify salient themes. RESULTS: We found that MCOs and CBOs have differing levels of need for data, varying incentives for collecting and sharing data, and differing valuations of what data can or should do. Four themes emerged from interviewees' descriptions of how they use data, including 1) to screen for patient needs, 2) to case manage, 3) to evaluate the effectiveness of programs, and 4) to partner with each other. Underlying these data use themes were areas of alignment between MCOs/CBOs, areas of incongruence, and areas of tension (both practical and ideological). The inability to interface with community partners for data privacy and ownership concerns contributes to division. Our findings suggest a disconnect between MCOs and CBOs regarding terms of their technology interfacing despite their shared mission of meeting the unmet social needs of enrollees. CONCLUSIONS: While data and technology can be used to identify enrollee needs and determine the most critical need, it is not sufficient in resolving challenges. People and relationships across sectors are vital in connecting enrollees with the community resources to resolve unmet needs.

A 30 YEAR (1991-2020) RETROSPECTIVE MORTALITY REVIEW OF GIRAFFIDS (GIRAFFA SPP. AND OKAPIA JOHNSTONI) IN MANAGED CARE.

Identifying common causes of mortality in zoo giraffe (Giraffa spp.) and okapi (Okapia johnstoni) provides an opportunity to help improve welfare and population management for these endangered species. Mortality reports from 1,024 giraffe and 95 okapi in zoos were compiled from the Species 360 Zoological Information Management Software (ZIMS) utilizing the Morbidity & Mortality Analysis tool. Thirty years of mortality reports (1991-2020) were evaluated to help identify trends and evaluate the impacts, if any, of changes over time in husbandry and management practices. The most common causes of death for giraffe from 1991 to 2015 were neonatal issues (234/845, 27.7%), trauma (213/845, 25.2%), noninfectious disease (190/845, 22.5%), and infectious disease (188/845, 22.2%). In comparison, the most common causes of mortality for giraffe from 2016 to 2020, were noninfectious disease (78/179, 43.6%), trauma (39/179, 21.8%), neonatal issues (39/179, 21.8%), and infectious disease (17/179, 9.5%). The most common cause of death for okapi from 1991 to 2015 were neonatal issues (29/64, 45.3%), infectious disease (13/64, 20.3%), noninfectious disease (11/64, 17.2%), and trauma (10/64, 15.6%). In comparison, the most common cause of death for okapi from 2016 to 2020 was noninfectious disease (15/31, 48.4%), neonatal issues (8/31, 25.8%), and infectious disease (5/31, 16.1%). The results suggest that zoo giraffids have had a relative decrease in mortality from infectious diseases in recent years, whereas death from noninfectious causes has increased significantly. Trauma-related giraffe mortalities and neonatal mortality in both giraffe and okapi, although decreasing in prevalence between time periods, continue to be important causes of death in zoos. This is the first descriptive mortality review for the Giraffidae family and provides data on potential giraffe and okapi health issues that zoos could proactively address.

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.

[Pay for performance in public directly managed healthcare centers. Part 2: The Spanish National Health System. SESPAS Report 2024]. / Evaluación del rendimiento y compensación en centros sanitarios de gestión directa. Parte 2: el Sistema Nacional de Salud. Informe SESPAS 2024.

In Spain, the compensation model for statutory health personnel is complex, heterogeneous, and more oriented to rewarding complementary functions and activities, than to paying for the actual performance in the position of employee. The various attempts to incorporate incentives have been distorted by a civil service egalitarianist culture, and weak systemic governance. External attractors (private practice, etc.) for healthcare professionals are becoming more important and neutralize many intramural incentives. There are few prospects of relevant or general changes, since the main actors involved are reforms-averse; but some environmental factors can lead to incremental improvements in employment contracts, in the information available to improve benchmarking, and in the creation of islands of good clinical governance and management. The economic scenario, increasingly concerned about inflationary trends and sustainability risks, may have a revitalizing effect of some governance and management reforms.

The value of improving insurance quality: Evidence from long-run Medicaid attrition.

The US government increasingly provides public health insurance coverage through private firms. We examine associated welfare implications for beneficiaries, using a 'revealed preference' framework based on beneficiaries' program attrition rates. Focusing on the Medicaid program in New York State, we exploit quasi-random variation in the initial assignment at birth to public versus private Medicaid based on birth weight. We find that infants assigned to private Medicaid at birth are less likely to subsequently leave Medicaid. We provide suggestive evidence that reduced attrition reflects beneficiary responses to improved program quality, rather than alternative mechanisms such as private Medicaid plans reducing re-enrollment barriers.

Are disparities in mental health care for Medicaid beneficiaries lower in managed care?

BACKGROUND: There are large and persistent racial and ethnic disparities in the use of mental health care in the United States. Medicaid managed care plans have the potential to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in use of mental health care through monitoring of need and active management of use of services across the populations they cover. This study compares racial and ethnic disparities among Medicaid beneficiaries in managed care with those not in managed care. METHODS: We compared Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled health maintenance organizations (HMOs) with those in fee-for-service (FFS) using data from the 2007-2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (N = 26,113). We specified two-part propensity score adjusted models to estimate differences in mental health related emergency department visits, hospital stays, prescription fills, and outpatient visits overall and by race/ethnicity. RESULTS: HMO enrollment was associated with lower odds of having a mental health prescription (OR = 0.86, 95 % CI 0.78-0.96) or outpatient visit (OR = 0.82 95 % CI 0.73-0.92). These differences were similar across racial and ethnic groups or larger among Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic beneficiaries than among Non-Hispanic White beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid managed care has not improved the inequitable allocation of mental health care across racial and ethnic groups. Explicit attention to monitoring of racial and ethnic differences in use of mental health care in Medicaid managed care is warranted. IMPLICATIONS: Improvement in racial and ethnic disparities in mental health care in Medicaid manage care is unlikely to occur without targeted accountability mechanisms, such as required reporting or other contracting requirements.