Persistence of provider directory inaccuracies after the No Surprises Act.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES American Journal of Managed Care Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.37765/ajmc.2024.89627
Simon F Haeder, Jane M Zhu
{"title":"Persistence of provider directory inaccuracies after the No Surprises Act.","authors":"Simon F Haeder, Jane M Zhu","doi":"10.37765/ajmc.2024.89627","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Provider directory inaccuracies have important implications for care navigation and access as well as ongoing regulatory efforts. We assessed the extent to which identified provider directory inaccuracies persisted across 7 specialties (cardiology, dermatology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, neurology, obstetrics-gynecology, primary care) and 5 carriers in the Pennsylvania Affordable Care Act insurance marketplace.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A secret shopper survey recontacted inaccurately listed providers (N = 1802) between 403 and 574 days after they were identified in an earlier secret shopper survey.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Descriptive analyses, with tests of proportion and t tests to assess whether differences across carriers, specialties, and geographic locations were statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1802 inaccurate provider listings, 451 (25.0%) had been removed at follow-up, 966 providers (53.6%) were successfully contacted, and 385 providers (21.4%) could not be reached. Of the recontacted providers, 240 (13.3%) were listed accurately at follow-up and 726 (40.3%) were listed with various inaccuracies, including 31.0% (n = 558) with inaccurate contact information, 11.2% (n = 201) listed under the wrong specialty, and 1.9% (n = 34) erroneously listed as being in network despite being out of network. We found substantial differences across carriers and specialties but not by rurality. Inaccuracies also were less likely to persist in the state's 2 metropolitan areas. Among inaccurate provider listings, on average, 540 days (median, 544 days) had passed between the initial and subsequent contacts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A large number of provider directory inaccuracies persist well beyond the 90-day expectation mandated by federal regulations, raising substantial concerns about compliance. These inaccuracies may impose substantial barriers to patient access and may render existing assessments of network adequacy ineffective.</p>","PeriodicalId":50808,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Managed Care","volume":"30 11","pages":"584-588"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Managed Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37765/ajmc.2024.89627","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Provider directory inaccuracies have important implications for care navigation and access as well as ongoing regulatory efforts. We assessed the extent to which identified provider directory inaccuracies persisted across 7 specialties (cardiology, dermatology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, neurology, obstetrics-gynecology, primary care) and 5 carriers in the Pennsylvania Affordable Care Act insurance marketplace.

Study design: A secret shopper survey recontacted inaccurately listed providers (N = 1802) between 403 and 574 days after they were identified in an earlier secret shopper survey.

Methods: Descriptive analyses, with tests of proportion and t tests to assess whether differences across carriers, specialties, and geographic locations were statistically significant.

Results: Of 1802 inaccurate provider listings, 451 (25.0%) had been removed at follow-up, 966 providers (53.6%) were successfully contacted, and 385 providers (21.4%) could not be reached. Of the recontacted providers, 240 (13.3%) were listed accurately at follow-up and 726 (40.3%) were listed with various inaccuracies, including 31.0% (n = 558) with inaccurate contact information, 11.2% (n = 201) listed under the wrong specialty, and 1.9% (n = 34) erroneously listed as being in network despite being out of network. We found substantial differences across carriers and specialties but not by rurality. Inaccuracies also were less likely to persist in the state's 2 metropolitan areas. Among inaccurate provider listings, on average, 540 days (median, 544 days) had passed between the initial and subsequent contacts.

Conclusions: A large number of provider directory inaccuracies persist well beyond the 90-day expectation mandated by federal regulations, raising substantial concerns about compliance. These inaccuracies may impose substantial barriers to patient access and may render existing assessments of network adequacy ineffective.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
无意外法案》颁布后,医疗服务提供者名录的不准确性依然存在。
目的:医疗服务提供者目录的不准确性对医疗服务导航和获取以及正在进行的监管工作具有重要影响。我们评估了宾夕法尼亚州平价医疗法案保险市场中 7 个专科(心脏病学、皮肤病学、内分泌学、肠胃病学、神经病学、妇产科学、初级保健)和 5 个承保人已确认的医疗服务提供者目录不准确的持续程度:秘密购物者调查:在早先的秘密购物者调查中发现名单不准确的医疗服务提供者(N = 1802)后的 403 至 574 天内,再次与这些医疗服务提供者取得联系:描述性分析、比例检验和 t 检验,以评估不同承保人、专科和地理位置之间的差异是否具有统计学意义:在 1802 个不准确的医疗服务提供者列表中,有 451 个(25.0%)在随访时被删除,966 个(53.6%)成功联系到了医疗服务提供者,385 个(21.4%)无法联系到医疗服务提供者。在重新取得联系的医疗服务提供者中,240 名(13.3%)在随访时被准确列出,726 名(40.3%)在列出时有各种不准确之处,包括 31.0%(n = 558)的联系信息不准确,11.2%(n = 201)列在错误的专科下,以及 1.9%(n = 34)被错误地列为网络内,尽管不在网络内。我们发现不同承保人和专科之间存在很大差异,但不同地区之间的差异不大。在该州的两个大都市地区,不准确的情况也较少发生。在不准确的医疗服务提供者列表中,初次联系与后续联系之间平均相隔 540 天(中位数为 544 天):大量医疗服务提供者名录不准确的情况持续时间远远超过了联邦法规规定的 90 天,这引起了人们对合规性的极大关注。这些不准确性可能会严重阻碍患者就医,并可能使现有的网络充分性评估失效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Managed Care
American Journal of Managed Care 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
177
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Managed Care is an independent, peer-reviewed publication dedicated to disseminating clinical information to managed care physicians, clinical decision makers, and other healthcare professionals. Its aim is to stimulate scientific communication in the ever-evolving field of managed care. The American Journal of Managed Care addresses a broad range of issues relevant to clinical decision making in a cost-constrained environment and examines the impact of clinical, management, and policy interventions and programs on healthcare and economic outcomes.
期刊最新文献
Association between screening for suspected COVID-19 cases and outcomes of patients revisiting the emergency department. Cancellations in primary care in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System. Collaboration to transition members to preferred formulary dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitor. Effects of individualized nurse-led care plans on olaparib treatment duration. High-intensity home-based rehabilitation in a Medicare accountable care organization.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1