Milbank Quarterly最新文献

Policy Points Cell and gene therapies (CGTs) offer treatment for rare and oftentimes deadly disease, but their prices are high, and payers may seek to limit spending. Total annual costs of covering all existing and expected CGTs for the entire US population 2023-2035 to amount to less than $20 per person and concentrate in commercial and state Medicaid plans. Reinsurance fees add to expected costs. Policies that improve coverage and affordability are needed to assure patient access to CGTs.

Context: Cell and gene therapies (CGTs) offer treatment to rare and oftentimes deadly diseases. Because of their high price and uncertain clinical outcomes, US insurers commonly restrain patient access to CGTs, and these barriers may create or perpetuate existing disparities. A reconsideration of existing insurance policies to improve access and reduce disparities is currently underway. One method insurers use to support access and protect them from large, unexpected claims is the purchase of reinsurance. In exchange for an upfront per-member-per-month (PMPM) premium, the reinsurer pays the claim and rebates the insurer at the end of the contract period if there are funds leftover. However, existing reinsurance plans may not cover CGTs or charge exorbitant fees for coverage.

Methods: We simulate the incremental annual per-person reinsurer costs to cover CGTs existing or expected between 2023 and 2035 for the US population and by payer type based on previously published estimates of expected US spending on CGTs, assumed US population of 330 persons, and current CGT reinsurance fees. We illustrate our methods by estimating the incremental annual per-person costs overall payers and to state Medicaid plans of sickle cell disease-targeted CGTs.

Findings: We estimate annual incremental spending on CGTs 2023-2035 to amount to $20.4 billion, or $15.69 per person. Total annual estimated spending is expected to concentrate among commercial plans. Sickle cell-targeted CGTs add a maximum of $0.78 PMPM in costs to all payers and will concentrate within state Medicaid programs. Reinsurance fees add to expected costs.

Conclusions: Annual per-person costs to provide access to CGTs are expected to concentrate in commercial and state Medicaid plans. Policies that improve CGT coverage and affordability are needed.

Policy Points This study examines exposure to out-of-pocket (OOP) costs related to childbirth and postpartum care for those with a Medicaid-insured birth compared with those with a commercially insured birth and subsequent financial outcomes at 12 months postpartum. We find that Medicaid is highly protective against health care costs for childbirth and postpartum care relative to commercial insurance, particularly for birthing people with low income. We find persistent medical debt and worry at 12 months postpartum for Medicaid recipients who reported OOP childbirth expenses.

Context: Out-of-pocket (OOP) costs related to childbirth and postpartum care may cause financial hardship, depending on type of insurance and income.

Methods: We estimated OOP spending on childbirth and postpartum care and financial strain 1 year after birth, comparing Medicaid-insured births with commercially insured births. The Postpartum Assessment of Health Survey followed up with respondents to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System after a 2020 birth in six states and New York City. The survey included questions on health care costs and financial well-being. Our analytic sample consisted of 4,453 postpartum people, 1,544 with a Medicaid-insured birth and 2,909 with a commercially insured birth.

Findings: We observe significant financial hardship from childbirth that persists into the postpartum year, with significant differences by insurance and income. We find Medicaid is highly financially protective relative to commercial insurance; 81.4% of Medicaid-insured births were free to the patient, compared with 15.7% of commercially insured births (p < 0.001). Six of ten commercially insured births (59%) cost over $1,000 OOP. Among respondents reporting OOP costs for childbirth, we found that Medicaid enrollees are more likely to have borrowed money from friends or family to pay for childbirth (8% vs. 1%, p < 0.001) and one in five had not made any payments 1 year postpartum (26% vs. 5% of commercially insured births, p < 0.001). Among the commercially insured, those with incomes under 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL) fared worse financially than those above 200% FPL on a number of indicators, including debt in collection (33% vs. 13%, p < 0.001) and financial worry (55% vs. 34%, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: The cost of childbirth and postpartum health care results in significant and persistent financial hardship, particularly for families with lower income with commercial insurance. Medicaid offers greater protection for families with low income by offering reduced cost sharing for childbirth and postpartum health care, but even minimal cost sharing in Medicaid causes financial strain.

Policy Points A large population of incarcerated people may be eligible for prerelease and transition services under the new Medicaid Reentry Section 1115 Demonstration Opportunity. We estimated the largest relative population increases in Medicaid coverage from the opportunity may be expected in smaller and more rural states. We found that mental illness, hepatitis C, and chronic kidney disease prevalence rates were sufficiently high among incarcerated populations to likely skew overall Medicaid population prevalence of these diseases when prerelease and transition services are expanded, implying the need for planning of additional data exchange and service delivery infrastructure by state Medicaid plans.

Context: As states expand prerelease and transition services for incarcerated individuals under the Medicaid Reentry Section 1115 Demonstration Opportunity, we sought to systematically inform Medicaid state and plan administrators regarding the population size and burden of disease data available on incarcerated populations in both jails and prisons in the United States.

Methods: We analyzed data on eligibility criteria for new Medicaid prerelease and transition services based on incarceration length and health conditions across states. We estimated the potentially eligible populations in prisons and jails, considering various incarceration lengths and health status requirements. We also compared disease prevalence in the incarcerated population with that of the existing civilian Medicaid population.

Findings: We found that rural and smaller states would experience a disproportionately large proportion of their Medicaid populations to be eligible for prerelease and transition services if new Medicaid eligibility rules were broadly applied. Self-reported psychological distress was notably higher among incarcerated individuals compared with those currently on Medicaid. The prevalence rates of previously diagnosed chronic hepatitis C and kidney disease were also much higher in the incarcerated population than the existing civilian Medicaid population.

Conclusions: We estimated large volumes of potentially Medicaid-eligible entrants as coverage policy changes take effect over the coming years, particularly impacting smaller and more rural states. Our findings reveal very high disease prevalence rates among the incarcerated population subject to new Medicaid coverage, including specific chronic, infectious, and behavioral health conditions that state Medicaid programs, health plans, and providers may benefit from advanced planning to address.

Policy Points The reinstitution of pre-COVID-19 pandemic licensure regulations has impeded interstate telehealth. This has disproportionately impacted patients who live near a state border; geographically mobile patients, such as college students; and patients with rare diseases who may need care from a specialist outside their state. Several promising and feasible reforms are available, at both state and federal levels, to facilitate interstate telehealth. For example, states can offer exemptions to licensure requirements for certain types of telehealth such as follow-up care or create licensure registries that impose little reduced paperwork and fees on physicians. On the federal level, congressional interventions that mimic the Department of Veterans Affairs Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks (VA MISSION) Act of 2018 can waive provider licensing and geographic restrictions to telehealth within certain federal programs such as Medicare. Any discussion of medical licensure reform, however, must also consider the current political climate, one in which states are taking divergent stances on sensitive topics such as reproductive care, gender-affirming care, and substance use treatments.

Policy Points Earmarked tax policies for behavioral health are perceived as having positive impacts related to increasing flexible funding, suggesting benefits to expand this financing approach. Implementation challenges related to these earmarked taxes included tax base volatility that impedes long-term service delivery planning and inequities in the distribution of tax revenue. Recommendations for designing or revising earmarked tax policies include developing clear guidelines and support systems to manage the administrative aspects of earmarked tax programs, cocreating reporting and oversight structures with system and service delivery agents, and selecting revenue streams that are relatively stable across years.

Context: Over 200 cities and counties in the United States have implemented policies earmarking tax revenue for behavioral health services. This mixed-methods study was conducted with the aim of characterizing perceptions of the impacts of these earmarked tax policies, strengths and weaknesses of tax policy designs, and factors that influence decision making about how tax revenue is allocated for services.

Methods: Study data came from surveys completed by 274 officials involved in behavioral health earmarked tax policy implementation and 37 interviews with officials in a sample of jurisdictions with these taxes-California (n = 16), Washington (n = 12), Colorado (n = 6), and Iowa (n = 3). Interviews primarily explored perceptions of the advantages and drawbacks of the earmarked tax, perceptions of tax policy design, and factors influencing decisions about revenue allocation.

Findings: A total of 83% of respondents strongly agreed that it was better to have the tax than not, 73.2% strongly agreed that the tax increased flexibility to address complex behavioral health needs, and 65.1% strongly agreed that the tax increased the number of people served by evidence-based practices. Only 43.3%, however, strongly agreed that it was easy to satisfy tax-reporting requirements. Interviews revealed that the taxes enabled funding for services and implementation supports, such as training in the delivery of evidence-based practices, and supplemented mainstream funding sources (e.g., Medicaid). However, some interviewees also reported challenges related to volatility of funding, inequities in the distribution of tax revenue, and, in some cases, administratively burdensome tax reporting. Decisions about tax revenue allocation were influenced by goals such as reducing behavioral health care inequities, being responsive to community needs, addressing constraints of mainstream funding sources, and, to a lesser degree, supporting services considered to be evidence based.

Conclusions: Earmarked taxes are a promising financing strategy to improve access to, and quality of, behavioral health services by supplementing mainstream state and federal financing.

Policy Points In a recently commissioned report on solutions for eliminating racial and ethnic health care inequities entitled Ending Unequal Treatment, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine found a health workforce that is representative of the communities it serves is essential for health care equity. The Supreme Court decision to ban race-conscious admission constraints pathways toward health workforce representativeness and equity. This paper draws on the National Academies report's findings that health care workforce representativeness improves care quality, population health, and equity to discuss policy and programmatic options for various participants to promote health workforce representativeness in the context of race-conscious admissions bans.

Policy Points First, policymakers can strengthen the inherent trust-building effect of legislations on citizens by incorporating trust-building principles within health data-sharing legislations in a recognizable and comprehensive manner to explicitly signal public trust to policy implementers as one of the policy outcomes to be achieved in the implementation phase. Second, policymakers can use the proposed "public trust in health data sharing" framework as an initial guide to incorporate trust-building principles within health data-sharing legislations.

Context: Public trust is critical to both system legitimacy and the successful implementation of data-driven health initiatives. Legislations are an essential instrument for building public trust, as they can have a dual effect on trust: a passive effect by reinforcing the public perception of an active regulatory system that upholds the rule of law and an active effect as a tool for policymakers to signal trust-building actions to be undertaken during the implementation phase. However, there is limited evidence on the extent to which health data-sharing legislations contain references to trust and trust-building principles for their practical implementation.

Methods: By applying an evidence-based "public trust in health data sharing" framework, 36 legislations from the European Union (EU), Italy, France, and Switzerland on health data sharing were analyzed to assess 1) how the term "trust" is embedded in legislations, and 2) the presence and quality of trust-building principles within the selected legislations.

Findings: Nine legislations incorporated references to "trust," mainly within the explanatory memorandum and preambles of EU legislations. The most prevalent trust-building principles were "agencies of accountability" (72%) and data "security" (70%). In contrast, the principles "public information" (14%) and "time" (6%) were the least presented. Moreover, the qualitative analysis showed that the majority of the trust-building principles were implicit in the legal text, with Swiss legislations having the highest number of explicit references.

Conclusions: The limited and implicit use of "trust" and trust-building principles in EU, Italian, French, and Swiss legislation emphasizes the opportunity to raise policymakers' awareness of these principles. The proposed framework provides an initial guide for policymakers to incorporate trust-building principles within health data-sharing legislations in a recognizable and comprehensive manner. This ensures that policy implementers at various stages of the policy process can implement trust-building actions, contributing to public trust building in both European and national health data-sharing initiatives.