Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-05-13DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12701
Caroline Horrow, Aaron S Kesselheim
Policy Points With increasing public attention to cases of inaccurate and misleading laboratory-developed tests, there have been calls for regulatory reform. To protect patients from faulty laboratory tests, we need a framework that balances comprehensive test review with laboratory flexibility. The Verifying Accurate Leading-edge IVCT [In Vitro Clinical Test] Development (VALID) Act would have helped ensure laboratory test safety and validity through a much-needed expansion of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight. However, Congress did not pass the VALID Act in 2022, forcing the FDA to start the regulatory reform process on its own.
政策要点 随着公众对实验室开发的检测项目不准确和误导性案例的日益关注,要求进行监管改革的呼声越来越高。为了保护患者免受错误化验项目的伤害,我们需要一个兼顾全面化验审查和实验室灵活性的框架。体外临床试验[IVCT]开发准确领先验证法案》(VALID)本可通过扩大食品药品管理局(FDA)的监督范围来确保实验室检测的安全性和有效性。然而,国会没有在 2022 年通过《VALID 法案》,迫使 FDA 不得不自行启动监管改革进程。
{"title":"Regulating Laboratory Tests: What Framework Would Best Support Safety and Validity?","authors":"Caroline Horrow, Aaron S Kesselheim","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12701","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1468-0009.12701","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points With increasing public attention to cases of inaccurate and misleading laboratory-developed tests, there have been calls for regulatory reform. To protect patients from faulty laboratory tests, we need a framework that balances comprehensive test review with laboratory flexibility. The Verifying Accurate Leading-edge IVCT [In Vitro Clinical Test] Development (VALID) Act would have helped ensure laboratory test safety and validity through a much-needed expansion of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight. However, Congress did not pass the VALID Act in 2022, forcing the FDA to start the regulatory reform process on its own.</p>","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"558-576"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576585/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140913191","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-07-05DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12710
Yimin Ge, John A Romley, Rosalie Liccardo Pacula
Policy Points The adoption of Medicaid institutions for mental disease (IMD) exclusion waivers increases the likelihood of substance abuse treatment facilities offering mental health and substance abuse treatment for co-occurring disorders, especially in residential facilities. There are differential responses to IMD waivers based on facility ownership. For-profit substance abuse treatment facilities are responsive to the adoption of IMD substance use disorder waivers, whereas private not-for-profit and public entities are not. The response of for-profit facilities suggests that integration of substance abuse and mental health treatment for individuals in residential facilities may be cost-effective.
Context: Access to integrated care for those with co-occurring mental health (MH) and substance use disorders (SUDs) has been limited because of an exclusion in Medicaid on paying for SUD care for those in institutions for mental disease (IMDs). Starting in 2015, the federal government encouraged states to pursue waivers of this exclusion, and by the end of 2020, 28 states had done so. It is unclear what impact these waivers have had on the availability of care for co-occurring disorders and the characteristics of any facilities that expanded care because of them.
Methods: Using data from the National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services, we estimate a two-stage residual inclusion model including time- and state-fixed effects to examine the effect of state IMD SUD waivers on the percentage of facilities offering co-occurring MH and SUD treatment, overall and for residential facilities specifically. Separate analyses are conducted by facility ownership type.
Findings: Results show that the adoption of an IMD SUD waiver is associated with 1.068 greater odds of that state having facilities offering co-occurring MH and substance abuse (SA) treatment a year or more later. The adoption of a waiver increases the odds of a state's residential treatment facility offering co-occurring MH and SA treatment by 1.129 a year or more later. Additionally, the results suggest 1.163 higher odds of offering co-occurring MH/SA treatment in private for-profit SA facilities in states that adopt an IMD SUD waiver while suggesting no significant impact on offered services by private not-for-profit or public facilities.
Conclusions: Our study findings suggest that Medicaid IMD waivers are at least somewhat effective at impacting the population targeted by the policy. Importantly, we find that there are differential responses to these IMD waivers based on facility ownership, providing new evidence for the literature on the role of ownership in the provision of health care.
政策要点 采用医疗补助精神疾病机构(IMD)排除豁免后,药物滥用治疗机构更有可能提供精神健 康和药物滥用并发症的治疗,尤其是在住宿设施中。根据设施所有权的不同,对精神病院豁免的反应也不同。营利性药物滥用治疗机构对 IMD 药物使用障碍豁免的采用反应积极,而非营利性私营机构和公共机构则不然。营利性机构的反应表明,对住院机构中的个人进行药物滥用和精神健康综合治疗可能具有成本效益:由于医疗补助计划(Medicaid)不为精神疾病机构(IMDs)中的药物滥用和精神疾病并发症(SUDs)患者支付药物滥用和精神疾病并发症治疗费用,因此,精神疾病和药物滥用并发症患者获得综合治疗的机会一直受到限制。从 2015 年开始,联邦政府鼓励各州争取豁免这一规定,到 2020 年底,已有 28 个州这样做了。目前还不清楚这些豁免对共伴性失调症护理的可用性产生了什么影响,也不清楚因豁免而扩大护理范围的任何机构的特征:利用《全国药物滥用治疗服务调查》(National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services)的数据,我们估算了一个包含时间和州固定效应的两阶段残差包含模型,以研究州立 IMD SUD 特例对提供精神健康和 SUD 并发症治疗的机构比例的影响,包括总体影响和对住院机构的具体影响。根据设施所有权类型分别进行了分析:结果显示,采用 IMD SUD 特例与该州一年或一年以上后提供精神疾病和药物滥用(SA)并发症治疗的机构的几率增加 1.068 有关。一年或更长时间后,采用豁免方案会使一个州的住院治疗机构提供精神疾病和药物滥用并发症治疗的几率增加 1.129。此外,研究结果表明,在采用 IMD SUD 特例的州,私立营利性 SA 机构提供 MH/SA 并发症治疗的几率提高了 1.163,而私立非营利性或公立机构提供的服务则没有受到显著影响:我们的研究结果表明,医疗补助 IMD 减免政策至少在一定程度上有效地影响了政策所针对的人群。重要的是,我们发现根据设施所有权的不同,对这些 IMD 减免政策的反应也不同,这为有关所有权在医疗服务提供中的作用的文献提供了新的证据。
{"title":"The Impact of Medicaid Institutions for Mental Disease Exclusion Waivers on the Availability of Substance Abuse Treatment Services and the Varying Effect by Ownership Type.","authors":"Yimin Ge, John A Romley, Rosalie Liccardo Pacula","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12710","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1468-0009.12710","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points The adoption of Medicaid institutions for mental disease (IMD) exclusion waivers increases the likelihood of substance abuse treatment facilities offering mental health and substance abuse treatment for co-occurring disorders, especially in residential facilities. There are differential responses to IMD waivers based on facility ownership. For-profit substance abuse treatment facilities are responsive to the adoption of IMD substance use disorder waivers, whereas private not-for-profit and public entities are not. The response of for-profit facilities suggests that integration of substance abuse and mental health treatment for individuals in residential facilities may be cost-effective.</p><p><strong>Context: </strong>Access to integrated care for those with co-occurring mental health (MH) and substance use disorders (SUDs) has been limited because of an exclusion in Medicaid on paying for SUD care for those in institutions for mental disease (IMDs). Starting in 2015, the federal government encouraged states to pursue waivers of this exclusion, and by the end of 2020, 28 states had done so. It is unclear what impact these waivers have had on the availability of care for co-occurring disorders and the characteristics of any facilities that expanded care because of them.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using data from the National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services, we estimate a two-stage residual inclusion model including time- and state-fixed effects to examine the effect of state IMD SUD waivers on the percentage of facilities offering co-occurring MH and SUD treatment, overall and for residential facilities specifically. Separate analyses are conducted by facility ownership type.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Results show that the adoption of an IMD SUD waiver is associated with 1.068 greater odds of that state having facilities offering co-occurring MH and substance abuse (SA) treatment a year or more later. The adoption of a waiver increases the odds of a state's residential treatment facility offering co-occurring MH and SA treatment by 1.129 a year or more later. Additionally, the results suggest 1.163 higher odds of offering co-occurring MH/SA treatment in private for-profit SA facilities in states that adopt an IMD SUD waiver while suggesting no significant impact on offered services by private not-for-profit or public facilities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study findings suggest that Medicaid IMD waivers are at least somewhat effective at impacting the population targeted by the policy. Importantly, we find that there are differential responses to these IMD waivers based on facility ownership, providing new evidence for the literature on the role of ownership in the provision of health care.</p>","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"669-691"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576589/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141535774","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-06-20DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12708
Kanika Arora, Douglas A Wolf
Policy Points We examined the effect of the Paid Family Leave policy (PFL) and Paid Sick Leave policy (PSL) on care provision to older parents. We found that PSL adoption led to an increase in care provision, an effect mainly attributable to respondents in states/periods when PSL and PFL were concurrently offered. Some of the strongest effects were found among women and unpartnered adult children. PFL adoption by itself was not associated with care provision to parents except when PFL also offered job protection. Paid leave policies have heterogeneous effects on eldercare and their design and implementation should be carefully considered.
Context: Family caregivers play a critical role in the American long-term care system. However, care responsibilities are known to potentially conflict with paid work, as about half of family caregivers are employed. The federal Family and Medical Leave Act passed by the US Congress in 1993 provides a nonuniversal, unpaid work benefit. In response, several states and localities have adopted the Paid Family Leave policy (PFL) and Paid Sick Leave policy (PSL) over the last two decades. Our objective is to examine the effect of these policies on the probability of personal care provision to older parents.
Methods: This study used longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study (1998-2020). Difference-in-differences regression models were estimated to examine associations between state- and local-level PFL and PSL mandates and personal care provision to older parents. We analyzed heterogeneous effects by the type of paid leave exposure (provision of job protection with PFL and availability of both PSL and PFL [with or without job protection] concurrently). We also examined results for different population subgroups.
Findings: PSL implementation was associated with a four- to five-percentage point increase in the probability of personal care provision. These effects were mainly attributable to respondents in states/periods when PSL and PFL were concurrently offered. The strongest effects were found among adult children who were employed at baseline, women, younger, unpartnered, and college educated. PFL implementation by itself was not associated with care provision to parents except when the policy also offered job protection.
Conclusions: Paid leave policies have heterogeneous impacts on personal care provision, potentially owing to differences in program features, variation in caregiving needs, and respondent characteristics. Overall, the results indicate that offering paid sick leave and paid family leave, when combined with job protection, could support potential family caregivers.
{"title":"Paid Leave Mandates and Care for Older Parents.","authors":"Kanika Arora, Douglas A Wolf","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12708","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1468-0009.12708","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points We examined the effect of the Paid Family Leave policy (PFL) and Paid Sick Leave policy (PSL) on care provision to older parents. We found that PSL adoption led to an increase in care provision, an effect mainly attributable to respondents in states/periods when PSL and PFL were concurrently offered. Some of the strongest effects were found among women and unpartnered adult children. PFL adoption by itself was not associated with care provision to parents except when PFL also offered job protection. Paid leave policies have heterogeneous effects on eldercare and their design and implementation should be carefully considered.</p><p><strong>Context: </strong>Family caregivers play a critical role in the American long-term care system. However, care responsibilities are known to potentially conflict with paid work, as about half of family caregivers are employed. The federal Family and Medical Leave Act passed by the US Congress in 1993 provides a nonuniversal, unpaid work benefit. In response, several states and localities have adopted the Paid Family Leave policy (PFL) and Paid Sick Leave policy (PSL) over the last two decades. Our objective is to examine the effect of these policies on the probability of personal care provision to older parents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study (1998-2020). Difference-in-differences regression models were estimated to examine associations between state- and local-level PFL and PSL mandates and personal care provision to older parents. We analyzed heterogeneous effects by the type of paid leave exposure (provision of job protection with PFL and availability of both PSL and PFL [with or without job protection] concurrently). We also examined results for different population subgroups.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>PSL implementation was associated with a four- to five-percentage point increase in the probability of personal care provision. These effects were mainly attributable to respondents in states/periods when PSL and PFL were concurrently offered. The strongest effects were found among adult children who were employed at baseline, women, younger, unpartnered, and college educated. PFL implementation by itself was not associated with care provision to parents except when the policy also offered job protection.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Paid leave policies have heterogeneous impacts on personal care provision, potentially owing to differences in program features, variation in caregiving needs, and respondent characteristics. Overall, the results indicate that offering paid sick leave and paid family leave, when combined with job protection, could support potential family caregivers.</p>","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"732-764"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576588/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141428089","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-06-26DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12702
Pierre-Henri Bréchat, Angela Fagerlin, Anthony Ariotti, Alexis Pearl Lee, Smitha Warrier, Nancy Gregovich, Pascal Briot, Rajendu Srivastava
Policy Points Improving health systems requires the pursuit of both patient-centered care and a supportive environment for health professionals. This Quadruple Aim includes improving the experience of care, improving the health of populations, reducing per capita costs of care, and improving the work life of the care providers. We propose expanding a recently defined Fifth Aim of health equity to include health democracy, ensuring that that the health and health care wants, needs, and responsibilities of populations are being met, and also propose adding a Sixth Aim of preserving and improving the health of the environment to create the best health possible. As social tension and environmental changes continue to impact the structure of our society, this "Hexagonal Aim" might provide additional ethical guiderails as we set our health care goals to foster sustainable and improved population health.
{"title":"A Hexagonal Aim as a Driver of Change for Health Care and Health Insurance Systems.","authors":"Pierre-Henri Bréchat, Angela Fagerlin, Anthony Ariotti, Alexis Pearl Lee, Smitha Warrier, Nancy Gregovich, Pascal Briot, Rajendu Srivastava","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12702","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1468-0009.12702","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points Improving health systems requires the pursuit of both patient-centered care and a supportive environment for health professionals. This Quadruple Aim includes improving the experience of care, improving the health of populations, reducing per capita costs of care, and improving the work life of the care providers. We propose expanding a recently defined Fifth Aim of health equity to include health democracy, ensuring that that the health and health care wants, needs, and responsibilities of populations are being met, and also propose adding a Sixth Aim of preserving and improving the health of the environment to create the best health possible. As social tension and environmental changes continue to impact the structure of our society, this \"Hexagonal Aim\" might provide additional ethical guiderails as we set our health care goals to foster sustainable and improved population health.</p>","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"544-557"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576580/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141460322","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-05-10DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12699
Larisa Svirsky, Dana Howard, Martin Fried, Nathan Richards, Nicole Thomas, Patricia J Zettler
Policy Points Opioid treatment agreements (OTAs) are controversial because of the lack of evidence that their use reduces opioid-related harms and the potential risks they pose of stigmatizing patients and undermining the clinician-patient relationship. Even so, their use is now required in most jurisdictions, and their use is influencing the outcomes of civil and criminal lawsuits. More research is needed to evaluate how OTAs are implemented given existing requirements. If additional research does not resolve the current level of uncertainty regarding OTA benefits, then policymakers in jurisdictions where they are required should consider eliminating OTA mandates or providing flexibility in the legal requirements to make room for clinicians and health care institutions to implement best practices.
Context: Opioid treatment agreements (OTAs) are documents that clinicians present to patients when prescribing opioids that describe the risks of opioids and specify requirements that patients must meet to receive their medication. Notwithstanding a lack of evidence that OTAs effectively mitigate opioids' risks, professional organizations recommend that they be implemented, and jurisdictions increasingly require them. We sought to identify the jurisdictions that require OTAs, how OTAs might affect the outcomes of lawsuits that arise when things go wrong, and instances in which the law permits flexibility for clinicians and health care institutions to adopt best practices.
Methods: We surveyed the laws and regulations of all 50 states and the District of Columbia to identify which jurisdictions require the use of OTAs, the circumstances in which OTA use is mandatory, and the terms OTAs must include (if any). We also surveyed criminal and civil judicial decisions in which OTAs were discussed as evidence on which a court relied to make its decision to determine how OTA use influences litigation outcomes.
Findings: Results show that a slight majority (27) of jurisdictions now require OTAs. With one exception, the jurisdictions' requirements for OTA use are triggered at least in part by long-term prescribing. There is otherwise substantial variation and flexibility within OTA requirements. Results also show that even in jurisdictions where OTA use is not required by statute or regulation, OTA use can inform courts' reasoning in lawsuits involving patients or clinicians. Sometimes, but not always, OTA use legally protects clinicians from liability.
Conclusions: Our results show that OTA use is entwined with legal obligations in various ways. Clinicians and health care institutions should identify ways for OTAs to enhance clinician-patient relationships and patient care within the bounds of relevant legal requirements and risks.
政策要点 阿片类药物治疗协议(OTAs)备受争议,因为缺乏证据表明使用该协议可以减少与阿片类药物相关的伤害,而且该协议可能会给患者带来耻辱,破坏临床医生与患者之间的关系。尽管如此,目前大多数司法管辖区都要求使用这种药物,而且这种药物的使用正在影响民事和刑事诉讼的结果。需要进行更多的研究,以评估在现有要求下如何实施 OTA。如果更多的研究不能解决目前关于 OTA 益处的不确定性,那么要求使用 OTA 的司法管辖区的政策制定者应考虑取消 OTA 强制规定,或在法律要求中提供灵活性,为临床医生和医疗机构实施最佳实践留出空间:阿片类药物治疗协议(OTA)是临床医生在开具阿片类药物处方时向患者出示的文件,其中描述了阿片类药物的风险,并明确了患者接受药物治疗必须满足的要求。尽管缺乏证据表明 OTA 能有效降低阿片类药物的风险,但专业组织建议实施 OTA,而且越来越多的司法管辖区要求实施 OTA。我们试图确定哪些司法管辖区要求实施 OTA,OTA 如何影响出错时的诉讼结果,以及在哪些情况下法律允许临床医生和医疗机构灵活采用最佳实践:我们调查了美国所有 50 个州和哥伦比亚特区的法律法规,以确定哪些司法管辖区要求使用 OTA,在哪些情况下必须使用 OTA,以及 OTA 必须包括哪些条款(如有)。我们还调查了刑事和民事司法判决书,在这些判决书中,法院将 OTA 作为做出判决所依赖的证据进行了讨论,以确定 OTA 的使用如何影响诉讼结果:结果显示,略占多数的司法管辖区(27 个)现在都要求使用 OTA。除一个辖区外,其他辖区对使用 OTA 的要求至少部分是由长期处方引发的。除此之外,在 OTA 要求方面还有很大的差异和灵活性。结果还显示,即使在法规或条例没有要求使用 OTA 的司法管辖区,在涉及患者或临床医生的诉讼中,OTA 的使用也能为法院的推理提供参考。有时,但并非总是如此,OTA 的使用可以从法律上保护临床医生免于承担责任:我们的研究结果表明,OTA 的使用以各种方式与法律义务纠缠在一起。临床医生和医疗机构应在相关法律要求和风险的范围内确定使用 OTA 的方法,以加强临床医生与患者之间的关系和对患者的护理。
{"title":"The Legal Landscape for Opioid Treatment Agreements.","authors":"Larisa Svirsky, Dana Howard, Martin Fried, Nathan Richards, Nicole Thomas, Patricia J Zettler","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12699","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1468-0009.12699","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points Opioid treatment agreements (OTAs) are controversial because of the lack of evidence that their use reduces opioid-related harms and the potential risks they pose of stigmatizing patients and undermining the clinician-patient relationship. Even so, their use is now required in most jurisdictions, and their use is influencing the outcomes of civil and criminal lawsuits. More research is needed to evaluate how OTAs are implemented given existing requirements. If additional research does not resolve the current level of uncertainty regarding OTA benefits, then policymakers in jurisdictions where they are required should consider eliminating OTA mandates or providing flexibility in the legal requirements to make room for clinicians and health care institutions to implement best practices.</p><p><strong>Context: </strong>Opioid treatment agreements (OTAs) are documents that clinicians present to patients when prescribing opioids that describe the risks of opioids and specify requirements that patients must meet to receive their medication. Notwithstanding a lack of evidence that OTAs effectively mitigate opioids' risks, professional organizations recommend that they be implemented, and jurisdictions increasingly require them. We sought to identify the jurisdictions that require OTAs, how OTAs might affect the outcomes of lawsuits that arise when things go wrong, and instances in which the law permits flexibility for clinicians and health care institutions to adopt best practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We surveyed the laws and regulations of all 50 states and the District of Columbia to identify which jurisdictions require the use of OTAs, the circumstances in which OTA use is mandatory, and the terms OTAs must include (if any). We also surveyed criminal and civil judicial decisions in which OTAs were discussed as evidence on which a court relied to make its decision to determine how OTA use influences litigation outcomes.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Results show that a slight majority (27) of jurisdictions now require OTAs. With one exception, the jurisdictions' requirements for OTA use are triggered at least in part by long-term prescribing. There is otherwise substantial variation and flexibility within OTA requirements. Results also show that even in jurisdictions where OTA use is not required by statute or regulation, OTA use can inform courts' reasoning in lawsuits involving patients or clinicians. Sometimes, but not always, OTA use legally protects clinicians from liability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results show that OTA use is entwined with legal obligations in various ways. Clinicians and health care institutions should identify ways for OTAs to enhance clinician-patient relationships and patient care within the bounds of relevant legal requirements and risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"632-668"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576586/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140899290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-06-07DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12703
Beena Bhuiyan Khan, Victoria Gemme, Ethan Chupp, Aparna Higgins, Corinna Sorenson
Policy Points State Medicaid experience with value-based payment (VBP) arrangements for medical products is still relatively limited, and states face a number of challenges in designing and implementing such arrangements, particularly because of the resource-intensive nature of arrangements and data needed to support measurement of desired outcomes. A number of success factors and opportunities to support VBP arrangement efforts were identified through this study, including leveraging established venues or processes for collaboration with manufacturers, engaging external and internal partners in VBP efforts to bolster capabilities, acquiring access to new data sources, and utilizing annual renegotiation of contracts to allow for adjustments.
Context: To date, uptake of value-based payment (VBP) arrangements for medical products and knowledge of their design and impact have been mainly concentrated among private payers. Interest and activity are expanding to Medicaid; however, their experiences and approaches to VBP arrangements for medical products are not well characterized.
Methods: This study sought to characterize the use of VBP arrangements for medical products among state Medicaid agencies through the use of a two-staged, mixed-methods approach. A survey and semistructured interviews were conducted to gain an understanding of state experiences with VBP arrangements for medical products. The survey and interviews were directed at senior leaders from nine states through the survey, with respondents from seven of these states additionally participating in the semistructured interviews.
Findings: Although experience with VBP arrangements for medical products among states varied, there were similarities across their motivations and general processes or phases employed in their design and implementation. States collectively identified a number of significant challenges to VBP arrangements, such as manufacturer engagement, outcomes measurement, and the time, expertise, and resources required to design and implement them. We outline a range of strategies to help address these gaps and make it easier for states to pursue VBP arrangements, including more direct engagement from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, state-to-state peer learning and collaboration, data infrastructure and sharing, and additional research to inform fit-for-purpose VBP arrangement approaches.
Conclusions: Findings from this study suggest that it may be easier for states to pursue VBP arrangements for medical products if there is greater clarity on processes employed that support design and implementation as well as effective strategies to address common challenges associated with contract negotiations. As states gain more experience, it will be important to monitor the design and implementation of common VBP arrangements to assess impact on the Medicaid program and th
{"title":"Experiences and Interest in Value-Based Payment Arrangements for Medical Products Among Medicaid Agencies: An Exploratory Analysis.","authors":"Beena Bhuiyan Khan, Victoria Gemme, Ethan Chupp, Aparna Higgins, Corinna Sorenson","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12703","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1468-0009.12703","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points State Medicaid experience with value-based payment (VBP) arrangements for medical products is still relatively limited, and states face a number of challenges in designing and implementing such arrangements, particularly because of the resource-intensive nature of arrangements and data needed to support measurement of desired outcomes. A number of success factors and opportunities to support VBP arrangement efforts were identified through this study, including leveraging established venues or processes for collaboration with manufacturers, engaging external and internal partners in VBP efforts to bolster capabilities, acquiring access to new data sources, and utilizing annual renegotiation of contracts to allow for adjustments.</p><p><strong>Context: </strong>To date, uptake of value-based payment (VBP) arrangements for medical products and knowledge of their design and impact have been mainly concentrated among private payers. Interest and activity are expanding to Medicaid; however, their experiences and approaches to VBP arrangements for medical products are not well characterized.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study sought to characterize the use of VBP arrangements for medical products among state Medicaid agencies through the use of a two-staged, mixed-methods approach. A survey and semistructured interviews were conducted to gain an understanding of state experiences with VBP arrangements for medical products. The survey and interviews were directed at senior leaders from nine states through the survey, with respondents from seven of these states additionally participating in the semistructured interviews.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Although experience with VBP arrangements for medical products among states varied, there were similarities across their motivations and general processes or phases employed in their design and implementation. States collectively identified a number of significant challenges to VBP arrangements, such as manufacturer engagement, outcomes measurement, and the time, expertise, and resources required to design and implement them. We outline a range of strategies to help address these gaps and make it easier for states to pursue VBP arrangements, including more direct engagement from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, state-to-state peer learning and collaboration, data infrastructure and sharing, and additional research to inform fit-for-purpose VBP arrangement approaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings from this study suggest that it may be easier for states to pursue VBP arrangements for medical products if there is greater clarity on processes employed that support design and implementation as well as effective strategies to address common challenges associated with contract negotiations. As states gain more experience, it will be important to monitor the design and implementation of common VBP arrangements to assess impact on the Medicaid program and th","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"713-731"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576581/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141285166","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-08-08DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12712
Thelma C Hurd, Fay Cobb Payton, Darryl B Hood
Policy Points Artificial intelligence (AI) is disruptively innovating health care and surpassing our ability to define its boundaries and roles in health care and regulate its application in legal and ethical ways. Significant progress has been made in governance in the United States and the European Union. It is incumbent on developers, end users, the public, providers, health care systems, and policymakers to collaboratively ensure that we adopt a national AI health strategy that realizes the Quintuple Aim; minimizes race-based medicine; prioritizes transparency, equity, and algorithmic vigilance; and integrates the patient and community voices throughout all aspects of AI development and deployment.
{"title":"Targeting Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence Algorithms in Health Care to Reduce Bias and Improve Population Health.","authors":"Thelma C Hurd, Fay Cobb Payton, Darryl B Hood","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12712","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1468-0009.12712","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points Artificial intelligence (AI) is disruptively innovating health care and surpassing our ability to define its boundaries and roles in health care and regulate its application in legal and ethical ways. Significant progress has been made in governance in the United States and the European Union. It is incumbent on developers, end users, the public, providers, health care systems, and policymakers to collaboratively ensure that we adopt a national AI health strategy that realizes the Quintuple Aim; minimizes race-based medicine; prioritizes transparency, equity, and algorithmic vigilance; and integrates the patient and community voices throughout all aspects of AI development and deployment.</p>","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"577-604"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576591/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141908127","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-06-12DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12707
Caitlin Murphy, Anne Rossier Markus, Rebecca Morris, Kay Johnson, Sara Rosenbaum, Laurie C Zephyrin
Policy Points Maternal health is influenced by the quality and accessibility of care before, during, and after pregnancy. Nationwide, Medicaid covers nearly one in two births and uses managed care as a central means for carrying out these responsibilities. Thus, managed care plays a fundamental role in assuring timely, equitable, quality care and improving maternal health outcomes. A close review of managed care contracts makes evident that the absence of a national set of maternal health standards has caused challenges in setting expectations for managed care performance. State Medicaid agencies adopt a variety of approaches and underlying philosophies for contracting.
Context: Managed care is how Medicaid agencies principally furnish maternity care. For this reason, the contracts that Medicaid agencies enter into with managed care organizations have attracted strong interest as a means of improving maternal health access, quality, and equity. However, limited research has documented the extent to which states use these agreements to set binding expectations across the maternal health continuum and how states approach the task of maternal health contracting.
Methods: To explore maternal health contracting within Medicaid Managed Care, this study took a three-phase, sequential approach: (1) an extensive literature review to identify clinical guidelines and expert recommendations regarding maternal health "best practices" for people with elevated health and social needs, (2) a review of the managed care contracts in use across 40 states and Washington, DC, to determine the extent to which they incorporate these best practices, and (3) interviews conducted with four state Medicaid agencies to better understand how states approach maternal health when developing their contracts.
Findings: The evidence on maternal health best practices reveals nearly 60 "best practices," although the literature review also underscored the extent to which these recommendations are fragmented across numerous professional bodies and government agencies and are thus difficult for Medicaid agencies to ascertain. The contracts themselves reflect an approach to the maternal health continuum in a fragmented and incomplete way. Thematic analysis of interviews with state Medicaid agencies revealed three key approaches to contracting for maternity care: an "organic" approach, an "intentional" approach, and an approach "grounded" in state strategy.
Conclusions: The absence of comprehensive, integrated guidelines reflecting the full maternal health continuum likely complicates the contracting task and contributes to incomplete, ambiguous contracts. A major step would be the development of a "best practices tool" that helps state Medicaid agencies translate evidence into comprehensive, clear contracting expectations.
{"title":"The Spectrum of State Approaches to Medicaid Maternity Care Contracting.","authors":"Caitlin Murphy, Anne Rossier Markus, Rebecca Morris, Kay Johnson, Sara Rosenbaum, Laurie C Zephyrin","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12707","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1468-0009.12707","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points Maternal health is influenced by the quality and accessibility of care before, during, and after pregnancy. Nationwide, Medicaid covers nearly one in two births and uses managed care as a central means for carrying out these responsibilities. Thus, managed care plays a fundamental role in assuring timely, equitable, quality care and improving maternal health outcomes. A close review of managed care contracts makes evident that the absence of a national set of maternal health standards has caused challenges in setting expectations for managed care performance. State Medicaid agencies adopt a variety of approaches and underlying philosophies for contracting.</p><p><strong>Context: </strong>Managed care is how Medicaid agencies principally furnish maternity care. For this reason, the contracts that Medicaid agencies enter into with managed care organizations have attracted strong interest as a means of improving maternal health access, quality, and equity. However, limited research has documented the extent to which states use these agreements to set binding expectations across the maternal health continuum and how states approach the task of maternal health contracting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To explore maternal health contracting within Medicaid Managed Care, this study took a three-phase, sequential approach: (1) an extensive literature review to identify clinical guidelines and expert recommendations regarding maternal health \"best practices\" for people with elevated health and social needs, (2) a review of the managed care contracts in use across 40 states and Washington, DC, to determine the extent to which they incorporate these best practices, and (3) interviews conducted with four state Medicaid agencies to better understand how states approach maternal health when developing their contracts.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The evidence on maternal health best practices reveals nearly 60 \"best practices,\" although the literature review also underscored the extent to which these recommendations are fragmented across numerous professional bodies and government agencies and are thus difficult for Medicaid agencies to ascertain. The contracts themselves reflect an approach to the maternal health continuum in a fragmented and incomplete way. Thematic analysis of interviews with state Medicaid agencies revealed three key approaches to contracting for maternity care: an \"organic\" approach, an \"intentional\" approach, and an approach \"grounded\" in state strategy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The absence of comprehensive, integrated guidelines reflecting the full maternal health continuum likely complicates the contracting task and contributes to incomplete, ambiguous contracts. A major step would be the development of a \"best practices tool\" that helps state Medicaid agencies translate evidence into comprehensive, clear contracting expectations.</p>","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"692-712"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576584/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141312127","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-07-10DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12709
Katrina M Walsemann, Heide Jackson, Emily Abbruzzi, Jennifer A Ailshire
Policy Points Education-cognition research overlooks the role of education quality in shaping cognitive function at midlife and older ages, even though quality may be more responsive to federal and state investment in public schooling than attainment. For older US adults who attended school during the early to mid-20th century, the quality of US education improved considerably as federal and state investment increased. Ensuring access to high-quality primary and secondary education may protect against poor cognitive function at midlife and older ages, particularly among Black Americans and persons who complete less education. It may also play an important role in reducing health inequities.
Context: Although educational attainment is consistently associated with better cognitive function among older adults, we know little about how education quality is related to cognitive function. This is a key gap in the literature given that the quality of US education improved considerably during the early to mid-20th century as state and federal investment increased. We posit that growing up in states with higher-quality education systems may protect against poor cognitive function, particularly among Black adults and adults who completed fewer years of school.
Methods: We used prospective data on cognitive function from the Health and Retirement Study linked to historical data on state investment in public schools, restricting our sample to non-Hispanic White and Black adults born between 1914 and 1959 (19,096 White adults and 4,625 Black adults). Using race-stratified linear mixed models, we considered if state-level education quality was associated with level and decline in cognitive function and if these patterns differed by years of schooling and race.
Findings: Residing in states with higher-resourced education systems during childhood was associated with better cognitive function, particularly among those who completed less than 12 years of schooling, regardless of race. For White adults, higher-resourced state education systems were associated with higher scores of total cognitive function and episodic memory, but there were diminishing returns as resources increased to very high levels. For Black adults, the relationship between state education resources and cognitive function varied by age with positive associations in midlife and generally null or negative associations at the oldest ages.
Conclusions: Federal and state investment in public schools may provide students with opportunities to develop important cognitive resources during schooling that translate into better cognitive function in later life, especially among marginalized populations.
{"title":"State-Level Education Quality and Trajectories of Cognitive Function by Race and Educational Attainment.","authors":"Katrina M Walsemann, Heide Jackson, Emily Abbruzzi, Jennifer A Ailshire","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12709","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1468-0009.12709","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points Education-cognition research overlooks the role of education quality in shaping cognitive function at midlife and older ages, even though quality may be more responsive to federal and state investment in public schooling than attainment. For older US adults who attended school during the early to mid-20th century, the quality of US education improved considerably as federal and state investment increased. Ensuring access to high-quality primary and secondary education may protect against poor cognitive function at midlife and older ages, particularly among Black Americans and persons who complete less education. It may also play an important role in reducing health inequities.</p><p><strong>Context: </strong>Although educational attainment is consistently associated with better cognitive function among older adults, we know little about how education quality is related to cognitive function. This is a key gap in the literature given that the quality of US education improved considerably during the early to mid-20th century as state and federal investment increased. We posit that growing up in states with higher-quality education systems may protect against poor cognitive function, particularly among Black adults and adults who completed fewer years of school.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used prospective data on cognitive function from the Health and Retirement Study linked to historical data on state investment in public schools, restricting our sample to non-Hispanic White and Black adults born between 1914 and 1959 (19,096 White adults and 4,625 Black adults). Using race-stratified linear mixed models, we considered if state-level education quality was associated with level and decline in cognitive function and if these patterns differed by years of schooling and race.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Residing in states with higher-resourced education systems during childhood was associated with better cognitive function, particularly among those who completed less than 12 years of schooling, regardless of race. For White adults, higher-resourced state education systems were associated with higher scores of total cognitive function and episodic memory, but there were diminishing returns as resources increased to very high levels. For Black adults, the relationship between state education resources and cognitive function varied by age with positive associations in midlife and generally null or negative associations at the oldest ages.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Federal and state investment in public schools may provide students with opportunities to develop important cognitive resources during schooling that translate into better cognitive function in later life, especially among marginalized populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"765-821"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576583/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141565008","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-06-11DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12705
Tasleem J Padamsee, Courtni Montgomery, Stefan Kienzle, Jeremy B Straughn, Andrea Elmore, Deborah L Fulton-Kehoe, Beryl Schulman, Thomas M Wickizer, Gary M Franklin
<p><p>Policy Points Workers' compensation agencies have instituted opioid review policies to reduce unsafe prescribing. Providers reported more limited and cautious prescribing than in the past; both patients and providers reported collaborative pain-management relationships and satisfactory pain control for patients. Despite the fears articulated by pharmaceutical companies and patient advocates, opioid review programs have not generally resulted in unmanaged pain or reduced function in patients, anger or resistance from patients or providers, or damage to patient-provider relationships or clinical autonomy. Other insurance providers with broad physician networks may want to consider similar quality-improvement efforts to support safe opioid prescribing.</p><p><strong>Context: </strong>Unsafe prescribing practices have been among the central causes of improper reception of opioids, unsafe use, and overdose in the United States. Workers' compensation agencies in Washington and Ohio have implemented opioid review programs (ORPs)-a form of quality improvement based on utilization review-to curb unsafe prescribing. Evidence suggests that such regulations indeed reduce unsafe prescribing, but pharmaceutical companies and patient advocates have raised concerns about negative impacts that could also result. This study explores whether three core sets of problems have actually come to pass: (1) unmanaged pain or reduced function among patients, (2) anger or resistance to ORPs from patients or providers, and (3) damage to patient-provider relationships or clinical autonomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with 48 patients (21 from Washington, 27 from Ohio) and 32 providers (18 from Washington, 14 from Ohio) who were purposively sampled to represent a range of injury and practice types. Thematic coding was conducted with codebooks developed using both inductive and deductive approaches.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The consequences of opioid regulations have been generally positive: providers report more limited prescribing and a focus on multimodal pain control; patients report satisfactory pain control and recovery alongside collaborative relationships with providers. Participants attribute these patterns to a broad environment of opioid caution; they do not generally perceive workers' compensation policies as distinctly impactful. Both patients and providers comment frequently on the difficult aspects of interacting with workers' compensation agencies; effects of these range from simple inconvenience to delays in care, unmanaged pain, and reduced potential for physical recovery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In general, the three types of feared negative impacts have not come to pass for either patients or providers. Although interacting with workers' compensation agencies involves difficulties typical of interacting with other insurers, opioid controls seem to have generally positive effects
{"title":"Impacts of State-Level Opioid Review Programs on Injured Workers and Their Health Care Providers: A Qualitative Study in Washington and Ohio.","authors":"Tasleem J Padamsee, Courtni Montgomery, Stefan Kienzle, Jeremy B Straughn, Andrea Elmore, Deborah L Fulton-Kehoe, Beryl Schulman, Thomas M Wickizer, Gary M Franklin","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12705","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1468-0009.12705","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points Workers' compensation agencies have instituted opioid review policies to reduce unsafe prescribing. Providers reported more limited and cautious prescribing than in the past; both patients and providers reported collaborative pain-management relationships and satisfactory pain control for patients. Despite the fears articulated by pharmaceutical companies and patient advocates, opioid review programs have not generally resulted in unmanaged pain or reduced function in patients, anger or resistance from patients or providers, or damage to patient-provider relationships or clinical autonomy. Other insurance providers with broad physician networks may want to consider similar quality-improvement efforts to support safe opioid prescribing.</p><p><strong>Context: </strong>Unsafe prescribing practices have been among the central causes of improper reception of opioids, unsafe use, and overdose in the United States. Workers' compensation agencies in Washington and Ohio have implemented opioid review programs (ORPs)-a form of quality improvement based on utilization review-to curb unsafe prescribing. Evidence suggests that such regulations indeed reduce unsafe prescribing, but pharmaceutical companies and patient advocates have raised concerns about negative impacts that could also result. This study explores whether three core sets of problems have actually come to pass: (1) unmanaged pain or reduced function among patients, (2) anger or resistance to ORPs from patients or providers, and (3) damage to patient-provider relationships or clinical autonomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with 48 patients (21 from Washington, 27 from Ohio) and 32 providers (18 from Washington, 14 from Ohio) who were purposively sampled to represent a range of injury and practice types. Thematic coding was conducted with codebooks developed using both inductive and deductive approaches.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The consequences of opioid regulations have been generally positive: providers report more limited prescribing and a focus on multimodal pain control; patients report satisfactory pain control and recovery alongside collaborative relationships with providers. Participants attribute these patterns to a broad environment of opioid caution; they do not generally perceive workers' compensation policies as distinctly impactful. Both patients and providers comment frequently on the difficult aspects of interacting with workers' compensation agencies; effects of these range from simple inconvenience to delays in care, unmanaged pain, and reduced potential for physical recovery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In general, the three types of feared negative impacts have not come to pass for either patients or providers. Although interacting with workers' compensation agencies involves difficulties typical of interacting with other insurers, opioid controls seem to have generally positive effects ","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"605-631"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576590/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141307277","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}