Rand health quarterly最新文献

Opioids play an outsized role in America's drug problems, but they also play a critically important role in medicine. Thus, they deserve special attention. Illegally manufactured opioids (such as fentanyl) are involved in a majority of U.S. drug overdoses, but the problems are broader and deeper than drug fatalities. Depending on the drugs involved, there can be myriad physical and mental health consequences associated with having a substance use disorder. And it is not just those using drugs who suffer. Substance use and related behaviors can significantly affect individuals' families, friends, employers, and wider communities. Efforts to address problems related to opioids are insufficient and sometimes contradictory. Researchers provide a nuanced assessment of America's opioid ecosystem, highlighting how leveraging system interactions can reduce addiction, overdose, suffering, and other harms. At the core of the opioid ecosystem are the individuals who use opioids and their families. Researchers also include detail on ten major components of the opioid ecosystem: substance use disorder treatment, harm reduction, medical care, the criminal legal system, illegal supply and supply control, first responders, the child welfare system, income support and homeless services, employment, and education. The primary audience for this study is policymakers, but it should also be useful for foundations looking for opportunities to create change that have often been overlooked. This study can help researchers better consider the full consequences of policy changes and help members of the media identify the dynamics of interactions that deserve more attention.

WeRise-a component of the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health's (LACDMH's) broader campaign, WhyWeRise-is an annual set of events targeting prevention and early intervention for mental health challenges. This evaluation indicates that WeRise events successfully reached groups of Los Angeles County residents particularly in need of mental health support, such as youth; mobilized them around mental health issues; and may have boosted awareness of mental health resources in the county. Perceptions of the events were very positive, with the vast majority saying that the event they attended connected them with resources and community, showed some of the strengths of their community, and empowered them to take care of their well-being.

WhyWeRise is a social marketing campaign conducted by the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health (LACDMH) to promote community engagement with mental health issues, reduce barriers to care, and increase awareness of how to seek mental health care. LACDMH has partnered with the Los Angeles Dodgers for several years to expand the reach of the campaign to the Major League Baseball team's audience and spread the WhyWeRise messages to the Dodgers' extensive Hispanic fan base-a key county demographic with attitudes toward mental illness that sometimes differ from those of other ethnic groups. The LACDMH/Dodgers campaign focused on awareness of resources and stigma reduction among Hispanic county residents. This study builds on prior RAND work and provides an evaluation of the reach of the 2022 Dodgers campaign overall and a focus on the reach to (and potential impact of outreach on) attendees of 2022 Dodger games. Results indicate that the Dodgers campaign reached a substantial percentage of Los Angeles County residents: 12 percent of adults and 27 percent of youth reported exposure to the campaign, translating to more than 800,000 adults and more than 400,000 youth reached. The campaign was effective in targeting Hispanic- or Latino-identifying residents, who made up 71 percent of youth who were campaign-exposed and 58 percent of adults exposed. In summary, there is evidence that the Dodgers campaign successfully reached Los Angeles County residents, particularly Hispanics and young adults, and that those reached were more aware of key county mental health resources.

Unlike many large employers, the U.S. military does not offer flexible spending account (FSA) options to members of the armed services and their families. Contributions to either a health care FSA (HCFSA) and/or dependent care FSA (DCFSA) reduce the amount of income subject to income and payroll taxes, thereby reducing the individual's tax liability. FSAs interact with other tax incentives in the U.S. tax code, potentially reducing or even eliminating the potential tax savings to individuals participating in an FSA. For service members to take advantage of an FSA, they must have eligible dependent care and medical expenses for themselves or their family members. For example, in the case of health care, most members would have few or no eligible out-of-pocket medical care costs associated with TRICARE. This study presents an analysis-requested by the Office of the Secretary of Defense as input for Congress-on the implications of FSA options for active-duty service members and their families that would allow pre-tax payment of dependent care expenses, insurance premiums, and out-of-pocket medical expenses. The authors evaluate the benefits and costs of FSA options to active members and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), and present an implementation plan should FSA options be implemented by DoD. They also identified legislative or administrative barriers to these options.

High-risk patients-those patients with complex health care needs who are most likely to face hospitalization or death in the following two years-are most often initially seen in the primary care setting. This small group of patients uses a disproportionate amount of care resources. Contributing to the challenges of care planning for this population is that individuals are highly heterogeneous; no two patients present the same set of symptoms, diagnoses, and challenges related to social determinants of health (SDOH). Methods for early identification of these high-risk patients-and their care needs-have raised the possibility of timely enhanced care. In this study, the authors conduct a scoping review to identify existing measures of care quality; assessment and screening guidelines; and tools that (1) assess social support, the need for caregiver support, and the need for referral to social services and (2) screen for cognitive impairment (CI). Evidence-based screening guidelines define who and what should be assessed-and how often-to enhance care quality and improve health outcomes, whereas measures permit ascertainment that this assessment is occurring. Evidence-based guidelines and measures-those that are found to lead to better health care outcomes-would be candidates for inclusion in a measure dashboard for high-risk patients in primary care settings.

The COVID-19 pandemic focused attention on long-term care facilities' need for infection-control policies that balanced community safety and individual well-being. Infection-control policies were often developed, implemented, and mandated without the input or involvement of those who are most affected: residents and their family members, administrators, and staff. This failure led to declines in residents' physical and mental health. The pandemic exposed an opportunity-and an imperative-to reimagine long-term care in a way that is centered on the needs and preferences of those who receive care, their family members, and those who provide care. This study lays the groundwork for cultural change and a move toward inclusive policy decisionmaking in long-term care through a review of infection-control policy decisions and action items proposed in guided discussions with a diversity of stakeholders-long-term care residents, direct care staff, and consumer advocates to facility administrators, clinicians, researchers, and industry organizations. Transforming the culture of long-term care to elevate the needs of residents will require attention to facility leadership, along with steps to increase inclusiveness, transparency, and accountability in decisionmaking.

Despite an overall decline in the U.S. veteran population, the number of veterans using VA health care has increased. To deliver timely care to as many eligible veterans as possible, VA supplements the care delivered by VA providers with private-sector community care, which is paid for by VA and delivered by non-VA providers. Although community care is a potentially important resource for veterans facing access barriers and long wait times for appointments, questions remain about its cost and quality. With recent expansions in veterans' eligibility for community care, accurate data are critical to policy and budget decisions and ensuring that veterans receive the high-quality health care they need.