Health affairs scholar最新文献

Marginalized racial and ethnic groups and rural and lower income communities experience significant cancer inequities. Blood-based multi-cancer early detection tests (MCEDs) provide a simple and less invasive method to screen for multiple cancers at a single access point and may be an important strategy to reduce cancer inequities. In this qualitative study, we explored barriers and facilitators to MCED adoption among communities facing health care access barriers in Alaska, California, and Oregon. We used reflexive thematic analysis to analyze general barriers to cancer screening, MCED-specific barriers, facilitators of MCED adoption, and MCED communication strategies. We found barriers and facilitators to MCED adoption across 4 levels of the social-ecological model: (1) individual, (2) interpersonal, (3) health care system, and (4) societal. These included adverse psychological impacts, positive perceptions of MCEDs, information and knowledge about cancer screening, the quality of the patient-provider relationship, a lack of health care system trustworthiness, logistical accessibility, patient supports, and financial accessibility. Optimal MCED communication strategies included information spread through the medical environment and the community. These findings underscore the importance of understanding and addressing the multilevel factors that may influence MCED adoption among communities facing health care access barriers to advance health equity.

Cannabis legalization continues to spread, with 38 states permitting the use of medical marijuana, 22 states permitting recreational use, and growing political momentum for federal legalization. The last time the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was tasked with regulating a new product occurred with 2009's Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which created the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP). Thus, the time is ripe to review the history of CTP with particular attention to difficulties the nascent center faced in regulating novel products such as e-cigarettes or electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). Specifically, FDA has struggled with defining its scope of authority, determining which review pathway(s) to utilize, and promulgating timely and transparent product standards for marketing authorization-all of which offer lessons for improving cannabis product oversight and enforcement.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government and many state governments instituted expanded coverage for telehealth (TH) services and since have maintained it. Using data from the Minnesota All Payer Claims Database and publicly available data sources, we examined TH use among commercially insured and Medicare Advantage (MA) patients in Minnesota. In 2022, 30.4% of commercially insured patients and 24.4% of MA patients used TH services. Living in a metropolitan area, an area with a high proportion of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color residents, having greater disease burden, and being younger were associated with a greater likelihood of using TH. Living in an area with limited broadband access reduced the likelihood of TH use. Two patient subgroups more likely to use TH-younger patients in metropolitan areas and high-risk patients with depression-received a similar proportion of ambulatory visits via TH.

The prior authorization (PA) process consumes time and money on the part of patients, providers, and payers. While some research shows substantial possible savings in the PA process, identifying what different groups can do is not as well known. Thus, organizations have struggled to capture this opportunity. To understand different perspectives on PA burden and receptivity to possible changes in the PA process, we surveyed 1005 patients, 1010 provider employees, and 115 private payer employees. Patients reported the longest perceived wait times but indicated the highest perceived approval rates and lowest perceived burden. The relatively low burden for patients is because most do not have to engage in PA directly. Provider respondents reported spending time equivalent of more than 100 000 full-time registered nurses per year on prior authorization. Artificial intelligence (AI) represents a possible solution: 65% of private payer respondents reported that their organizations planned to incorporate AI into the process in the next 3 to 5 years. Intended adoption by provider respondents is much smaller (11%). Private payer respondents cited cybersecurity concerns and a lack of technical infrastructure as barriers; provider respondents cited lack of budget and limited trust in the technology.

As the Medicare Advantage (MA) program grows in enrollment and costs, there has been increasing concern that federal payments to MA plans exceed necessary levels. Estimates suggest that, in 2023, MA plans were paid up to 6% more per enrollee than would have been spent had that beneficiary instead enrolled in traditional Medicare (TM). We evaluated the factors driving this overpayment, characterizing trends in MA benchmarks, bids, and total payments from pre-Affordable Care Act (pre-ACA) levels through 2023. We found that, despite an overall decrease in risk-adjusted bids relative to average risk-adjusted TM enrollee costs, total payments to plans have modestly increased since 2015. Decomposing these trends into various factors in the MA payment formula, we found that divergent trends in benchmarks and bids are, in part, due to the increasing influence of payment adjustments, such as quartile spending adjustments, quality bonus payments, and risk adjustment. Our results suggest that current payment rules have contributed to overpayments and policy reform may be necessary.

Equitable access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care is key to reducing inequities in SRH outcomes. Publicly funded family-planning services are an important source of SRH care for people with social risk factors that impede their access. This study aimed to create a new index (Local Social Inequity in SRH [LSI-SRH]) to measure community-level risk of adverse SRH outcomes based on social determinants of health (SDoH). We evaluated the validity of the LSI-SRH scores in predicting adverse SRH outcomes and the need for publicly funded services. The data were drawn from more than 200 publicly available SDoH and SRH measures, including availability and potential need for publicly supported family planning from the Guttmacher Institute. The sample included 72 999 Census tracts (99.9%) in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. We used random forest regression to predict the LSI-SRH scores; 42 indicators were retained in the final model. The LSI-SRH model explained 81% of variance in the composite SRH outcome, outperforming 3 general SDoH indices. LSI-SRH scores could be a useful for measuring community-level SRH risk and guiding site placement and resource allocation.