Clinical and Administrative Perspectives on Prior Authorization for Residential Substance Use Disorder Treatment: A Qualitative Analysis.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Rebecca Wallis, Lindsay Allen, Stephen M Davis, Herb Linn, Anh Ngo, Yilin Cai, Carrie Speck, Thomas Bias
{"title":"Clinical and Administrative Perspectives on Prior Authorization for Residential Substance Use Disorder Treatment: A Qualitative Analysis.","authors":"Rebecca Wallis, Lindsay Allen, Stephen M Davis, Herb Linn, Anh Ngo, Yilin Cai, Carrie Speck, Thomas Bias","doi":"10.1007/s11414-025-09956-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective of this study was to describe the clinical experiences associated with billing for short-term residential care for substance use disorder (SUD) under a Medicaid managed care organization (MCO) payment structure requiring prior authorization. The authors conducted a qualitative analysis of focus group data collected from residential adult services (RAS) facilities staff in West Virginia between 2020 and 2022. These primary data were derived from 17 semi-structured focus groups across 11 distinct RAS facilities, which included 28 administrators, 23 clinicians, and 10 peer recovery support specialists, and were recorded and transcribed before being coded. A phenomenological thematic analysis was employed using data describing reported experiences of RAS staff members billing MCOs under the 1115 Medicaid SUD Waiver. Two main themes arose related to billing MCOs for residential treatment. First, providers felt powerless in their roles as their focus moved from clinical to administrative due to the administrative burden of prior authorizations. Second, providers felt that the shorter lengths of stay for patients that resulted from the prior authorization requirements reduced the quality of care they could provide and that the low quality of care increased the risk of relapse among patients. Thus, MCOs' utilization of prior authorization as a cost management tool may create barriers for providers to fulfill their clinical roles and provide high-quality care. More research is needed to investigate the prior authorization process from the perspective of MCOs and to quantify the effects of prior authorization on patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":49040,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-025-09956-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of this study was to describe the clinical experiences associated with billing for short-term residential care for substance use disorder (SUD) under a Medicaid managed care organization (MCO) payment structure requiring prior authorization. The authors conducted a qualitative analysis of focus group data collected from residential adult services (RAS) facilities staff in West Virginia between 2020 and 2022. These primary data were derived from 17 semi-structured focus groups across 11 distinct RAS facilities, which included 28 administrators, 23 clinicians, and 10 peer recovery support specialists, and were recorded and transcribed before being coded. A phenomenological thematic analysis was employed using data describing reported experiences of RAS staff members billing MCOs under the 1115 Medicaid SUD Waiver. Two main themes arose related to billing MCOs for residential treatment. First, providers felt powerless in their roles as their focus moved from clinical to administrative due to the administrative burden of prior authorizations. Second, providers felt that the shorter lengths of stay for patients that resulted from the prior authorization requirements reduced the quality of care they could provide and that the low quality of care increased the risk of relapse among patients. Thus, MCOs' utilization of prior authorization as a cost management tool may create barriers for providers to fulfill their clinical roles and provide high-quality care. More research is needed to investigate the prior authorization process from the perspective of MCOs and to quantify the effects of prior authorization on patient outcomes.

住院药物使用障碍治疗的临床和行政视角:定性分析。
本研究的目的是描述在医疗补助管理医疗组织(MCO)支付结构下需要事先授权的物质使用障碍(SUD)短期住宿护理计费的临床经验。作者对2020年至2022年期间从西弗吉尼亚州住宅成人服务(RAS)设施工作人员收集的焦点小组数据进行了定性分析。这些原始数据来自11个不同的RAS机构的17个半结构化焦点小组,其中包括28名管理员,23名临床医生和10名同伴康复支持专家,并在编码之前进行记录和转录。采用现象学专题分析,使用描述RAS工作人员根据1115医疗补助SUD豁免计划为mco开票的报告经验的数据。出现了两个主要主题,涉及到向mco收取住院治疗费用。首先,由于事先授权的行政负担,当他们的重点从临床转移到行政管理时,提供者感到无能为力。其次,提供者认为,由于事先授权要求,患者的住院时间缩短,降低了他们可以提供的护理质量,而且低质量的护理增加了患者复发的风险。因此,mco使用事先授权作为成本管理工具可能会对提供者履行其临床角色和提供高质量护理造成障碍。需要更多的研究从mco的角度来调查事先授权的过程,并量化事先授权对患者结局的影响。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research
Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
5.30%
发文量
51
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: This journal examines the organization, financing, delivery and outcomes of behavioral health services (i.e., alcohol, drug abuse, and mental disorders), providing practical and empirical contributions to and explaining the implications for the broader behavioral health field. Each issue includes an overview of contemporary concerns and recent developments in behavioral health policy and management through research articles, policy perspectives, commentaries, brief reports, and book reviews. This journal is the official publication of the National Council for Behavioral Health.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信