Medicare's integration imperative: A policy analysis of care coordination barriers for older adults with co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Evans F. Kyei PhD, MSN, RN , Mercy N. Mumba PhD, RN, FAAN
{"title":"Medicare's integration imperative: A policy analysis of care coordination barriers for older adults with co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders","authors":"Evans F. Kyei PhD, MSN, RN ,&nbsp;Mercy N. Mumba PhD, RN, FAAN","doi":"10.1016/j.outlook.2025.102550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Medicare serves 65 million Americans aged 65+, with 3.7% having co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders. Despite evidence supporting integrated care, fragmented Medicare policies result in higher readmissions and lower treatment completion rates for this vulnerable population.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To analyze Medicare policies using the Integration Continuum Framework and identify nursing practice and policy implications for older adults with dual diagnoses.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Systematic review of Medicare policy documents (2010–2023) analyzed through the Integration Continuum Framework across clinical, financial, and administrative dimensions.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>Medicare policies predominantly reflect minimal integration (Levels 1–2). Only 17.3% of beneficiaries with co-occurring disorders receive coordinated care, requiring visits to 3.7 providers across 2.8 facilities compared to 1.9 providers at 1.6 facilities for single diagnoses. The Collaborative Care Model achieves Level 3 integration but excludes substance use disorders, limiting comprehensive care.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Medicare's fragmented approach creates significant coordination challenges. Nurses are uniquely positioned to bridge these gaps through screening protocols, care navigation, and leadership initiatives. Policy reforms including expanding the Collaborative Care Model to include substance use disorders, eliminating same-day billing restrictions, and streamlining documentation represent pathways toward comprehensive Level 4–5 integration, ultimately improving outcomes for older adults with dual diagnoses.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54705,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Outlook","volume":"73 6","pages":"Article 102550"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Outlook","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0029655425002039","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Medicare serves 65 million Americans aged 65+, with 3.7% having co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders. Despite evidence supporting integrated care, fragmented Medicare policies result in higher readmissions and lower treatment completion rates for this vulnerable population.

Purpose

To analyze Medicare policies using the Integration Continuum Framework and identify nursing practice and policy implications for older adults with dual diagnoses.

Methods

Systematic review of Medicare policy documents (2010–2023) analyzed through the Integration Continuum Framework across clinical, financial, and administrative dimensions.

Discussion

Medicare policies predominantly reflect minimal integration (Levels 1–2). Only 17.3% of beneficiaries with co-occurring disorders receive coordinated care, requiring visits to 3.7 providers across 2.8 facilities compared to 1.9 providers at 1.6 facilities for single diagnoses. The Collaborative Care Model achieves Level 3 integration but excludes substance use disorders, limiting comprehensive care.

Conclusion

Medicare's fragmented approach creates significant coordination challenges. Nurses are uniquely positioned to bridge these gaps through screening protocols, care navigation, and leadership initiatives. Policy reforms including expanding the Collaborative Care Model to include substance use disorders, eliminating same-day billing restrictions, and streamlining documentation represent pathways toward comprehensive Level 4–5 integration, ultimately improving outcomes for older adults with dual diagnoses.
医疗保险的整合势在必行:对同时发生精神健康和物质使用障碍的老年人护理协调障碍的政策分析
医疗保险为6500万65岁以上的美国人提供服务,其中3.7%的人同时患有精神健康和物质使用障碍。尽管有证据支持综合护理,但支离破碎的医疗保险政策导致这一弱势群体的再入院率更高,治疗完成率更低。目的利用整合连续体框架分析医疗保险政策,并确定双重诊断老年人的护理实践和政策含义。方法通过临床、财务和行政层面的整合连续体框架对2010-2023年医疗保险政策文件进行系统回顾分析。医疗保险政策主要反映最小的整合(1-2级)。只有17.3%的同时患有疾病的受益人接受了协调治疗,需要在2.8个设施中访问3.7个提供者,而在1.6个设施中访问1.9个提供者进行单一诊断。协作护理模式达到了3级整合,但排除了物质使用障碍,限制了综合护理。结论医疗保险的碎片化方式带来了重大的协调挑战。护士具有独特的优势,可以通过筛查协议、护理导航和领导举措来弥合这些差距。政策改革,包括扩大协作护理模式,将物质使用障碍纳入其中,消除当天计费限制,简化文件,代表了全面整合4-5级的途径,最终改善双重诊断的老年人的结果。
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
Nursing Outlook
Nursing Outlook 医学-护理
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
7.00%
发文量
109
审稿时长
25 days
期刊介绍: Nursing Outlook, a bimonthly journal, provides innovative ideas for nursing leaders through peer-reviewed articles and timely reports. Each issue examines current issues and trends in nursing practice, education, and research, offering progressive solutions to the challenges facing the profession. Nursing Outlook is the official journal of the American Academy of Nursing and the Council for the Advancement of Nursing Science and supports their mission to serve the public and the nursing profession by advancing health policy and practice through the generation, synthesis, and dissemination of nursing knowledge. The journal is included in MEDLINE, CINAHL and the Journal Citation Reports published by Clarivate Analytics.
×
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