Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law最新文献_第5页

Inside "Operation Change Agent": Mallinckrodt's Plan for Capturing the Opioid Market. 变革者行动 "内幕：Mallinckrodt 公司抢占阿片类药物市场的计划。

IF 3.3 3区医学

Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI: 10.1215/03616878-11186127

Daniel Eisenkraft Klein, Ross MacKenzie, Ben Hawkins, Adam D Koon

{"title":"Inside \"Operation Change Agent\": Mallinckrodt's Plan for Capturing the Opioid Market.","authors":"Daniel Eisenkraft Klein, Ross MacKenzie, Ben Hawkins, Adam D Koon","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11186127","DOIUrl":"10.1215/03616878-11186127","url":null,"abstract":"Context: The United States is deeply entangled in an opioid crisis that began with the overuse of prescription painkillers. At the height of the prescription opioid crisis (2006-2012), Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals was the nation's largest opioid manufacturer. This study explores Mallinckrodt's strategies for expanding its market share by promoting a new opioid.Methods: The authors used the Opioid Industry Document Archive to analyze the incentive structures, sales contests, and rhetorical strategy behind Mallinckrodt's \"Operation Change Agent,\" a campaign to switch patients from OxyContin to Mallinckrodt-manufactured painkillers. A structured search of the archive in October 2022 retrieved 464 documents dated between 2010 and 2020.Findings: The authors identified a range of Mallinckrodt's sales force motivational techniques, including hypertargeting high-decile prescribers, providing free trial kits, using emotion-based language to connect with prescribers, and strategies for opposing prescriber resistance. Throughout, managers used specific incentivization metaphors to frame strategies in terms of sport and ultramarathons.Conclusions: This research on internal corporate strategy joins the growing challenges to industry claims that opioid sales teams simply educated providers and helped fill existing demand for their products. It has important implications for regulatory policy and consumer protections that can better protect health in the face of competitive market forces.","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"599-630"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139698861","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Equity Investment in Physician Practices: What's All This Brouhaha? 医生诊所的股权投资：这一切是怎么回事？

IF 3.3 3区医学

Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI: 10.1215/03616878-11186103

Mark V Pauly, Lawton Robert Burns

{"title":"Equity Investment in Physician Practices: What's All This Brouhaha?","authors":"Mark V Pauly, Lawton Robert Burns","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11186103","DOIUrl":"10.1215/03616878-11186103","url":null,"abstract":"There have been two waves of equity-based investment in physician practices. Both used a combination of public and private sources but in different mixes. The first investment wave, in the 1990s, was led by public equity and physician practice management companies, with less involvement by private equity (PE). The second investment wave followed the Affordable Care Act and was led by PE firms. It has generated concerns of wasteful spending, less cost-effective care, and initiatives harmful to patient welfare. This article compares the two waves and asks if they are parallel in important ways. It describes the similarities in the players, driving forces, acquisition dynamics, spurs to consolidation, types of equity involved, models to organize physicians, and levels of market penetration achieved. The article then tackles three unresolved issues: Does PE investment differ from other investment vehicles in concerning ways? Does PE possess capabilities that other investment vehicles lack and confer competitive advantage? Does physician practice investment offer opportunities for supernormal profits? It then discusses ongoing trends that may disrupt PE and curtail its practice investment. It concludes that past may be prologue, that is, what happened during the 1990s may well repeat, suggesting the PE threat is overblown.","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"631-664"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139698860","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Rationing by Inconvenience: How Insurance Denials Induce Administrative Burdens. 因不便而配给：保险拒绝如何造成行政负担》（How Insurance Denials Induce Administrative Burdens.

IF 3.3 3区医学

Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI: 10.1215/03616878-11186111

Miranda Yaver

{"title":"Rationing by Inconvenience: How Insurance Denials Induce Administrative Burdens.","authors":"Miranda Yaver","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11186111","DOIUrl":"10.1215/03616878-11186111","url":null,"abstract":"Context: How do health coverage denials keep care out of reach for American patients by imposing unevenly distributed administrative burdens? This article argues that the process of appealing insurers' denials imposes administrative burdens on patients inequitably, deepening the divide between those with meaningful access to health coverage and those for whom benefits are out of reach.Methods: The author conducted a nationwide survey of 1,340 US adults on their experiences with coverage denials; this was supplemented with 110 semistructured interviews with patients, physicians, and former health insurance executives.Findings: Those who were less affluent were significantly less likely than their wealthier counterparts to appeal denials of coverage. Patients who underestimated the rate at which patients prevail in insurance appeals were less likely to appeal their own denials. Black Medicaid patients and those who were in worse health were significantly less likely to prevail in the appeals they pursued. Many unappealed denials were attributable to the significant administrative burdens associated with appeal, including learning and psychological costs.Conclusions: Administrative burdens associated with appealing denials of coverage can deepen health inequities along class and race lines, suggesting a need for policy interventions to make it easier to navigate the health insurance bureaucracy.","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"539-565"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139698862","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Social Stigma and COVID-19 Vaccine Refusal in France. 法国的社会污名与拒绝接种 COVID-19 疫苗。

IF 3.3 3区医学

Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI: 10.1215/03616878-11186095

Patrick Peretti-Watel, Lisa Fressard, Benoît Giry, Pierre Verger, Jeremy Keith Ward

{"title":"Social Stigma and COVID-19 Vaccine Refusal in France.","authors":"Patrick Peretti-Watel, Lisa Fressard, Benoît Giry, Pierre Verger, Jeremy Keith Ward","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11186095","DOIUrl":"10.1215/03616878-11186095","url":null,"abstract":"Context: In 2021, French health authorities strongly promoted vaccination against COVID-19. The authors assumed that refusing this vaccine became a stigma, and they investigated potential public stigma toward unvaccinated people among the French population.Methods: A representative sample of the French adult population (N = 2,015) completed an online questionnaire in September 2021. The authors focused on participants who were already vaccinated against COVID-19 or intended to get vaccinated (N = 1,742). A cluster analysis was used to obtain contrasted attitudinal profiles, and the authors investigated associated factors with logistic regressions.Findings: Regarding attitudes toward unvaccinated people, a majority of respondents supported several pejorative statements, and a significant minority also endorsed social rejection attitudes. The authors found four contrasting attitudinal profiles: moral condemnation only (32% of respondents), full stigma (26%), no stigma (26%), and stigma rejection (16%). Early vaccination, civic motives for it, faith in science, rejection of political extremes, and being aged 65 or older were the main factors associated with stigmatizing attitudes toward unvaccinated people.Conclusions: The authors found some evidence of stigmatization toward unvaccinated people, but further research is needed, especially to investigate perceived stigmatization among them. The authors discuss their results with reference to the concept of \"folk devils\" and from a public health perspective.","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"567-598"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139698863","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Polarization, the Pandemic, and Public Trust in Health System Actors. 两极分化、大流行和公众对卫生系统行为者的信任。

IF 3.3 3区医学

Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI: 10.1215/03616878-11075562

Alessandro Del Ponte, Alan S Gerber, Eric M Patashnik

{"title":"Polarization, the Pandemic, and Public Trust in Health System Actors.","authors":"Alessandro Del Ponte, Alan S Gerber, Eric M Patashnik","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11075562","DOIUrl":"10.1215/03616878-11075562","url":null,"abstract":"Context: Public opinion on the performance of health system actors is polarized today, but it remains unclear which actors enjoy the most or the least trust among Democrats and Republicans, whether the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced how people view their own physicians, and whether doctors have retained the ability to influence public beliefs about policy issues.Methods: The authors conducted two national surveys in 2022 and 2023 to examine these questions.Findings: Democrats rated the performance of medical research scientists and public health experts during the pandemic more highly than did Republicans and independents. About three in ten Republicans said the pandemic decreased their trust in their personal doctors. Nonetheless, most Americans reported confidence in physicians. The authors replicated the findings of Gerber and colleagues (2014) to demonstrate that respondents continued to have more positive views of doctors than other professionals and that public opinion was responsive to cues from a doctors' group.Conclusions: What polarizes Democrats and Republicans today is not the question of whether medical scientists and public health experts are competent but whether the advice offered by these actors is in the public interest and should guide policy makers' decisions. Democrats strongly believe the answer to these questions is yes, while Republicans exhibit skepticism.","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"375-401"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138178024","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Impervious to Elite Influence: Americans' ACA Attitudes, 2009-2020. 不受精英影响:美国人对ACA的态度，2009-2020。

IF 3.3 3区医学

Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI: 10.1215/03616878-11066328

Daniel J Hopkins

引用次数: 0

Partisanship and the Pandemic: How and Why Americans Followed Party Cues on COVID-19. 党派关系和大流行:美国人如何以及为什么在COVID-19上遵循政党线索。

IF 3.3 3区医学

Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI: 10.1215/03616878-11066336

Isaac D Mehlhaff, Matías C Tarillo, Ayelén Vanegas, Marc J Hetherington

{"title":"Partisanship and the Pandemic: How and Why Americans Followed Party Cues on COVID-19.","authors":"Isaac D Mehlhaff, Matías C Tarillo, Ayelén Vanegas, Marc J Hetherington","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11066336","DOIUrl":"10.1215/03616878-11066336","url":null,"abstract":"The United States underperformed its potential in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors use original survey data from April 2020 to March 2022 to show that political partisanship may have contributed to this inconsistent response by distinguishing elites and citizens who took the crisis seriously from those who did not. This division was not inevitable; when the crisis began, Democrats and Republicans differed little in their viewpoints and actions relative to COVID-19. However, partisans increasingly diverged when their preferred political leaders provided them with opposing cues. The authors outline developments in party politics over the last half century that contributed to partisan division on COVID-19, most centrally an anti-expertise bias among Republicans. Accordingly, Republicans' support for mitigation measures, perception of severity of COVID-19, and support for vaccines gradually decreased after the initial outbreak. Partisan differences also showed up at the state level; Trump's vote share in 2016 was negatively associated with mask use and positively associated with COVID-19 infections. Diverging elite cues provided fertile ground for the partisan pandemic, underscoring the importance of political accountability even in an era of polarization.","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"351-374"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138178023","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Medicaid by Any Other Name? Investigating Malleability of Partisan Attitudes toward the Public Program. 医疗补助有其他名字吗?调查党派对公共项目态度的可塑性。

IF 3.3 3区医学

Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI: 10.1215/03616878-11066320

Adrianna McIntyre, Josh McCrain, Danielle Pavliv

{"title":"Medicaid by Any Other Name? Investigating Malleability of Partisan Attitudes toward the Public Program.","authors":"Adrianna McIntyre, Josh McCrain, Danielle Pavliv","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11066320","DOIUrl":"10.1215/03616878-11066320","url":null,"abstract":"Context: Medicaid is the largest health insurance program by enrollment in the United States. The program varies across states and across a variety of dimensions, including what it is called; some states use state-specific naming conventions, for example, MassHealth in Massachusetts.Methods: In a preregistered online survey experiment (N = 5,807), the authors tested whether public opinion shifted in response to the use of state-specific Medicaid program names for the provision of information about program enrollment.Findings: Replacing \"Medicaid\" with a state-specific name resulted in a large increase in the share of respondents reporting that they \"haven't heard enough to say\" how they felt about the program. This corresponded to a decrease in both favorable and unfavorable attitudes toward the program. Although confusion increased among all partisan groups, there is evidence that state-specific names may also strengthen positive perceptions among Republicans. Providing enrollment information generally did not affect public opinion.Conclusions: These findings offer suggestive evidence that state-specific program names may muddle understanding of the program as a government-provided benefit. Policy makers seeking to bolster support for the program or claim credit for expanding or improving it may be better served by simply referring to it as \"Medicaid.\"","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"451-471"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138178022","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Public Attitudes, Inequities, and Polarization in the Launch of the 988 Lifeline. 988生命线启动中的公众态度、不公平和两极分化。

IF 3.3 3区医学

Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI: 10.1215/03616878-11066312

Timothy Callaghan, Alva O Ferdinand, Matt Motta, Alee Lockman, Aakriti Shrestha, Kristin Lunz Trujillo

{"title":"Public Attitudes, Inequities, and Polarization in the Launch of the 988 Lifeline.","authors":"Timothy Callaghan, Alva O Ferdinand, Matt Motta, Alee Lockman, Aakriti Shrestha, Kristin Lunz Trujillo","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11066312","DOIUrl":"10.1215/03616878-11066312","url":null,"abstract":"Context: To address the considerable burden of mental health need in the United States, Congress passed the National Suicide Hotline Designation Act in 2020. The act rebranded the national suicide prevention lifeline as 988, a three-digit number akin to 911 for individuals to call in the case of a mental health emergency. Surprisingly little is known about American attitudes toward this new lifeline.Methods: The authors use a demographically representative survey of 5,482 US adults conducted June 24-28, 2022, to examine the influence of mental health status, partisan identification, and demographic characteristics on public awareness of the new 988 lifeline, public support for the lifeline, and intention to use it.Findings: The authors find that while only a quarter of Americans are aware of the lifeline, support for the 988 lifeline is widespread, with more than 75% of Americans indicating they would be likely to use the new number if needed. The authors identify key disparities in awareness, support, and intended use, with Republicans, individuals with low socioeconomic status, and Blacks less supportive of the 988 lifeline and in some cases less likely to use it.Conclusions: The results point to the need for additional interventions that increase public awareness of 988 and reduce disparities in program knowledge, support, and intention to use.","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"473-493"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138178026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Polarized Perspectives on Health Equity: Results from a Nationally Representative Survey on US Public Perceptions of COVID-19 Disparities in 2023. 关于卫生公平的两极分化观点:一项关于2023年美国公众对COVID-19差异看法的全国代表性调查的结果。

IF 3.3 3区医学

Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI: 10.1215/03616878-11066304

Sarah E Gollust, Chloe Gansen, Erika Franklin Fowler, Steven T Moore, Rebekah H Nagler

{"title":"Polarized Perspectives on Health Equity: Results from a Nationally Representative Survey on US Public Perceptions of COVID-19 Disparities in 2023.","authors":"Sarah E Gollust, Chloe Gansen, Erika Franklin Fowler, Steven T Moore, Rebekah H Nagler","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11066304","DOIUrl":"10.1215/03616878-11066304","url":null,"abstract":"Republicans and Democrats responded to the COVID-19 pandemic in starkly different ways, from their attitudes in 2020 about whether the virus posed a threat to whether the pandemic ended in 2023. The consequences of COVID-19 for health equity have been a central concern in public health, and the concept of health equity has also been beset by partisan polarization. In this article, the authors present and discuss nationally representative survey data from 2023 on US public perceptions of disparities in COVID-19 mortality (building on a previous multiwave survey effort) as well as causal attributions for racial disparities, the contribution of structural racism, and broader attitudes about public health authority. The authors find anticipated gulfs in perspectives between Democrats on the one hand and independents and Republicans on the other. The results offer a somewhat pessimistic view of the likelihood of finding common ground in how the general public understands health inequities or the role of structural racism in perpetuating them. However, the authors show that those who acknowledge racial disparities in COVID-19 are more likely to support state public health authority to act in response to other infectious disease threats. The authors explore the implications of these public opinion data for advocacy, communication, and future needed research.","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"403-427"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11846683/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138178025","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0