医疗补助管理的医疗网络充分性标准和精神卫生保健准入。

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Ju-Chen Hu, Janet R Cummings, Xu Ji, Adam S Wilk
{"title":"医疗补助管理的医疗网络充分性标准和精神卫生保健准入。","authors":"Ju-Chen Hu, Janet R Cummings, Xu Ji, Adam S Wilk","doi":"10.37765/ajmc.2025.89662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Medicaid is the largest payer of mental health (MH) services in the US, and more than 80% of its enrollees are covered by Medicaid managed care (MMC). States are required to establish quantitative network adequacy standards (NAS) to regulate MMC plans' MH care access. We examined the association between quantitative NAS and MH care access among Medicaid-enrolled adults and among those with MH conditions.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cross-sectional study with a difference-in-differences design.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the 2016-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, we included Medicaid enrollees aged 18 to 64 years in 15 states. Subgroup analyses included enrollees with MH conditions who experienced in the past year (1) serious psychological distress, (2) a major depressive episode, and/or (3) suicidal thoughts. Outcomes assessed whether in the past year the enrollee had any (1) MH services, (2) inpatient MH stays, (3) outpatient MH visits, (4) MH prescription, and (5) unmet MH care needs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 9300 adults aged 18 to 64 years, 27.2% had MH conditions. Among all adults, NAS were marginally associated with increased use of any MH services (adjusted OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-2.1; P = .055) but were not associated with other outcomes. Among enrollees with MH conditions, no statistically significant association between NAS and MH care access was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Current quantitative NAS requirements may have few impacts on improving MH care access for adults and those with MH conditions without the implementation of additional interventions. States should consider adjusting enforcement strategies and adopting other interventions alongside NAS.</p>","PeriodicalId":50808,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Managed Care","volume":"31 1","pages":"25-32"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medicaid managed care network adequacy standards and mental health care access.\",\"authors\":\"Ju-Chen Hu, Janet R Cummings, Xu Ji, Adam S Wilk\",\"doi\":\"10.37765/ajmc.2025.89662\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Medicaid is the largest payer of mental health (MH) services in the US, and more than 80% of its enrollees are covered by Medicaid managed care (MMC). States are required to establish quantitative network adequacy standards (NAS) to regulate MMC plans' MH care access. We examined the association between quantitative NAS and MH care access among Medicaid-enrolled adults and among those with MH conditions.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cross-sectional study with a difference-in-differences design.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the 2016-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, we included Medicaid enrollees aged 18 to 64 years in 15 states. Subgroup analyses included enrollees with MH conditions who experienced in the past year (1) serious psychological distress, (2) a major depressive episode, and/or (3) suicidal thoughts. Outcomes assessed whether in the past year the enrollee had any (1) MH services, (2) inpatient MH stays, (3) outpatient MH visits, (4) MH prescription, and (5) unmet MH care needs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 9300 adults aged 18 to 64 years, 27.2% had MH conditions. Among all adults, NAS were marginally associated with increased use of any MH services (adjusted OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-2.1; P = .055) but were not associated with other outcomes. Among enrollees with MH conditions, no statistically significant association between NAS and MH care access was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Current quantitative NAS requirements may have few impacts on improving MH care access for adults and those with MH conditions without the implementation of additional interventions. States should consider adjusting enforcement strategies and adopting other interventions alongside NAS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50808,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Managed Care\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"25-32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Managed Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37765/ajmc.2025.89662\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Managed Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37765/ajmc.2025.89662","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:医疗补助是美国最大的心理健康(MH)服务支付者,超过80%的参保人被医疗补助管理式医疗(MMC)所覆盖。要求各州建立定量的网络充分性标准(NAS),以规范MMC计划的MH护理获取。我们研究了在参加医疗补助的成年人和有MH条件的成年人中,定量NAS和MH护理获取之间的关系。研究设计:采用差中差设计的横断面研究。方法:使用2016-2019年全国药物使用和健康调查,我们纳入了15个州18至64岁的医疗补助参保者。亚组分析包括在过去一年中经历过(1)严重心理困扰,(2)重度抑郁发作和/或(3)自杀念头的MH患者。结果评估了在过去一年中受试者是否有任何(1)MH服务,(2)住院MH住院,(3)门诊MH就诊,(4)MH处方,以及(5)未满足的MH护理需求。结果:9300名18 ~ 64岁成人中,27.2%患有MH。在所有成年人中,NAS与任何MH服务的使用增加略有相关(调整OR为1.4;95% ci, 1.0-2.1;P = .055),但与其他结果无关。在有MH条件的入组者中,NAS和MH护理可及性之间没有统计学上显著的关联。结论:如果没有实施额外的干预措施,目前的定量NAS要求可能对改善成人和MH患者的护理机会影响不大。各国应考虑调整执法战略并采取其他干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Medicaid managed care network adequacy standards and mental health care access.

Objectives: Medicaid is the largest payer of mental health (MH) services in the US, and more than 80% of its enrollees are covered by Medicaid managed care (MMC). States are required to establish quantitative network adequacy standards (NAS) to regulate MMC plans' MH care access. We examined the association between quantitative NAS and MH care access among Medicaid-enrolled adults and among those with MH conditions.

Study design: Cross-sectional study with a difference-in-differences design.

Methods: Using the 2016-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, we included Medicaid enrollees aged 18 to 64 years in 15 states. Subgroup analyses included enrollees with MH conditions who experienced in the past year (1) serious psychological distress, (2) a major depressive episode, and/or (3) suicidal thoughts. Outcomes assessed whether in the past year the enrollee had any (1) MH services, (2) inpatient MH stays, (3) outpatient MH visits, (4) MH prescription, and (5) unmet MH care needs.

Results: Among 9300 adults aged 18 to 64 years, 27.2% had MH conditions. Among all adults, NAS were marginally associated with increased use of any MH services (adjusted OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-2.1; P = .055) but were not associated with other outcomes. Among enrollees with MH conditions, no statistically significant association between NAS and MH care access was observed.

Conclusions: Current quantitative NAS requirements may have few impacts on improving MH care access for adults and those with MH conditions without the implementation of additional interventions. States should consider adjusting enforcement strategies and adopting other interventions alongside NAS.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Managed Care
American Journal of Managed Care 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
177
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Managed Care is an independent, peer-reviewed publication dedicated to disseminating clinical information to managed care physicians, clinical decision makers, and other healthcare professionals. Its aim is to stimulate scientific communication in the ever-evolving field of managed care. The American Journal of Managed Care addresses a broad range of issues relevant to clinical decision making in a cost-constrained environment and examines the impact of clinical, management, and policy interventions and programs on healthcare and economic outcomes.
×
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