ACA网络监管文件不准确,与供应商目录不匹配。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Simon F Haeder, Jane M Zhu
{"title":"ACA网络监管文件不准确,与供应商目录不匹配。","authors":"Simon F Haeder, Jane M Zhu","doi":"10.37765/ajmc.2025.89791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Access to mental health services has been shown to be particularly inadequate, with limited understanding of the efficacy of existing network adequacy regulations. State and federal regulations mandate insurance carriers to submit regulatory filings to help maintain network adequacy compliance, but the accuracy of these data remains unassessed.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We employed a secret shopper survey to verify regulatory filings and assess the congruence between the filings and provider directory listings as well as appointment availability and wait time for 8306 mental health counselors submitted by all carriers participating in Pennsylvania's Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace for plan year 2024.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Descriptive analyses, with tests of proportion and t tests to assess differences between carriers and between adult and pediatric provider specialties.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 19.9% of filed regulatory listings (n = 1649) were not present in consumer-facing provider directories, and only 35.3% of filed listings (n = 2928) fully matched provider directory entries. Of the 2152 provider listings we were able to verify fully via secret shopper calls, 65.2% (n = 1404) exhibited at least 1 inaccuracy. Inaccurate phone number was the most common issue (56.6%; n = 1219). Appointments were available for only 321 of the 2152 providers (14.9%), with a mean of 33.2 days lapsed between call and scheduled appointment time. Although we identified substantial differences in appointment wait times by carrier, we found no difference between adult and pediatric providers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ACA network adequacy assessments that rely on carrier regulatory filings and/or consumer-facing directories substantially overestimated provider availability and access to mental health services.</p>","PeriodicalId":50808,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Managed Care","volume":"31 9","pages":"e265-e269"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ACA network regulatory filings are inaccurate, poorly match provider directories.\",\"authors\":\"Simon F Haeder, Jane M Zhu\",\"doi\":\"10.37765/ajmc.2025.89791\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Access to mental health services has been shown to be particularly inadequate, with limited understanding of the efficacy of existing network adequacy regulations. State and federal regulations mandate insurance carriers to submit regulatory filings to help maintain network adequacy compliance, but the accuracy of these data remains unassessed.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We employed a secret shopper survey to verify regulatory filings and assess the congruence between the filings and provider directory listings as well as appointment availability and wait time for 8306 mental health counselors submitted by all carriers participating in Pennsylvania's Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace for plan year 2024.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Descriptive analyses, with tests of proportion and t tests to assess differences between carriers and between adult and pediatric provider specialties.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 19.9% of filed regulatory listings (n = 1649) were not present in consumer-facing provider directories, and only 35.3% of filed listings (n = 2928) fully matched provider directory entries. Of the 2152 provider listings we were able to verify fully via secret shopper calls, 65.2% (n = 1404) exhibited at least 1 inaccuracy. Inaccurate phone number was the most common issue (56.6%; n = 1219). Appointments were available for only 321 of the 2152 providers (14.9%), with a mean of 33.2 days lapsed between call and scheduled appointment time. Although we identified substantial differences in appointment wait times by carrier, we found no difference between adult and pediatric providers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ACA network adequacy assessments that rely on carrier regulatory filings and/or consumer-facing directories substantially overestimated provider availability and access to mental health services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50808,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Managed Care\",\"volume\":\"31 9\",\"pages\":\"e265-e269\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"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.2025.89791\",\"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.2025.89791","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

目标:事实证明,获得精神卫生服务的机会特别不足,对现有网络充分性条例的效力了解有限。州和联邦法规要求保险公司提交监管文件,以帮助保持网络充分性合规性,但这些数据的准确性仍未得到评估。研究设计:我们采用了一项秘密购物者调查来验证监管文件,并评估文件与提供者目录列表之间的一致性,以及参与宾夕法尼亚州平价医疗法案(ACA)市场的所有运营商提交的8306名心理健康顾问的预约可用性和等待时间。方法:描述性分析,采用比例检验和t检验来评估携带者之间以及成人和儿科提供者专业之间的差异。结果:共有19.9%的备案监管清单(n = 1649)不存在于面向消费者的供应商目录中,只有35.3%的备案清单(n = 2928)完全匹配供应商目录条目。在我们能够通过秘密购物者电话完全验证的2152个供应商列表中,65.2% (n = 1404)表现出至少1个不准确。电话号码不准确是最常见的问题(56.6%;n = 1219)。在2152名医疗服务提供者中,只有321名(14.9%)可以预约,从电话到预约时间平均间隔33.2天。虽然我们确定了不同载体在预约等待时间上的实质性差异,但我们发现成人和儿科提供者之间没有差异。结论:ACA网络充分性评估依赖于运营商监管文件和/或面向消费者的目录,大大高估了提供者的可用性和获得精神卫生服务的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
ACA network regulatory filings are inaccurate, poorly match provider directories.

Objectives: Access to mental health services has been shown to be particularly inadequate, with limited understanding of the efficacy of existing network adequacy regulations. State and federal regulations mandate insurance carriers to submit regulatory filings to help maintain network adequacy compliance, but the accuracy of these data remains unassessed.

Study design: We employed a secret shopper survey to verify regulatory filings and assess the congruence between the filings and provider directory listings as well as appointment availability and wait time for 8306 mental health counselors submitted by all carriers participating in Pennsylvania's Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace for plan year 2024.

Methods: Descriptive analyses, with tests of proportion and t tests to assess differences between carriers and between adult and pediatric provider specialties.

Results: A total of 19.9% of filed regulatory listings (n = 1649) were not present in consumer-facing provider directories, and only 35.3% of filed listings (n = 2928) fully matched provider directory entries. Of the 2152 provider listings we were able to verify fully via secret shopper calls, 65.2% (n = 1404) exhibited at least 1 inaccuracy. Inaccurate phone number was the most common issue (56.6%; n = 1219). Appointments were available for only 321 of the 2152 providers (14.9%), with a mean of 33.2 days lapsed between call and scheduled appointment time. Although we identified substantial differences in appointment wait times by carrier, we found no difference between adult and pediatric providers.

Conclusions: ACA network adequacy assessments that rely on carrier regulatory filings and/or consumer-facing directories substantially overestimated provider availability and access to mental health services.

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