In this market insights program, AMCP brought together a panel of experts representing various stakeholders: national and regional health plans, integrated health care systems, employer benefits groups, clinical experts, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and patient advocacy organizations. The objectives were to gain insights into the current and evolving treatments in hemophilia, sickle cell disease, and β-thalassemia; measure the effects of recently approved therapies on clinicians, payers, and patients; recognize emerging trends within the stop-loss market; address potential issues and obstacles related to monitoring and reporting outcomes; and identify concerns associated with both existing and emerging contracting and reimbursement models. This article aims to summarize expert perspectives on health care system challenges and strategies concerning the management of inherited blood disorders and to advance managed care professionals\' understanding of their role in supporting care for these patients. The experts emphasized that when shaping coverage policies, a patient-centered approach is crucial, focusing on preserving organ function to maintain eligibility for future gene therapies among individuals with inherited blood disorders. These strategies, including benefit design modifications, specialized provider networks, and centralized mechanisms like registries, are vital for evaluating effectiveness, facilitating decision-making, and managing costs and risks associated with new and emerging treatment options for inherited blood disorders.

Within the framework of its Market Insights Program, AMCP convened a panel of experts representing diverse stakeholders to identify alterations to plan design and/or coverage options geared toward improving the diagnosis and treatment of mental health conditions among persons living with rare diseases (PLWRD). PLWRD face unique mental health challenges because of the misunderstood nature of their conditions, potential misdiagnosis, and limited treatment options. Economic burdens arise from increased medical needs, reliance on caregivers, and work disruptions. The interplay of these factors, along with health insurance coverage, creates a distinctive mental health landscape for PLWRD and a need to prioritize mental health support for this patient population. This article aims to (1) summarize expert perspectives on health care system challenges and areas of agreement concerning the management of mental health conditions and (2) advance payers\' understanding of their role in supporting mental health care for patients with rare diseases. Addressing mental health needs of PLWRD presents multifaceted challenges. Managed care organizations play a pivotal role in supporting mental health care for PLWRD through their quality improvement initiatives and policies for coverage and reimbursement, which can impact both the rare disease treatment and mental health services PLWRD receive.

As people lose Medicaid because of the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency, many states will route former Medicaid managed care enrollees into Affordable Care Act Marketplace coverage with the same carrier. In 2021, 52.1 percent of Medicaid managed care enrollees were enrolled by a carrier that also had a plan on the Marketplace in the same county.

Managed care plans, which contract with states to cover three-quarters of Medicaid enrollees, play a crucial role in addressing the drug epidemic in the United States. However, substance use disorder benefits vary across Medicaid managed care plans, and it is unclear what role states play in regulating their activities. To address this question, we surveyed thirty-three states and Washington, D.C., regarding their substance use disorder treatment coverage and utilization management requirements for Medicaid managed care plans in 2021. Most states mandated coverage of common forms of substance use disorder treatment and prohibited annual maximums and enrollee cost sharing in managed care. Fewer than one-third of states forbade managed care plans from imposing prior authorization for each treatment service. For most treatment medications, fewer than two-thirds of states prohibited prior authorization, drug testing, \"fail first,\" or psychosocial therapy requirements in managed care. Our findings suggest that many states give managed care plans broad discretion to impose requirements on covered substance use disorder treatments, which may affect access to lifesaving care.

Although disparities and inequities in health status and access to health care services have long existed in our nation, the COVID-19 pandemic cast a bright spotlight on them. Communities of color and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations were disproportionally affected by the pandemic. These same populations suffer from higher prevalences of chronic illnesses, which puts them at greater risk for poor outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2. At long last, in the wake of the pandemic, the health care community began to acknowledge improving health equity as a public health imperative. In a November 2020 JMCP Viewpoints article, Dr Stephen Kogut of the University of Rhode Island College of Pharmacy presented an insightful analysis of disparities in medication use (DMU) and offered 4 suggestions on how the managed care pharmacy community can help eliminate DMU. This Viewpoints article assesses what progress has been made in addressing those imperatives and proposes further steps that should be taken. Although the managed care pharmacy community has broadly acknowledged the existence of DMU and taken steps to mitigate them, there is much work to do in examining and improving benefit design and coverage policies; collecting and reporting data on race and ethnicity and DMU; incorporating the perspectives of patients, including those representing minority populations, in benefit design and coverage policies; and addressing the challenges associated with traditional cost-sharing models. The entire managed care pharmacy community, including AMCP and other membership organizations, must remain steadfast in its efforts to improve health equity and eliminate DMU.

This article provides a summary of Viewpoint and Research articles responding to the 2020 Journal of Managed Care + Specialty Pharmacy Call to Action to address racial and social inequities in medication use. We find great heterogeneity in terms of topic, clinical condition examined, and health disparity addressed. Common recommendations across Viewpoint articles include the need to increase racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trial participants, the need to address drug affordability and health insurance literacy, and the need to incentivize providers and plans to participate in diversity initiatives, such as the better capture of information on social determinants of health (SDOH) in claims data to be able to address SDOH needs. Across research articles, we also find a large range of approaches and study designs, spanning from randomized controlled trials to surveys to observational studies. These articles identify disparities in which minoritized beneficiaries are shown to be less likely to receive medications and vaccines, as well as less likely to be adherent to medications, across a variety of conditions. Finally, we discuss Healthy People 2030 as a potential framework for future health disparity researchers.

暂无摘要。

Several states are considering competitive procurement to help shape Medicaid managed care markets. In New York state, the focus of our study, regulators propose contracts that reward quality improvement and simplify state administration by rewarding plans that operate across several of the state\'s 62 counties. This case analysis uses novel regulatory data from New York state, obtained via public records request, to examine incentives underlying Medicaid markets and help inform contracting design. The data report plan enrollment by county and plan spending across administrative activities for all 16 Medicaid plans in New York state for 2018. We examine the counties in which plans operate, profitability, and administrative resource allocation. We compare outcomes by tertile of plan profitability, measured as net income per member-month. Plan profitability ranged widely, with the most profitable plan realizing nearly $30 per member-month while the least profitable 5 plans realized net negative earnings. Operational differences across plan profitability emerged most clearly in administrative spending. The most profitable plans reported greater spending on salaries overall and for executive management, and taxes, while the least profitable plans spent more on operational functions including utilization management/ quality improvement, claims processing, and informational systems. We observe modest differences in county rurality and little in geographic breadth. Procurement design that rewards capacity-building in key administrative functions might impact market evolution, given that on average, highly profitable firms spent less on these activities in New York\'s Medicaid managed care market in 2018.

UNASSIGNED: Millions of economically disadvantaged children depend on Medicaid for dental care, with states differing in whether they deliver these benefits using fee-for-service or capitated managed care payment models. However, there is limited research examining the association between managed care and the accessibility of dental services.
UNASSIGNED: To estimate the association between the adoption of managed care for dental services in Florida\'s Medicaid program and nontraumatic dental emergency department visits and associated charges.
UNASSIGNED: This cohort study used an event-study difference-in-differences design, leveraging Florida Medicaid\'s staggered adoption of managed care to examine its association with pediatric nontraumatic dental emergency department visits and associated charges. This study included all Florida emergency department visits from 2010 to 2014 in which the patient was 17 years or younger, the patient was a Florida resident, Medicaid paid for the visit, and a primary or secondary International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, code was used to classify a nontraumatic dental condition. Analyses were conducted between May 2023 and April 2024.
UNASSIGNED: The county of residence transitioning Medicaid dental services from fee-for-service to a fully capitated managed care program managed by a dental plan.
UNASSIGNED: The rate of nontraumatic dental emergency department visits per 100 000 pediatric Medicaid enrollees and the associated mean charges per visit. Nontraumatic dental emergency department visits are a well-documented proxy for access to dental care. Data on emergency department visit counts came from the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration. Medicaid population denominators were derived from the American Community Survey\'s 5-year estimates.
UNASSIGNED: Among the 34 414 pediatric nontraumatic dental emergency department visits that met inclusion criteria across Florida\'s 67 counties, the mean (SD) age of patients was 8.11 (5.28) years, and 50.8% of patients were male. Of these, 10 087 visits occurred in control counties and 24 327 in treatment counties. Control counties generally had lower rates of NTDC ED visits per 100 000 enrollees compared with treatment counties (123.5 vs 132.7). Over the first 2.5 years of implementation, the adoption of managed care was associated with an 11.3% (95% CI, 4.0%-18.4%; P = .002) increase in nontraumatic dental emergency department visits compared with pre-implementation levels. There was no evidence that the average charge per visit changed.
UNASSIGNED: In this cohort study, Florida Medicaid\'s adoption of managed care for pediatric dental services was associated with increased emergency department visits for children, which could be associated with decreased access to dental care.

UNASSIGNED: Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs) are private managed care plans designed to promote Medicare and Medicaid integration for full-benefit, dually eligible beneficiaries. Currently, the highest level of D-SNP integration occurs in plans with exclusively aligned enrollment (EAE).
UNASSIGNED: To compare patient experience of care, out-of-pocket spending, and satisfaction among dually enrolled Medicaid beneficiaries in D-SNPs with EAE, those in D-SNPs without EAE, and those with traditional Medicare.
UNASSIGNED: This cross-sectional study included respondents to a mail survey fielded to a stratified random sample of full-benefit, community-dwelling, dual-eligible Medicaid beneficiaries who qualified for receipt of home and community-based services in the Virginia Medicaid Commonwealth Coordinated Care Plus program between March and October 2022.
UNASSIGNED: Enrollment in a D-SNP with EAE or a D-SNP without EAE vs traditional Medicare.
UNASSIGNED: The main outcomes were self-reported measures of access and delays in receiving plan approvals, out-of-pocket spending, and satisfaction with health plans\' customer service and choice of primary care and specialist physicians.
UNASSIGNED: Of 7200 surveys sent, 2226 were completed (response rate, 30.9%). The analytic sample consisted of 1913 Medicaid beneficiaries with nonmissing data on covariates (mean [SD] age, 70.8 [15.6] years; 1367 [71.5%] female). Of these, 583 (30.5%) were enrolled in D-SNPs with EAE, 757 (39.6%) in D-SNPs without EAE, and 573 (30.0%) in traditional Medicare. Compared with respondents enrolled in D-SNPs without EAE, those in D-SNPs with the highest level of integration (EAE) were 6.77 percentage points (95% CI, 8.81-12.66 percentage points) more likely to report being treated with courtesy and respect and 5.83 percentage points (95% CI, 0.21-11.46 percentage points) more likely to know who to call when they had a health problem. No statistically significant differences were found between members in either type of D-SNP and between those in D-SNPs and traditional Medicare in terms of their difficulty accessing care, delays in care, and satisfaction with care coordination and physician choice.
UNASSIGNED: This cross-sectional study found some benefits of integrating administrative processes under Medicare and Medicaid but suggests that care coordination and access improvements under full integration require additional time and/or efforts to achieve.