Dataset Information

Racial/ethnic disparities in specialty behavioral health care treatment patterns and expenditures among commercially insured patients in managed behavioral health care plans.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To document differences among racial/ethnic/gender groups in specialty behavioral health care (BH) utilization/expenditures; examine whether these differences are driven by probability vs intensity of treatment; and identify whether differences are explained by socioeconomic status (SES).

Data source

The cohort consists of adults continuously enrolled in Optum plans with BH benefits during 2013.

Study design

We modeled each outcome using linear regressions among the entire sample stratified by race/ethnicity, language and gender. Then, we estimated logistic regressions of the probability that an enrollee had any spending/use in a given service category (service penetration) and linear regressions of spending/use among the user subpopulation (treatment intensity). Lastly, all analyses were rerun with SES controls.

Data collection

This study links administrative data from a managed BH organization to a commercial marketing database.

Principal findings

We found that in many cases, racial/ethnic minorities had lower specialty BH expenditures/utilization, relative to whites, primarily driven by differences in service penetration. Among women, relative to whites, Asian non-English speakers, Asian English speakers, Hispanic non-English speakers, Hispanic English speakers, and blacks had $106, $95, $90, $48, and $61 less in total expenditures. SES explained racial/ethnic differences in treatment intensity but not service penetration.

Conclusions

In this population, SES was not a major driver of racial/ethnic differences in specialty BH utilization. Future studies should explore the role of other factors not studied here, such as stigma, cultural competence, and geography.

SUBMITTER: Narain K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6505415 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Racial/ethnic disparities in specialty behavioral health care treatment patterns and expenditures among commercially insured patients in managed behavioral health care plans.

Narain Kimberly K Xu Haiyong H Azocar Francisca F Ettner Susan L SL

Health services research 20190207 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To document differences among racial/ethnic/gender groups in specialty behavioral health care (BH) utilization/expenditures; examine whether these differences are driven by probability vs intensity of treatment; and identify whether differences are explained by socioeconomic status (SES).<h4>Data source</h4>The cohort consists of adults continuously enrolled in Optum plans with BH benefits during 2013.<h4>Study design</h4>We modeled each outcome using linear regressions among t ...[more]

PMID: 30734279

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceMedicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program cover almost 50% of children with special health care needs (CSHCN). CSHCN often require specialty services and have been increasingly enrolled in Medicaid managed care (MMC) plans, but there is a dearth of recent national studies on specialty care access among publicly insured children and particularly CSHCN.ObjectiveTo provide recent, nationwide evidence on the association of MMC penetration with specialty care access among publicly insured children, with a special focus on CSHCN.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used nationally representative data from the 2016 to 2019 National Survey of Children's Health to identify publicly insured children in 41 states that administered comprehensive managed care organizations for Medicaid. Data analysis was performed from May 2022 to March 2023.ExposureForm CMS-416 data were used to measure state-year level share of Medicaid-enrolled children who were covered by MMC (ie, MMC penetration).Main outcomes and measuresMeasures of specialty care access included whether, in the past year, the child had (1) any visit to non-mental health (MH) specialists, (2) any visit to MH professionals, and (3) any unmet health care needs and (4) whether the caregiver ever felt frustrated getting services for their child. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association of MMC penetration with specialty care access among all publicly insured children, and separately for CSHCN and non-CSHCN.ResultsAmong 20 029 publicly insured children, 7164 (35.8%) were CSHCN, 9537 (48.2%) were female, 4110 (37.2%) were caregiver-reported Hispanic, and 2812 (21.4%) were caregiver-reported non-Hispanic Black (all percentages are weighted). MMC was not associated with significant changes in any visit to non-MH specialists and unmet health care needs. In addition, MMC penetration was positively associated with caregiver frustration among all children (adjusted odds ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.03-1.48; P = .02) and was negatively associated with any visit to MH professionals among CSHCN (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.98; P = .04).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study evaluating MMC and specialty care access for publicly insured children, increased MMC enrollment was not associated with improved specialty care access for publicly insured children, including CSHCN. MMC was associated with less access to specialties like MH and increased frustrations among caregivers seeking services for their children.

Project description:ObjectiveTo describe how access to primary and specialty care differs for Medicaid patients relative to commercially insured patients, and how these differences vary across rural and urban counties, using comprehensive claims data from Oregon.DesignCross-sectional study of risk-adjusted access rates for two types of primary care providers (physicians; nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs)); four types of mental health providers (psychiatrists, psychologists, advanced practice NPs or PAs specializing in mental health care, behavioral specialists); and four physician specialties (obstetrics and gynecology, general surgery, gastroenterology, dermatology).Participants420,947 Medicaid and 638,980 commercially insured adults in Oregon, October 2014-September 2015.OutcomePresence of any visit with each provider type, risk-adjusted for sex, age, and health conditions.ResultsRelative to commercially insured individuals, Medicaid enrollees had lower rates of access to primary care physicians (- 11.82%; CI - 12.01 to - 11.63%) and to some specialists (e.g., obstetrics and gynecology, dermatology), but had equivalent or higher rates of access to NPs and PAs providing primary care (4.33%; CI 4.15 to 4.52%) and a variety of mental health providers (including psychiatrists, NPs and PAs, and other behavioral specialists). Across all providers, the largest gaps in Medicaid-commercial access rates were observed in rural counties. The Medicaid-commercial patient mix was evenly distributed across primary care physicians, suggesting that access for Medicaid patients was not limited to a small subset of primary care providers.ConclusionsThis cross-sectional study found lower rates of access to primary care physicians for Medicaid enrollees, but Medicaid-commercial differences in access rates were not present across all provider types and displayed substantial variability across counties. Policies that address rural-urban differences as well as Medicaid-commercial differences-such as expansions of telemedicine or changes in the workforce mix-may have the largest impact on improving access to care across a wide range of populations.

Project description:ImportanceYouths with type 2 diabetes are at higher risk for complications compared with peers with type 1 diabetes, though few studies have evaluated differences in access to specialty care.ObjectiveTo compare claims with diabetes specialists for youths with type 1 vs type 2 diabetes and the association between specialist claims with multidisciplinary and acute care utilization.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used Optum Clinformatics Data Mart commercial claims. Individuals included in the study were youths younger than 19 years with type 1 or 2 diabetes as determined by a validated algorithm and prescription claims. Data were collected for youths with at least 80% enrollment in a commercial health plan from December 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019. Statistical analysis was performed from September 2022 to January 2024.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the number of ambulatory claims from an endocrine and/or diabetes physician or advanced practice clinician associated with a diabetes diagnosis code; secondary outcomes included multidisciplinary and acute care claims.ResultsClaims were analyzed for 4772 youths (mean [SD] age, 13.6 [3.7] years; 4300 [90.1%] type 1 diabetes; 472 [9.9%] type 2 diabetes; 2465 [51.7%] male; 128 [2.7%] Asian, 303 [6.4] Black or African American, 429 [9.0%] Hispanic or Latino, 3366 [70.5%] non-Hispanic White, and 546 [11.4%] unknown race and ethnicity). Specialist claims were lower in type 2 compared with type 1 diabetes (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.61 [95% CI, 0.52-0.72]; P < .001) in propensity score-weighted analyses. The presence of a comorbidity was associated with increased specialist claims for type 1 diabetes (IRR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.03-1.10]) and decreased claims for type 2 diabetes (IRR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.67-0.87]). Pooling diagnosis groups and adjusted for covariates, each additional specialist claim was associated with increased odds of a claim with a diabetes care and education specialist (odds ratio [OR], 1.31 [95% CI, 1.25-1.36]), dietitian (OR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.09-1.19]), and behavioral health clinician (OR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.12-1.20]). For acute care claims, each additional specialist claim was associated with increased odds of admission (OR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.11-1.24]) but not for emergency claims (OR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.98-1.82]).Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found that youths with type 2 diabetes were significantly less likely to have specialist claims despite insurance coverage, indicating other barriers to care, which may include medical complexity. Access to diabetes specialists influences engagement with multidisciplinary services. The association between increasing ambulatory clinician services and admissions suggests high utilization by a subgroup of patients at greater risk for poor outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundFew studies have estimated the real-world economic burden such as all-cause and follicular lymphoma (FL)-related costs and health care resource utilization (HCRU) in patients with FL.ObjectivesThis study evaluated outcomes in patients who were newly initiated with FL indicated regimens by line of therapy with real-world data.MethodsA retrospective study was conducted among patients with FL from MarketScan® databases between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2013. Patients were selected if they were ≥18 years old when initiated on a FL indicated therapy, had at least 1 FL-related diagnosis, ≥1 FL commonly prescribed systemic anti-cancer therapy after diagnosis, and did not use any FL indicated regimen in the 24 months prior to the first agent. These patients were followed up at least 48 months and the outcomes, including the distribution of regimens by line of therapy, the treatment duration by line of therapy, all-cause and FL-related costs, and HCRU by line of therapy were evaluated.ResultsThis study identified 598 patients who initiated FL indicated treatment. The average follow-up time was approximately 5.7 years. Of these patients, 50.2% (n=300) were female, with a mean age of 60.7 years (SD=13.1 years) when initiating their treatment with FL indicated regimens. Overall, 598 (100%) patients received first-line therapy, 180 (43.6%) received second-line therapy, 51 received third-line therapy, 21 received fourth-line therapy, and 10 received fifth-line therapy. Duration of treatment by each line of therapy was 370 days, 392 days, 162 days, 148 days, and 88 days, respectively. The most common first-line regimens received by patients were rituximab (n=201, 33.6%), R-CHOP (combination of rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin hydrochloride [hydroxydaunomycin]; n=143, 24.0%), BR (combination of bendamustine and rituximab; n=143, 24.0%), and R-CVP (combination of rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone; n=71, 11.9%). The most common second-line treatment regimens were (N=180): rituximab (n=78, 43.3%) and BR (n=41, 22.8%). Annualized all-cause health care costs per patient ranged from US$97 141 (SD: US$144 730) for first-line to US$424 758 (SD: US$715 028) for fifth-line therapy.ConclusionsThe primary regimens used across treatment lines conform to those recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guidelines. The economic burden for patients with FL is high and grows with subsequent lines of therapy.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the type, frequency, and timing of health care use among commercially insured postpartum and nonpostpartum women.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study used data from a large national commercial claims database. Women between 18 and 44 years of age who gave birth in 2016 (n=149,563) and women who were neither pregnant nor postpartum between 2015 and 2017 (n=2,048,831) (nonpostpartum) were included. We examined hospitalization, and preventive visits, problem visits, and emergency department (ED) visits among postpartum women during the early postpartum period (less than 21 days after childbirth), the postpartum period (21-60 days postpartum), and extended postpartum period (61-365 days after childbirth). Visits among nonpostpartum women were assessed during time periods of equivalent duration.ResultsAlmost 24% of postpartum women had a problem visit in the early postpartum period, compared with 19.7% of nonpostpartum women (adjusted difference 4.8 percentage points [95% CI 4.6-5.0]). Approximately 3% of postpartum women had an early ED visit, more than double the percentage among nonpostpartum women (adjusted difference 2.3 percentage points [95% CI 2.2-2.4]). Both problem visits and ED visits among postpartum women remained elevated relative to nonpostpartum women during the postpartum and extended postpartum periods. Although postpartum women were more likely than nonpostpartum women to receive preventive care during the early and postpartum periods, only 43% of postpartum women had a preventive visit during the extended postpartum period, a rate 1.8 (95% CI -2.1 to -1.5) percentage points lower than that of nonpostpartum women. Adjusted hospitalization rates among postpartum women in the early (0.8%), postpartum (0.3%), and extended postpartum (1.4%) periods were higher than those of nonpostpartum women (0.1%, 0.2%, and 1.6%, respectively).ConclusionsCommercially insured postpartum women use more health care than nonpostpartum women, including inpatient care. Differences are largest in the early postpartum period and persist beyond 60 days postpartum.

Dataset Information

Racial/ethnic disparities in specialty behavioral health care treatment patterns and expenditures among commercially insured patients in managed behavioral health care plans.

Objective

Data source

Study design

Data collection

Principal findings

Conclusions

Publications

Racial/ethnic disparities in specialty behavioral health care treatment patterns and expenditures among commercially insured patients in managed behavioral health care plans.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets