Incorrect Provider Directories Associated With Out-Of-Network Mental Health Care And Outpatient Surprise Bills.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Busch SH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7497897 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivePrevious research has shown relatively high use of out-of-network mental health providers, although direct comparisons with rates among general health providers are not available. We aimed to (1) estimate the proportion of privately insured adults using an out-of-network mental health provider in the past 12 months; (2) compare rates of out-of-network mental health provider use with out-of-network general medical use; (3) determine reasons for out-of-network mental health care use.MethodsA nationally representative sample of privately insured US adults was surveyed using the internet in February 2011. Screener questions identified if the participant had used either a general medical physician or a mental health professional within the past 12 months. Respondents using either type of out-of-network provider completed a 10-minute survey on details of their out-of-network care experiences.ResultsEighteen percent of individuals who used a mental health provider reported at least 1 contact with an out-of-network mental health provider, compared to 6.8% who used a general health provider (P<0.01). The most common reasons for choosing an out-of-network mental health provider were the physician was recommended (26.1%), continuity with a previously known provider (23.7%), and the perceived skill of the provider (19.3%).ConclusionsOut-of-network provider use is more likely in mental health care than general health care. Most respondents chose an out-of-network mental health provider based on perceived provider quality or continuing care with a previously known provider rather than issues related to the availability of an in-network provider, convenient location, or appointment wait time.
| S-EPMC4707657 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction:Mental health services are an area of high need in many health care systems in the United States. With a limited number of psychiatric providers and a projected increase in the deficit of psychiatrists, a call for increased mental health services is apparent. The inclusion of mental health clinical pharmacy specialists (MH-CPS) as part of interdisciplinary care teams has enabled the William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital & Clinics as well as numerous other Veterans Affairs sites to improve access to mental health providers when pharmacists serve as an integral part of the mental health team. Our objectives were to (1) evaluate impressions of nonpharmacist mental health providers of MH-CPS and (2) assess for areas of improvement in MH-CPS services. Methods:A survey was formulated, using 5-point Likert scale criteria, to evaluate impressions of MH-CPS from other mental health providers. Questions were designed to address impressions of clinical skills, knowledge, team contribution, and comfort with MH-CPS providers. These were distributed and completed in December 2018 by members of mental health treatment teams at the William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital & Clinics. Results:Overall, mental health team members rated satisfaction with MH-CPS highly across all evaluated criteria. Discussion:Per review of these results, MH-CPS are a valued and respected part of the mental health team.
| S-EPMC7213948 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9214586 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This cross-sectional study examines surprise bills that are received for childbirths and newborn hospitalizations.
| S-EPMC8796895 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveDisparities in diagnosis of mental health problems and in access to treatment among racial-ethnic groups are apparent across different behavioral conditions, particularly in the quality of treatment for depression. This study aimed to determine how much disparities differ across providers.MethodsBayesian mixed-effects models were used to estimate whether disparities in patient adherence to antidepressant medication (N=331,776) or psychotherapy (N=275,095) were associated with specific providers. Models also tested whether providers who achieved greater adherence to treatment, on average, among non-Hispanic white patients than among patients from racial-ethnic minority groups attained lower disparities and whether the percentage of patients from racial-ethnic minority groups in a provider caseload was associated with disparities.ResultsDisparities in adherence to both antidepressant medication and psychotherapy were associated with the provider. Provider performance with non-Hispanic white patients was negatively correlated with provider-specific disparities in adherence to psychotherapy but not to antidepressants. A higher proportion of patients from racial-ethnic minority groups in a provider's caseload was associated with lower adherence among non-Hispanic white patients, lower disparities in adherence to psychotherapy, and greater disparities in adherence to antidepressant medication.ConclusionsAdherence to depression treatment among a provider's patients from racial-ethnic minority groups was related to adherence among that provider's non-Hispanic white patients, but evidence also suggested provider-specific disparities. Efforts among providers to decrease disparities might focus on improving the general skill of providers who treat more patients from racial-ethnic minority groups as well as offering culturally based training to providers with notable disparities.
| S-EPMC7590958 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMost research on transitions of care has focused on the transition from acute to outpatient care. Little is known about the transition from outpatient to acute care. We conducted a systematic review of the literature on the transition from outpatient to acute care, focusing on provider-to-provider communication and its impact on quality of care.MethodsWe searched the MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for English-language articles describing direct communication between outpatient providers and acute care providers around patients presenting to the emergency department or admitted to the hospital. We conducted double, independent review of titles, abstracts, and full text articles. Conflicts were resolved by consensus. Included articles were abstracted using standardized forms. We maintained search results via Refworks (ProQuest, Bethesda, MD). Risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the Downs' and Black's tool.ResultsOf 4009 citations, twenty articles evaluated direct provider-to-provider communication around the outpatient to acute care transition. Most studies were cross-sectional (65%), conducted in the US (55%), and studied communication between primary care and inpatient providers (62%). Of three studies reporting on the association between communication and 30-day readmissions, none found a significant association; of these studies, only one reported a measure of association (adjusted OR for communication vs. no communication, 1.08; 95% CI 0.92-1.26).DiscussionThe literature on provider-to-provider communication at the transition from outpatient to acute care is sparse and heterogeneous. Given the known importance of communication for other transitions of care, future studies are needed on provider-to-provider communication during this transition. Studies evaluating ideal methods for communication to reduce medical errors, utilization, and optimize patient satisfaction at this transition are especially needed.
| S-EPMC4803688 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Privately insured patients who receive care from in-network physicians may receive unexpected out-of-network bills ("surprise bills") from out-of-network clinicians they did not choose. In elective surgery, this can occur if patients choose in-network surgeons and hospitals but receive out-of-network bills from other involved clinicians. Objective:To evaluate out-of-network billing across common elective operations performed with in-network primary surgeons and facilities. Design, Setting, and Participants:Retrospective analysis of claims data from a large US commercial insurer, representing 347?356 patients who had undergone 1 of 7 common elective operations (arthroscopic meniscal repair [116?749]; laparoscopic cholecystectomy [82?372]; hysterectomy [67?452]; total knee replacement [42?313]; breast lumpectomy [18?018]; colectomy [14?074]; coronary artery bypass graft surgery [6378]) by an in-network primary surgeon at an in-network facility between January 1, 2012, and September 30, 2017. Follow-up ended November 8, 2017. Exposure:Patient, clinician, and insurance factors potentially related to out-of-network bills. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was the proportion of episodes with out-of-network bills. The secondary outcome was the estimated potential balance bill associated with out-of-network bills from each surgical procedure, calculated as total out-of-network charges less the typical in-network price for the same service. Results:Among 347?356 patients (mean age, 48 [SD, 11] years; 66% women) who underwent surgery with in-network primary surgeons and facilities, 20.5% of episodes (95% CI, 19.4%-21.7%) had an out-of-network bill. In these episodes, the mean potential balance bill per episode was $2011 (95% CI, $1866-$2157) when present. Out-of-network bills were associated with surgical assistants in 37% of these episodes; when present, the mean potential balance bill was $3633 (95% CI, $3384-$3883). Out-of-network bills were associated with anesthesiologists in 37% of episodes; when present, the mean potential balance bill was $1219 (95% CI, $1049-$1388). Membership in health insurance exchange plans, compared with nonexchange plans, was associated with a significantly higher risk of out-of-network bills (27% vs 20%, respectively; risk difference, 6% [95% CI, 3.9%-8.9%]; P?<?.001). Surgical complications were associated with a significantly higher risk of out-of-network bills, compared with episodes with no complications (28% vs 20%, respectively; risk difference, 7% [95% CI, 5.8%-8.8%]; P?<?.001). Among 83?021 procedures performed at ambulatory surgery centers with in-network primary surgeons, 6.7% (95% CI, 5.8%-7.7%) included an out-of-network facility bill and 17.2% (95% CI, 15.7%-18.8%) included an out-of-network professional bill. Conclusions and Relevance:In this retrospective analysis of commercially insured patients who had undergone elective surgery at in-network facilities with in-network primary surgeons, a substantial proportion of operations were associated with out-of-network bills.
| S-EPMC7042888 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Georgia has recently made a commendable effort to reform mental health care. The "Concept on Mental Health Care" adopted by the Government and the two strategic plans for 2014-2020 and 2021-2031, which aimed to develop comprehensive evidence-based, culturally appropriate, and human rights-oriented mental health care, have promoted the deinstitutionalization and development of community mental health services. Since 2018, new standards of care for mental health ambulatories and mobile teams have been imposed and implemented in the state programme and funded accordingly. The study aimed to investigate the quality of care in community mental health services. As a result, we monitored the mental health ambulatories in all major cities and regional centres of the country (in total, 16 ambulatories) and the mobile teams which had at least two years of experience (in total, 14 mobile teams). The data analyses showed that the new standards for ambulatories and mobile teams increased access to and coverage of mental health care across the country. However, further effort is still needed to achieve comprehensive treatment by mental health care services.
| S-EPMC11262074 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceReports of a recent increase in US outpatient mental health care raise questions about whether it has been driven by rising rates of psychological distress and whether mental health treatment has become either more or less focused on people with higher levels of distress.ObjectiveTo characterize national trends in serious psychological distress and trends in outpatient mental health service use by adults with and without serious psychological distress.Design, setting, and participantsThe 2004-2005, 2009-2010, and 2014-2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys (MEPS) were nationally representative surveys taken in US households. The analysis was limited to participants 18 years or older. Dates of this analysis were February 2018 to April 2018.Main outcomes and measuresAnnual national trends in the percentages of adults with serious psychological distress (Kessler 6 scale score ≥13), outpatient mental health service use (outpatient visit with a mental disorder diagnosis, psychotherapy visit, or psychotropic medication), and type of psychotropic medication use (antidepressants, anxiolytics/sedatives, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, and stimulants). Age- and sex-adjusted odds ratios of the associations of survey period with the odds of serious psychological distress, outpatient mental health service use, and outpatient mental health service use were stratified by level of psychological distress.ResultsThe analysis involved 139 862 adult participants from the 2004-2005, 2009-2010, and 2014-2015 MEPS, including 51.67% women, 48.33% men, 67.11% white adults, and 32.89% nonwhite adults, with an overall mean (SE) age of 46.41 (0.14) years. Serious psychological distress declined overall from 4.82% (2004-2005) to 3.71% (2014-2015), including significant declines among young (3.94% to 3.07%), middle-aged (5.52% to 4.36%), and older adults (5.24% to 3.79%); men (3.94% to 3.09%) and women (5.64% to 4.29%); and major racial/ethnic groups (white, 4.52% to 3.82%; African American, 5.12% to 3.64%; Hispanic, 6.03% to 3.55%; and other, 5.22% to 3.26%). Overall, the percentage of adults receiving any outpatient mental health service increased from 19.08% (2004-2005) to 23.00% (2014-2015) (adjusted odds ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.17-1.34). Although the proportionate increase in outpatient mental health service use for adults with serious psychological distress (54.17% to 68.40%) was larger than that for adults with less serious or no psychological distress (17.26% to 21.08%), the absolute increase in outpatient mental health service use was almost completely the result of growth in outpatient mental health service use by individuals with less serious or no psychological distress.Conclusions and relevanceThe recent increase in outpatient mental health service use occurred during a period of decline in serious psychological distress. Adults with less serious psychological distress accounted for most of the absolute increase in outpatient mental health service use, while adults with serious psychological distress experienced a greater relative increase in outpatient mental health service use.
| S-EPMC6439744 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to investigate the relation between a variety of child, parent, family and environmental factors and pre-treatment motivation of parents of children and adolescents newly referred to a mental health care clinic in The Netherlands. Data were collected of 521 parents most involved in the upbringing of the child (443 mothers and 78 fathers; Dutch origin 97.1%) of 207 girls and 314 boys (age M?=?10.2, range 1-18 years). Treatment motivation was measured by the Parent Motivation Inventory. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression was used to investigate the prediction strength of 33 factors in 5 domains: (1) source of referral and prior use of healthcare services, (2) child characteristics, (3) characteristics of the primary parent, (4) parenting characteristics of the primary parent, and (5) family characteristics. Twenty-one factors were statistically relevant, explaining 21.3% of the deviance in pre-treatment motivation. Child characteristics, mainly type and severity of problems, contributed most to the model. Notably, internalising problems contributed more than externalising problems. Furthermore, we found relations between parental pre-treatment motivation and parents' perceived self-efficacy, parents' perceived parenting competence, financial problems and source of referral. Our findings provide insight into the multifacetedness of parental motivation prior to starting treatment and inform health professionals of specific contextual factors of interest in parents' readiness to change their behaviour and participate in treatment.
| S-EPMC7321896 | biostudies-literature