Prices And Cost Sharing For Psychotherapy In Network Versus Out Of Network In The United States.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Benson NM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8128060 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceIndividuals in the United States with mental illnesses and substance use disorders can face major access barriers from limited provider (eg, clinicians and facilities) networks in health insurance plans.ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-sharing payments for out-of-network (OON) care for private insurance plan enrollees with mental health conditions, alcohol use disorders, or drug use disorders compared with those with congestive heart failure (CHF) or diabetes.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used data from a large commercial claims database from 2012 to 2017. The study included adults with mental health conditions, with alcohol use disorders, with drug use disorders, with CHF, and with diabetes who were aged 18 to 64 years and enrolled in employer-sponsored insurance plans.Main outcomes and measuresMain outcomes included OON care during hospitalization, OON care during outpatient care, cost-sharing payments with OON care, OON cost sharing as a proportion of total health care spending, and OON cost sharing as a proportion of total cost sharing.ResultsThe study sample included 3?209?929 enrollees with mental health conditions (mean [SD] age, 45.9 [12.6] years; 64.8% women), 294?550 with alcohol use disorders (mean [SD] age, 42.8 [13.4] years; 60.9% men), 321?535 with drug use disorders (mean [SD] age, 41.1 [13.9] years; 59.1% men), 178?701 with CHF (mean [SD] age, 53.8 [8.9] years; 62.6% men), and 1?383?398 with diabetes (mean [SD] age, 52.5 [9.0] years; 58.9% men). Enrollees with behavioral conditions were more likely to encounter OON clinicians in inpatient and outpatient settings. For instance, those with drug use disorders were 12.9 percentage points (95% CI, 12.5-13.2 percentage points; P?<?.001) more likely to have inpatient OON care than those with CHF and 15.3 percentage points (95% CI, 15.1-15.6 percentage points; P?<?.001) more likely to receive outpatient OON care. Behavioral conditions also had higher cost sharing for OON care. For example, individuals with mental health conditions had cost-sharing payments for OON care $341 (95% CI, $331-$351) higher than those with diabetes (P?<?.001), individuals with drug use disorders had cost-sharing payments for OON care $1242 (95% CI, $1209-$1276) higher than those with diabetes (P?<?.001), and individuals with alcohol use disorders had cost-sharing payments for OON care $1138 (95% CI, $1101-$1174) higher than those with diabetes (P?<?.001). The OON care rates and cost-sharing payments were much higher when enrollees sought care from behavioral clinicians and facilities.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of enrollees in commercial insurance plans, cost sharing for OON care among those with behavioral health conditions was significantly higher than those with chronic physical conditions. These disparities may be indicative of limited in-network availability for behavioral health care.
| S-EPMC6865267 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a highly effective treatment for depression but is infrequently used owing to stigma, uncertainty about indications, adverse effects, and perceived high cost. Objective:To assess the cost-effectiveness of ECT compared with pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy for treatment-resistant major depressive disorder in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants:A decision analytic model integrating data on clinical efficacy, costs, and quality-of-life effects of ECT compared with pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy was used to simulate depression treatment during a 4-year horizon from a US health care sector perspective. Model input data were drawn from multiple meta-analyses, randomized trials, and observational studies of patients with depression. Where possible, data sources were restricted to US-based studies of nonpsychotic major depression. Data were analyzed between June 2017 and January 2018. Interventions:Six alternative strategies for incorporating ECT into depression treatment (after failure of 0-5 lines of pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy) compared with no ECT. Main Outcomes and Measures:Remission, response, and nonresponse of depression; quality-adjusted life-years; costs in 2013 US dollars; and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Strategies with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year or less were designated cost-effective. Results:Based on the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression trial, we simulated a population with a mean (SD) age of 40.7 (13.2) years, and 62.2% women. Over 4 years, ECT was projected to reduce time with uncontrolled depression from 50% of life-years to 33% to 37% of life-years, with greater improvements when ECT is offered earlier. Mean health care costs were increased by $7300 to $12 000, with greater incremental costs when ECT was offered earlier. In the base case, third-line ECT was cost-effective, with an ICER of $54 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Third-line ECT remained cost-effective in a range of univariate, scenario, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Incorporating all input data uncertainty, we estimate a 74% to 78% likelihood that at least 1 of the ECT strategies is cost-effective and a 56% to 58% likelihood that third-line ECT is the optimal strategy. Conclusions and Relevance:For US patients with treatment-resistant depression, ECT may be an effective and cost-effective treatment option. Although many factors influence the decision to proceed with ECT, these data suggest that, from a health-economic standpoint, ECT should be considered after failure of 2 or more lines of pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy.
| S-EPMC6145669 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrent first-line treatments for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) include the multityrosine kinase inhibitors pazopanib and sunitinib. Both agents had similar progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the COMPARZ trial (Comparing the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Pazopanib versus Sunitinib); however, the adverse event profiles of the 2 agents are different. In the PISCES trial (Patient Preference Study of Pazopanib versus Sunitinib in Advanced or Metastatic Kidney Cancer), patients and physicians preferred pazopanib primarily because it offered better health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and caused less fatigue.ObjectiveTo compare the cost-effectiveness of pazopanib versus sunitinib from a U.S. health care system perspective in the first-line treatment of patients with mRCC.MethodsA partitioned-survival analysis model with 3 health states (preprogression, postprogression, and dead), data from 2 randomized controlled trials of pazopanib versus sunitinib (COMPARZ and PISCES), and secondary sources were used to calculate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for pazopanib versus sunitinib. A time horizon of 37.5 months was used in the base case, consistent with the duration of follow-up used in the COMPARZ trial. The proportion of patients in each health state over time was based on Kaplan-Meier survival distributions for PFS and OS from the COMPARZ trial. Utility values were obtained from the PISCES trial. Costs were based on medical resource utilization data from the COMPARZ trial and unit costs from secondary sources. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted.ResultsIn the base case, pazopanib was estimated to provide more QALYs at a lower cost compared with sunitinib (pazopanib dominant). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, pazopanib was projected to be dominant in 69% of the simulations. The probability that pazopanib was more cost-effective than sunitinib was ≥ 90% for threshold values of cost-effectiveness between the range of $10,000-$160,000 per QALY gained. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, pazopanib was dominant in all scenarios examined.ConclusionResults of this study suggest that pazopanib is cost-effective compared with sunitinib as the first-line treatment of patients with mRCC in the United States.
| S-EPMC10397968 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8080228 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Increasing cigarette taxes has been the cornerstone of tobacco control policy. Recent work has argued that raising cigarette taxes alone may no longer be an effective strategy for lowering smoking rates. We largely confirm these findings but also find that increases in price continue to predict lower smoking participation in most model specifications. We argue that raising cigarette prices via taxation remains an effective public health policy. We discuss the advantages of homogeneous tax environments and minimum price laws for eliminating opportunities for consumers to offset tax increases by searching for lowest taxes.
| S-EPMC7674120 | biostudies-literature
Project description:About 46.6 million Americans have mental illnesses, yet profound treatment gaps exist in this country. Among those receiving treatment, most are treated solely with medication, even though >50% prefer to include psychotherapy in treatment. Other countries have changed policies to enhance access to evidence-based psychotherapy, resulting in availability and utilization reflective of patient preferences. To improve access to these treatments, the U.S. health care system would need to seek agreement among stakeholders regarding what constitutes effective treatment; enhance training, credentialing, and continuing education requirements; implement quality measures; integrate services into nontraditional venues; and incentivize best practices.
| S-EPMC9192142 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The study was conducted to estimate the relative cost effectiveness of contraceptives in the United States from a payer's perspective.A Markov model was constructed to simulate costs for 16 contraceptive methods and no method over a 5-year period. Failure rates, adverse event rates and resource utilization were derived from the literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed on costs and failure rates.Any contraceptive method is superior to "no method". The three least expensive methods were the copper-T intrauterine device (IUD) (US$647), vasectomy (US$713) and levonorgestrel (LNG)-20 intrauterine system (IUS) (US$930). Results were sensitive to the cost of contraceptive methods, the cost of an unintended pregnancy and plan disenrollment rates.The copper-T IUD, vasectomy and the LNG-20 IUS are the most cost-effective contraceptive methods available in the United States. Differences in method costs, the cost of an unintended pregnancy and time horizon are influential factors that determine the overall value of a contraceptive method.
| S-EPMC3638200 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background: It has been reported that patients hospitalized outside regular working hours have worse outcomes. This study aims to compare outcomes following liver transplantation (LT) performed during public holidays and nonholidays. Methods: We analyzed the United Network for Organ Sharing registry data for 55 200 adult patients who underwent an LT between 2010 and 2019. Patients were grouped according to LT receipt during public holidays ±3 d (n = 7350) and nonholiday periods (n = 47 850). The overall post-LT mortality hazard was analyzed using multivariable Cox regression models. Results: LT recipient characteristics were similar between public holidays and nonholidays. Compared with nonholidays, deceased donors during public holidays had a lower donor risk index (median [interquartile range]: holidays 1.52 [1.29–1.83] versus nonholidays 1.54 [1.31–1.85]; P = 0.001) and shorter cold ischemia time (median [interquartile range]: holidays 5.82 h [4.52–7.22] versus nonholidays 5.91 h [4.62–7.38]; P < 0.001). Propensity score matching 4-to-1 was done to adjust for donor and recipient confounders (n = 33 505); LT receipt during public holidays (n = 6701) was associated with a lower risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio 0.94 [95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.99]; P = 0.046). The number of livers that were not recovered for transplant was higher during public holidays compared with nonholidays (15.4% versus 14.5%, respectively; P = 0.03). Conclusions: Although LT performed during public holidays was associated with improved overall patient survival, liver discard rates were higher during public holidays compared with nonholidays.
| S-EPMC10065833 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe financial protection of the prevention provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) doesn't apply to breast MRI but only to mammography for breast cancer screening. The purpose of the study is to examine the financial burden among women who received breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for screening.MethodsThis observational study used the Marketscan database. Women who underwent breast MRI between 2009 and 2017 and had screening mammography within 6 months of the MRI were included. We compared the time trend of the proportion of zero cost-share for women undergoing screening mammography and that for MRI. We quantified out-of-pocket (OOP) costs as the sum of copayment, coinsurance, and deductible and defined zero cost-share as having no OOP cost. We conducted multivariable logistic regression and 2-part model to examine factors associated with zero cost-share and OOP costs of MRI, respectively.ResultsDuring the study period, 16 341 women had a screening breast MRI. The proportion of screening MRI claims with zero cost-share decreased from 43.1% (2009) to 26.2% (2017). The adjusted mean OOP cost for women in high-deductible plans was more than twice the cost for their counterparts ($549 vs $251; 2-sided P < .001). Women who resided in the South in the post-Affordable Care Act era were less likely to have zero cost-share and paid higher OOP costs for screening MRI.ConclusionsMany women are subject to high financial burden when receiving MRI for breast cancer screening. Those enrolled in high-deductible plans and who reside in the South are especially vulnerable financially.
| S-EPMC8826560 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHigh and continually increasing pharmaceutical drug spending is a major health and health policy concern in the United States.ObjectiveTo demonstrate trends in prices among popular brand-name prescription drugs.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation of drug prices focuses on 49 top-selling brand-name medications in the United States. Pharmacy claims data from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2017, were obtained from Blue Cross Blue Shield Axis, a database that includes data from more than 35 million individuals with private pharmaceutical insurance. Drugs that exceeded $500 million in US sales or $1 billion in worldwide sales were examined.Main outcomes and measuresThe median sum of out-of-pocket and insurance costs paid by patients or insurers for common prescriptions, presented annually and monthly, was the primary outcome.ResultsIn total, 132 brand-name prescription drugs were identified in 2017 that met the inclusion criteria. Of this total, the study focused on 49 top-selling drugs that exceeded 100 000 pharmacy claims. Substantial cost increases among these drugs was near universal, with a 76% median cost increase from January 2012 through December 2017, and almost all drugs (48 [98%]) displaying regular annual or biannual price increases. Of the 36 drugs that have been available since 2012, 28 (78%) have seen an increase in insurer and out-of-pocket costs by more than 50%, and 16 (44%) have more than doubled in price. Insulins (ie, Novolog, Humalog, and Lantus) and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (ie, Humira and Enbrel) demonstrated highly correlated price increases, coinciding with some of the largest growth in drug costs. Relative price changes did not differ between drugs that entered the market in the past 3 to 6 years and those that have been on the market longer (number of drugs, 13 vs 36; median, 29% increase from January 2015 through December 2017; P = .81) nor between drugs with or without a Food and Drug Administration-approved therapeutic equivalent (number of drugs, 17 vs 32; median, 79% vs 73%; P = .21). Changes in prices paid were highly correlated with third-party estimates of changes in drug net prices (ρ = 0.55; P = 3.8 × 10-5), suggesting that the current rebate system, which incentivizes high list prices and greater reliance on rebates, increases overall costs.Conclusions and relevanceThe growth of drug spending in the United States associated with government-protected market exclusivity is likely to continue; greater price transparency is warranted.
| S-EPMC6547085 | biostudies-literature