Jill R. Horwitz

State Legal Restrictions and Prescription-Opioid Use among Disabled Adults

BACKGROUND In response to rising rates of opioid abuse and overdose, U.S. states enacted laws to restrict the prescribing and dispensing of controlled substances. The effect of these laws on opioid use is unclear. METHODS We tested associations between prescription-opioid receipt and state controlled-substances laws. Using Medicare administrative data for fee-for-service disabled beneficiaries 21 to 64 years of age who were alive throughout the calendar year (8.7 million person-years from 2006 through 2012) and an original data set of laws (e.g., prescription-drug monitoring programs), we examined the annual prevalence of beneficiaries with four or more opioid prescribers, prescriptions yielding a daily morphine-equivalent dose (MED) of more than 120 mg, and treatment for nonfatal prescription-opioid overdose. We estimated how opioid outcomes varied according to eight types of laws. RESULTS From 2006 through 2012, states added 81 controlled-substance laws. Opioid receipt and potentially hazardous prescription patterns were common. In 2012 alone, 47% of beneficiaries filled opioid prescriptions (25% in one to three calendar quarters and 22% in every calendar quarter); 8% had four or more opioid prescribers; 5% had prescriptions yielding a daily MED of more than 120 mg in any calendar quarter; and 0.3% were treated for a nonfatal prescription-opioid overdose. We observed no significant associations between opioid outcomes and specific types of laws or the number of types enacted. For example, the percentage of beneficiaries with a prescription yielding a daily MED of more than 120 mg did not decline after adoption of a prescription-drug monitoring program (0.27 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -0.05 to 0.59). CONCLUSIONS Adoption of controlled-substance laws was not associated with reductions in potentially hazardous use of opioids or overdose among disabled Medicare beneficiaries, a population particularly at risk. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and others.).

Wellness Incentives In The Workplace: Cost Savings Through Cost Shifting To Unhealthy Workers

The Affordable Care Act encourages workplace wellness programs, chiefly by promoting programs that reward employees for changing health-related behavior or improving measurable health outcomes. Recognizing the risk that unhealthy employees might be punished rather than helped by such programs, the act also forbids health-based discrimination. We reviewed results of randomized controlled trials and identified challenges for workplace wellness programs to function as the act intends. For example, research results raise doubts that employees with health risk factors, such as obesity and tobacco use, spend more on medical care than others. Such groups may not be especially promising targets for financial incentives meant to save costs through health improvement. Although there may be other valid reasons, beyond lowering costs, to institute workplace wellness programs, we found little evidence that such programs can easily save costs through health improvement without being discriminatory. Our evidence suggests that savings to employers may come from cost shifting, with the most vulnerable employees--those from lower socioeconomic strata with the most health risks--probably bearing greater costs that in effect subsidize their healthier colleagues.

Adoption And Spread Of New Imaging Technology: A Case Study

Technology is a major driver of health care costs. Hospitals are rapidly acquiring one new technology in particular: 64-slice computed tomography (CT), which can be used to image coronary arteries in search of blockages. We propose that it is more likely to be adopted by hospitals that treat cardiac patients, function in competitive markets, are reimbursed for the procedure, and have favorable operating margins. We find that early adoption is related to cardiac patient volume but also to operating margins. The paucity of evidence informing this technologys role in cardiac care suggests that its adoption by cardiac-oriented hospitals is premature. Further, adoption motivated by operating margins reinforces concerns about haphazard technology acquisition.

Expansion of Invasive Cardiac Services in the United States

Background— The number of hospitals offering invasive cardiac services (diagnostic angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention, and coronary artery bypass grafting) has expanded, yet national patterns of service diffusion and their effect on geographic access to care are unknown. Methods and Results— This is a retrospective cohort study of all hospitals in fee-for-service Medicare, 1996 to 2008. Logistic regression identified the relationship between cardiac service adoption and the proportion of neighboring hospitals within 40 miles already offering the service. From 1996 to 2008, 397 hospitals began offering diagnostic angiography, 387 percutaneous coronary intervention, and 298 coronary artery bypass grafting (increasing the proportion with services by 3%, 11%, and 4%, respectively). This capacity increase led to little new geographic access to care; the population increase in geographic access to diagnostic angiography was 1 percentage point; percutaneous coronary intervention 5 percentage points, and coronary artery bypass grafting 4 percentage points. Controlling for hospital and market characteristics, a 10 percentage point increase in the proportion of nearby hospitals already offering the service increased the odds by 10% that a hospital would add diagnostic angiography (odds ratio, 1.102; 95% confidence interval, 1.018–1.193), increased the odds by 79% that it would add percutaneous coronary intervention (odds ratio, 1.794; 95% confidence interval, 1.288–2.498), and had no significant effect on adding coronary artery bypass grafting (odds ratio, 0.929; 95% confidence interval, 0.608–1.420). Conclusions— Hospitals are most likely to introduce new invasive cardiac services when neighboring hospitals already offer such services. Increases in the number of hospitals offering invasive cardiac services have not led to corresponding increases in geographic access.

Rural Hospital Ownership: Medical Service Provision, Market Mix, and Spillover Effects

OBJECTIVE To test whether nonprofit, for-profit, or government hospital ownership affects medical service provision in rural hospital markets, either directly or through the spillover effects of ownership mix. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING Data are from the American Hospital Association, U.S. Census, CMS Healthcare Cost Report Information System and Prospective Payment System Minimum Data File, and primary data collection for geographic coordinates. The sample includes all nonfederal, general medical, and surgical hospitals located outside of metropolitan statistical areas and within the continental United States from 1988 to 2005. STUDY DESIGN We estimate multivariate regression models to examine the effects of (1) hospital ownership and (2) hospital ownership mix within rural hospital markets on profitable versus unprofitable medical service offerings. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS Rural nonprofit hospitals are more likely than for-profit hospitals to offer unprofitable services, many of which are underprovided services. Nonprofits respond less than for-profits to changes in service profitability. Nonprofits with more for-profit competitors offer more profitable services and fewer unprofitable services than those with fewer for-profit competitors. CONCLUSIONS Rural hospital ownership affects medical service provision at the hospital and market levels. Nonprofit hospital regulation should reflect both the direct and spillover effects of ownership.

Complying with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA): Challenges and solutions

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires Medicare-participating hospitals to provide emergency care to patients regardless of their ability to pay, plays an important role in protecting the uninsured. Yet many hospitals do not comply. This study examines the reasons for noncompliance and proposes solutions. We conducted 11 semistructured key informant interviews with hospitals, hospital associations, and patient safety organizations in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services region with the highest number of EMTALA complaints filed. Respondents identified 5 main causes of noncompliance: financial incentives to avoid unprofitable patients, ignorance of EMTALAs requirements, high referral burden at hospitals receiving EMTALA transfer patients, reluctance to jeopardize relationships with transfer partners by reporting borderline EMTALA violations, and opposing priorities of hospitals and physicians. Respondents suggested 5 methods to improve compliance, including educating subspecialists about EMTALA, informally educating hospitals about borderline violations, and incorporating EMTALA-compliant processes into hospital operations such as by routing transfer requests through the emergency department. To improve compliance we suggest (1) more closely aligning Medicaid/Medicare payment policies with EMTALA, (2) amending the Act to permit informal mediation between hospitals about borderline violations, (3) increasing the hospitals role in ensuring EMTALA compliance, and (4) expanding the role of hospital associations.

Cross Border Effects of State Health Technology Regulation

Certificate of Need (CON) laws, state laws requiring providers to obtain licenses before adopting health-care technology, have been controversial. The effect of CON on technology supply has not been well established. In part this is because analyses have focused on state-level supply effects, which may reflect either the consequence of CON regulation on supply or the cause for its adoption or retention. Instead, we focus on the cross border effects of CON. We compare the number and location of magnetic resonance imaging providers in counties that border states with a different regulatory regime to (1) counties in the interior of states, (2) counties on state borders with the same regulatory regime on both sides, and (3) counties on borders with different regulatory regimes, but with a large river on the border. We find there are 6.4 fewer MRIs per million people in regulated counties that border counties in unregulated states than in unregulated counties that border regulated counties. This statistically significant finding that regulatory spillover can be sizable should be accounted for in future research on state-based health technology regulation. In addition, it suggests state experiences may not accurately predict the effects of CON if it were implemented nationally.

Workplace Wellness: The Authors Reply

written permission from the Publisher. All rights reserved. mechanical, including photocopying or by information storage or retrieval systems, without prior may be reproduced, displayed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or Affairs Health Foundation. As provided by United States copyright law (Title 17, U.S. Code), no part of by Project HOPE The People-to-People Health 2013 Bethesda, MD 20814-6133. Copyright