Supportive Care for Superutilizers of a Managed Care Organization

Outcomes of an integrated practice unit for vulnerable emergency department patients

BACKGROUND

An integrated practice unit (IPU) that provides a multidisciplinary approach to patient care, typically involving a primary care provider, registered nurse, social worker, and pharmacist has been shown to reduce healthcare utilization among high-cost super-utilizer (SU) patients or multi-visit patients (MVP). However, less is known about differences in the impact of these interventions on insured vs. uninsured SU patients and super high frequency SUs ([Formula: see text]8 ED visits per 6 months) vs. high frequency SUs (4-7 ED visits per 6 months).

METHODS

We assessed the percent reduction in ED visits, ED cost, hospitalizations, hospital days, and hospitalization costs following implementation of an IPU for SUs located in an academic tertiary care facility. We compared outcomes for publicly insured with uninsured patients, and super high frequency SUs with high frequency SUs 6 months before vs. 6 months after enrollment in the IPU.

RESULTS

There was an overall 25% reduction in hospitalizations (p < 0.001), and 23% reduction in hospital days (p = 0.0045), when comparing 6 months before vs. 6 months after enrollment in the program. There was a 26% reduction in average total direct hospitalization costs per patient (p = 0.002). Further analysis revealed a greater reduction in health care utilization for uninsured SU patients compared with publicly insured patients. The program reduced hospitalizations for super high frequency SUs. However, there was no statistically significant impact on overall health care utilization of super high frequency SUs when compared with high frequency SUs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study supports existing evidence that dedicated IPUs for SUs can achieve significant reductions in acute care utilization, particularly for uninsured and high frequency SU patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

IRB201500212. Retrospectively registered.

Impact of Prior Authorization on Patient Access to Cancer Care

Prior authorization (PA) is a type of utilization review that health insurers apply to control service delivery, payments, and reimbursements of health interventions. The original stated intent of PA was to ensure high-quality standards in treatment delivery while encouraging evidence-based and cost-effective therapeutic choices. However, as currently implemented in clinical practice, PA has been shown to affect the health workforce, adding administrative burden to authorize needed health interventions for patients and often requiring time-consuming peer-to-peer reviews to challenge initial denials. PA is presently required for a wide range of interventions, including supportive care medicines and other essential cancer care interventions. Patients who are denied coverage are commonly forced to receive second-choice options, including less effective or less tolerable options, or are exposed to financial toxicity because of substantial out-of-pocket expenditures, affecting patient-centric outcomes. The development of tools informed by national clinical guidelines to identify standard-of-care interventions for patients with specific cancer diagnoses and the implementation of evidence-based clinical pathways as part of quality improvement efforts of cancer centers have improved patient outcomes and may serve to establish new payment models for health insurers, thereby also reducing administrative burden and delays. The definition of a set of essential interventions and guidelines- or pathways-driven decisions could facilitate reimbursement decisions and thus reduce the need for PAs. Structural changes in how PA is applied and implemented, including a redefinition of its real need, are needed to optimize patient-centric outcomes and support high-quality care of patients with cancer.