Defining and determining medical necessity in Medicaid managed care

Considerations in the Determination of Medical Necessity in Children: Application to Contractual Language

Through this policy statement, the American Academy of Pediatrics advocates that all health care insurers adopt consistent medical necessity definitions that reflect the needs of infants, children, adolescents, and young adults (hereafter noted as "children") as a function of developmental, epidemiologic, dependency, demographic, and cost-related factors that change over the pediatric continuum and that differ from adults. Optimally, the scope of benefits defined in health care contracts should address the complete spectrum of health care needs of children and families, but in reality, many plans offer a limited scope of benefits for children. Even if a proposed intervention falls within the scope of benefits or is not specifically excluded from coverage, the health plan may still deny the intervention. In such cases, contractual language may allow an appeal to succeed if the provider demonstrates medical necessity. With the assistance of experienced pediatric physicians and other providers with pediatric expertise, health care payers and agencies should clearly detail the processes that define, evaluate, and determine medical necessity and through which providers may appeal decisions. A basic requirement for any medical necessity process is the consideration of input from the physician(s) caring for a pediatric patient for whom a medical necessity determination is necessary.

Paying for Pediatric Home Health Care: How Families of Children With Medical Complexity Navigate Gaps in Coverage

Limited private and public financing of home health care for children with medical complexity can have harmful and costly consequences. Little is known of how parents and professionals in the United States navigate coverage for these services or how payer restrictions are shaping service quality. Qualitative interviews were conducted with families and professionals (eg, prescribers, providers, administrators of pediatric home health care [PHHC]) caring for children with medical complexity. Interview transcripts were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. In total, 47 families and 45 professionals from across 31 states and the District of Columbia had experiences with the full range of PHHC services. Participants detailed the need to patch together multiple insurances and payment programs to cover a child's home health needs. They described nontransparent eligibility determinations that do not reflect the diagnostic uncertainty and static functional status that is common for many children. Coverage denials are common, leaving gaps in care that can potentiate downstream cost escalation. Evidence-based health care reform must ensure that children get the PHHC needed to maintain function and reduce the need for hospital-based services. Recommendations are offered to improve PHHC financing and care for the most medically vulnerable children and their families.

Medicaid's EPSDT Benefit: An Opportunity to Improve Pediatric Screening for Social Determinants of Health

The Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment (EPSDT) benefit is a key component of Medicaid policy intended to define an essential set of services provided to patients younger than age 21. Given increasing attention to social determinants of health in pediatric health care, this qualitative review examines the extent to which EPSDT might be used to implement structured screening to identify environmental and social factors affecting children's health. Themes derived from semistructured interviews conducted in 2017 were triangulated with a review of the recent literature to describe how states currently consider the EPSDT benefit with respect to social determinants of health screening. Our findings suggest that, with sufficient stakeholder advocacy given the evidence supporting social determinants of health screening as "medically necessary," EPSDT benefits could be considered as a funding source to incentivize the incorporation of social determinants of health screening into the basic package of well-child care.

Evaluating and Valuing Drugs for Rare Conditions: No Easy Answers

We find ourselves in an era of unprecedented growth in the development and use of so-called "orphan" drugs to treat rare diseases, which are poised to represent more than one-fifth of pharmaceutical expenditures by 2022. This widespread use has been facilitated by legislative and regulatory incentives in both the United States and abroad, yet US payers and health systems have not yet made a concerted effort to understand whether and how rare diseases require special considerations on their part and how to adapt traditional methods of health technology assessment and economic evaluation to accommodate these situations. In this article, we explore the general ethical dilemmas that rare diseases present, steps taken by health technology assessment bodies worldwide to define the level of rarity that would necessitate special measures and the modifications to their assessment and valuation processes needed, and the contextual components for rare-disease evaluation that lie outside of the assessment framework as a guide to US decision makers on constructing a formal and relevant process stateside.

Pediatric Chronic Critical Illness: Reducing Excess Hospitalizations

OBJECTIVES

The past 2 decades have seen an expanding pediatric population that is chronically critically ill: children with repeated and prolonged hospitalizations and ongoing dependence on technologies to sustain vital functions. Although illness complexity prompts many hospitalizations, our goal with this study was to explore modifiable patient, family, and health system contributions to excess hospital days for children with chronic critical illness (CCI).

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 51 stakeholders known for their CCI expertise. Stakeholders were from 5 metropolitan areas and were either (1) interdisciplinary providers (inpatient and/or outpatient clinicians, home health providers, foster care affiliates, or policy professionals) or (2) parents of children with CCI. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed for themes.

RESULTS

All stakeholders agreed that homelike settings are ideal care sites for children with CCI, yet in every region these children experience prolonged hospitalizations. The perceived causes of excess hospital days are (1) inadequate communication and coordination within health care teams and between clinicians and families, (2) widespread gaps in qualified pediatric home health services and durable medical equipment providers, (3) inconsistent parent support, and (4) policies that limit pediatric service eligibility, state-supported case management, and nonhospital care sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an expanding pediatric population with CCI, we lack an intentional care model to minimize their hospitalizations. In this study, we generate several hypotheses for exploring the potential impact of expanded access to home nursing, robust care coordination, and family and clinician support to reduce hospital days for this population of high health care utilizers.