Attitudinal Barriers to Analgesic Use among Patients with Substance Use Disorders

Attitudinal barriers towards analgesic use among primary care patients with chronic pain and substance use disorders (SUDs) are not well understood. We evaluated the prevalence of moderate to significant attitudinal barriers to analgesic use among 597 primary care patients with chronic pain and current analgesic use with 3 subscales from the Barriers Questionaire II: concern about side effects, fear of addiction, and worry about reporting pain to physicians. Concern about side effects was a greater barrier for those with opioid use disorders (OUDs) and non-opioid SUDs than for those with no SUD (OR (95% CI): 2.30 (1.44–3.68), P < 0.001 and 1.64 (1.02–2.65), P = 0.041, resp.). Fear of addiction was a greater barrier for those with OUDs as compared to those with non-opioid SUDs (OR (95% CI): 2.12 (1.04–4.30), P = 0.038) and no SUD (OR (95% CI): 2.69 (1.44–5.03), P = 0.002). Conversely, participants with non-opioid SUDs reported lower levels of worry about reporting pain to physicians than those with no SUD (OR (95% CI): 0.43 (0.24–0.76), P = 0.004). Participants with OUDs reported higher levels of worry about reporting pain than those with non-opioid SUDs (OR (95% CI): 1.91 (1.01–3.60), P = 0.045). Concerns about side effects and fear of addiction can be barriers to analgesic use, moreso for people with SUDs and OUDs

Affordability of health care under publicly subsidized insurance after Massachusetts health care reform: a qualitative study of safety net patients

Introduction: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the 2006 Massachusetts (MA) health reform law, on which the ACA was based, aimed to improve the affordability of care largely by expanding publicly sponsored insurances. Both laws also aimed to promote consumer understanding of how to acquire, maintain and use these public plans. A prior study found an association between the level of cost-sharing required in these plans and the affordability of care. Preparatory to a quantitative study we conducted this qualitative study that aimed to examine (1) whether cost sharing levels built into the public insurance types that formed the backbone of the MA health reform led to unaffordability of care and if so, (2) how insurances with higher cost sharing levels led to unaffordability of care in this context. Methods: We interviewed 12 consumers obtaining the most commonly obtained insurances under MA health reform (Medicaid and Commonwealth Care) at a safety net hospital emergency department. We purposefully interviewed a stratified sample of higher and low cost sharing recipients. We used a combination of inductive and deductive codes to analyze the data according to degree of cost-sharing required by different insurance types. Results: We found that higher cost sharing plans led to unaffordability of care, as evidenced by unmet medical needs, difficulty affording basic non-medical needs due to expenditures on medical care, and reliance on non-insurance resources to pay for care. Participants described two principal mechanisms by which higher cost sharing led to unaffordability of care: (1) cost sharing above what their incomes allowed and (2) poor understanding of how to effectively acquire, maintain and utilize insurance new public plans. Conclusions: Further efforts to investigate the relationship between perceived affordability of care and understanding of insurance for the insurance types obtained under MA health reform may be warranted. A potential focus for further work may be quantitative investigation of how the level of calibration of cost-sharing to income and understanding of insurances under the MA reform was associated with perceived affordability of care. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12939-015-0240-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Perceived affordability of health insurance and medical financial burdens five years in to Massachusetts health reform

Introduction: Under the Massachusetts health reform, low income residents (those with incomes below 150 % of the Federal Poverty Level [FPL]) were eligible for Medicaid and health insurance exchange-based plans with minimal cost-sharing and no premiums. Those with slightly higher incomes (150 %-300 % FPL) were eligible for exchange-based plans that required cost-sharing and premium payments. Methods: We conducted face to face surveys in four languages with a convenience sample of 976 patients seeking care at three hospital emergency departments five years after Massachusetts reform. We compared perceived affordability of insurance, financial burden, and satisfaction among low cost sharing plan recipients (recipients of Medicaid and insurance exchange-based plans with minimal cost-sharing and no premiums), high cost sharing plan recipients (recipients of exchange-based plans that required cost-sharing and premium payments) and the commercially insured. Results: We found that despite having higher incomes, higher cost-sharing plan recipients were less satisfied with their insurance plans and perceived more difficulty affording their insurance than those with low cost-sharing plans. Higher cost-sharing plan recipients also reported more difficulty affording medical and non-medical health care as well as insurance premiums than those with commercial insurance. In contrast, patients with low cost-sharing public plans reported higher plan satisfaction and less financial concern than the commercially insured. Conclusions: Policy makers with responsibility for the benefit design of public insurance available under health care reforms in the U.S. should calibrate cost-sharing to income level so as to minimize difficulty affording care and financial burdens. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12939-015-0235-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Experiences applying for and understanding health insurance under Massachusetts health care reform

Background: The Affordable Care Act was modeled on the Massachusetts Health Reform of 2006, which reduced the number of uninsured largely through a Medicaid expansion and the provision of publicly subsidized insurance obtained through a Health Benefits Exchange. Methods: We surveyed a convenience sample of 780 patients seeking care in a safety-net system who obtained Medicaid or publicly subsidized insurance after the Massachusetts reform, as well as a group of employed patients with private insurance. Results: We found that although most patients with Medicaid or publicly subsidized exchange-based plans were able to obtain assistance with applying for and choosing an insurance plan, substantial proportions of respondents experienced difficulties with the application process and with understanding coverage and cost features of plans. Conclusions: Under the Affordable Care Act, efforts to simplify the application process and reduce the complexity of plans may be warranted, particularly for vulnerable patient populations cared for by the medical safety net

Developing High-Functioning Teams: Factors Associated With Operating as a “Real Team” and Implications for Patient-Centered Medical Home Development

Team-based care is a foundation of health care redesign models like the patient-centered medical home (PCMH). Yet few practices rigorously examine how the implementation of PCMH relates to teamwork. We identified factors associated with the perception of a practice operating as a real team. An online workforce survey was conducted with all staff of 12 primary care sites of Cambridge Health Alliance at different stages of PCMH transformation. Bivariate and multivariate analyses of factors associated with teamwork perceptions were conducted. In multivariate models, having effective leadership was the main factor associated with practice teamwork perceptions (odds ratio [OR], 10.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.39-20.43); in addition, practicing at a site in an intermediate stage of PCMH transformation was also associated with enhanced team perceptions (OR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.28-4.64). In a model excluding effective leadership, respondents at sites in an intermediate stage of PCMH transformation (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.1-3.4) and who had higher care team behaviors (such as huddles and weekly meetings; OR, 3.41; 95% CI, 1.30-8.92), higher care team perceptions (OR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.15-6.11), and higher job satisfaction (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.02-3.92) had higher practice teamwork perceptions. This study highlights the strong association between effective leadership, care team behaviors and perceptions, and job satisfaction with perceptions that practices operate as real teams. Although we cannot infer causality with these cross-sectional data, this study raises the possibility that providing attention to these factors may be important in augmenting practice teamwork perceptions

Developing High-Functioning Teams: Factors Associated With Operating as a “Real Team” and Implications for Patient-Centered Medical Home Development

Team-based care is a foundation of health care redesign models like the patient-centered medical home (PCMH). Yet few practices rigorously examine how the implementation of PCMH relates to teamwork. We identified factors associated with the perception of a practice operating as a real team. An online workforce survey was conducted with all staff of 12 primary care sites of Cambridge Health Alliance at different stages of PCMH transformation. Bivariate and multivariate analyses of factors associated with teamwork perceptions were conducted. In multivariate models, having effective leadership was the main factor associated with practice teamwork perceptions (odds ratio [OR], 10.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.39-20.43); in addition, practicing at a site in an intermediate stage of PCMH transformation was also associated with enhanced team perceptions (OR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.28-4.64). In a model excluding effective leadership, respondents at sites in an intermediate stage of PCMH transformation (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.1-3.4) and who had higher care team behaviors (such as huddles and weekly meetings; OR, 3.41; 95% CI, 1.30-8.92), higher care team perceptions (OR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.15-6.11), and higher job satisfaction (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.02-3.92) had higher practice teamwork perceptions. This study highlights the strong association between effective leadership, care team behaviors and perceptions, and job satisfaction with perceptions that practices operate as real teams. Although we cannot infer causality with these cross-sectional data, this study raises the possibility that providing attention to these factors may be important in augmenting practice teamwork perceptions