Search

Objective: Investigate the association between Telemental Health (TMH) uptake and sociodemographic characteristics, and how TMH uptake relates to health care resource utilization and Medicaid expenditures among Mississippi Medicaid enrollees with major depression. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted (2019-2020), comparing those who utilized TMH and those who did not. Results: Among the 21,239 identified enrollees, 806 (3.79%) utilized TMH. The TMH cohort was more likely to be of older age, non-Hispanic White, comprehensive managed care organization enrollees, rural residents, and from areas with a higher area deprivation index, and have higher Charlson comorbidity index scores. The TMH cohort also exhibited higher mental health-related and all-cause outpatient and emergency department utilization, along with higher Medicaid expenditures. Conclusion: As the first study investigating telehealth utilization among Mississippi Medicaid enrollees, this study highlights sociodemographic disparities in telehealth adoption. Addressing barriers hindering telehealth adoption among vulnerable populations and ensuring the availability of quality data are vital for future research.

Background: Telemental health (TMH) offers a promising approach to managing major depressive disorder (MDD). The objective of our work was to evaluate TMH usage among a vulnerable population of MDD Medicare beneficiaries and its association with health care utilization and expenditures. Methods: This cohort study analyzed 2019 Mississippi Medicare fee-for-service data for adult beneficiaries with MDD. Subjects were matched by the use of TMH following 1:1 propensity score matching. Comparisons between TMH and non-TMH cohorts were made on health care utilization and expenditure outcomes, adjusting for provider types postmatching. Results: Among 7,673 identified beneficiaries, 551 used TMH and 7,122 did not. Prematching, TMH cohort showed greater proportions of dual beneficiaries, rural residents, subjects with income below $40,000, those with disability entitlement, and higher Charlson comorbidity index scores, compared to the non-TMH cohort (all p < 0.001). Moreover, the TMH cohort had fewer outpatient visits, but more inpatient admissions, emergency department (ED) visits, and higher medical, pharmacy, and total expenditures (all p < 0.001). Postmatching, TMH was associated with a 25% reduction in outpatient visits ( p < 0.001) and a 20% reduction in pharmacy expenditures ( p  = 0.01), with no significant effect on inpatient admissions, ED visits, medical expenditures, or total expenditures. Conclusions: These results underscore the potential of TMH in enhancing accessible health care services for vulnerable populations and affordable services for Medicare. Our results provide a robust baseline for future policy discussions concerning TMH. Future studies should consider identifying barriers to TMH use among vulnerable populations and ensuring equitable and high-quality patient care.

Background: Some policymakers are concerned that expanding telehealth coverage may increase Medicare expenditures. However, there is limited evidence on the association of telehealth use with utilization and spending among Medicare beneficiaries with major depression., Objective: To examine the differences in spending and utilization among telemental health users and non-telemental health users with major depression., Methods: We examined 2014-2019 traditional Medicare claims data for beneficiaries aged ≥50 years with major depression in Texas. Multivariable generalized linear models were used to assess the relationships between telemental health use and Medicare spending and utilization while adjusting for patient demographics and programmatic and clinical factors., Results: In each of the years between 2014 and 2019, an average of 4.6% Medicare beneficiaries with major depression had at least 1 telemental health visit. Compared with beneficiaries without a telemental health visit, those who had a telemental health visit were significantly more likely to be enrolled in Medicaid, be Medicare eligible due to a disability, live in a lower income area or in a rural area, and have a higher comorbidity index. Beneficiaries utilizing telemental health services incurred higher unadjusted Medicare spending than those not receiving telemental health services. However, this difference appeared due to beneficiary and programmatic characteristics rather than telemental health use. Adjusting for model covariates, the telemental health group had lower overall per member per year predicted spending, inpatient admissions, and emergency department visits than non-telemental health users., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that telemental health care use may improve access to mental health care without increasing Medicare spending among telemental health users in Texas., Competing Interests: M.T.P. currently works at KFF. However, this work was conducted prior to her role at KFF as part of her dissertation research at the University of Texas School of Public Health. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

During the COVID-19 pandemic and public health emergency, telehealth programs vastly expanded with strong support from various federal and state agencies. However, the uncertainty regarding future reimbursement policies for telehealth services has resulted in concerns about long-term sustainability of innovative health service delivery models beyond the financial support. Given the limited literature on creating telehealth programs with long-term sustainability in consideration, we have developed a framework for gathering appropriate data during various stages of program implementation to evaluate clinical effectiveness and economic sustainability that is applicable across various settings, with additional attention to health equity. Recognizing the difficulty of sustaining telehealth programs solely through a fee-for-service payment model, we encourage all telehealth stakeholders, especially payers and policymakers, to consider cost-effectiveness of telehealth programs and support alternate payment models for ensuring long-term sustainability.

Objective: Investigate the association between Telemental Health (TMH) uptake and sociodemographic characteristics, and how TMH uptake relates to health care resource utilization and Medicaid expenditures among Mississippi Medicaid enrollees with major depression. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted (2019–2020), comparing those who utilized TMH and those who did not. Results: Among the 21,239 identified enrollees, 806 (3.79%) utilized TMH. The TMH cohort was more likely to be of older age, non-Hispanic White, comprehensive managed care organization enrollees, rural residents, and from areas with a higher area deprivation index, and have higher Charlson comorbidity index scores. The TMH cohort also exhibited higher mental health-related and all-cause outpatient and emergency department utilization, along with higher Medicaid expenditures. Conclusion: As the first study investigating telehealth utilization among Mississippi Medicaid enrollees, this study highlights sociodemographic disparities in telehealth adoption. Addressing barriers hindering telehealth adoption among vulnerable populations and ensuring the availability of quality data are vital for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Telemental health (TMH) offers a promising approach to managing major depressive disorder (MDD). The objective of our work was to evaluate TMH usage among a vulnerable population of MDD Medicare beneficiaries and its association with health care utilization and expenditures. Methods: This cohort study analyzed 2019 Mississippi Medicare fee-for-service data for adult beneficiaries with MDD. Subjects were matched by the use of TMH following 1:1 propensity score matching. Comparisons between TMH and non-TMH cohorts were made on health care utilization and expenditure outcomes, adjusting for provider types postmatching. Results: Among 7,673 identified beneficiaries, 551 used TMH and 7,122 did not. Prematching, TMH cohort showed greater proportions of dual beneficiaries, rural residents, subjects with income below $40,000, those with disability entitlement, and higher Charlson comorbidity index scores, compared to the non-TMH cohort (all p < 0.001). Moreover, the TMH cohort had fewer outpatient visits, but more inpatient admissions, emergency department (ED) visits, and higher medical, pharmacy, and total expenditures (all p < 0.001). Postmatching, TMH was associated with a 25% reduction in outpatient visits (p < 0.001) and a 20% reduction in pharmacy expenditures (p = 0.01), with no significant effect on inpatient admissions, ED visits, medical expenditures, or total expenditures. Conclusions: These results underscore the potential of TMH in enhancing accessible health care services for vulnerable populations and affordable services for Medicare. Our results provide a robust baseline for future policy discussions concerning TMH. Future studies should consider identifying barriers to TMH use among vulnerable populations and ensuring equitable and high-quality patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the COVID-19 pandemic and public health emergency, telehealth programs vastly expanded with strong support from various federal and state agencies. However, the uncertainty regarding future reimbursement policies for telehealth services has resulted in concerns about long-term sustainability of innovative health service delivery models beyond the financial support. Given the limited literature on creating telehealth programs with long-term sustainability in consideration, we have developed a framework for gathering appropriate data during various stages of program implementation to evaluate clinical effectiveness and economic sustainability that is applicable across various settings, with additional attention to health equity. Recognizing the difficulty of sustaining telehealth programs solely through a fee-for-service payment model, we encourage all telehealth stakeholders, especially payers and policymakers, to consider cost-effectiveness of telehealth programs and support alternate payment models for ensuring long-term sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has emerged as a viable and valuable care delivery method to improve chronic disease management. In light of the high prevalence and substantial economic burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD), this systematic review examines the cost and cost-effectiveness of using RPM to manage CVD in the United States. Methods: We systematically searched databases to identify potentially relevant research. Findings were synthesized for cost and cost-effectiveness by economic study type with consideration of study perspective, intervention, clinical outcome, and time horizon. The methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Economic Evaluations. Results: Thirteen articles with fourteen studies published between 2011 and 2021 were included in the final review. Studies from the provider perspective with a narrow scope of cost components identified higher costs and similar effectiveness for the RPM group relative to the usual care group. However, studies from payer and healthcare sector perspectives indicate better clinical effectiveness of RPM relative to usual care, with two cost-utility analysis studies suggesting that RPM relative to usual care is a cost-effective tool for CVD management even at the conservative $50,000 per Quality-Adjusted Life-Year threshold. Additionally, all modelbased studies revealed that RPM is cost-effective in the long run. Conclusions: Full economic evaluations identified RPM as a potentially cost-effective tool, particularly for long-term CVD management. In addition to the current literature, rigorous economic analysis with a broader perspective is needed in evaluating the value and economic sustainability of RPM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]