Developing network adequacy standards for VA Community Care

ObjectivesTo inform how the VA should develop and implement network adequacy standards, we convened an expert panel to discuss Community Care Network (CCN) adequacy and how VA might implement network adequacy standards for community care.Data Sources/Study settingData were generated from expert panel ratings and from an audio‐recorded expert panel meeting conducted in Arlington, Virginia, in October 2017.Study DesignWe used a modified Delphi panel process involving one round of expert panel ratings provided by nine experts in network adequacy standards. Expert panel members received a list of network adequacy standard measures used in commercial and government market and were provided a rating form listing a total of 11 measures and characteristics to rate.Data Collection MethodsItems on the rating form were individually discussed during an expert panel meeting between the nine expert panel members and VA Office of Community Care leaders. Attendees addressed discordant views and generated revised or new standards accordingly. Recorded audio data were transcribed to facilitate thematic analysis regarding opportunities and challenges with implementing network adequacy standards in VA Community Care.Principal FindingsThe five highest ranked standards were network directories for Veterans, regular reporting of network adequacy data to VA, maximum wait time/distance standards, minimum ratio of providers to enrolled population, and qualitative assessments of network adequacy. During the expert panel discussion with VA Community Care leaders, opportunities and challenges implementing network adequacy standards were highlighted.ConclusionsOur expert panel shed light on priorities for network adequacy to be implemented under CCN contracts, such as developing comprehensive provider directories for Veterans to use when selecting community providers. Remaining questions focus on whether the VA could reasonably develop and implement network adequacy standards given current Congressional restraints on VA reimbursement to community providers.     

Implications of the 2018 Canadian Cannabis Act: Should regulation differ for medicinal and non-medicinal cannabis use?⋆

The regulatory framework for access to medical cannabis has been established in Canada since 2001, with the number of patients seeking access growing substantially over the years. With the novel enactment of the Cannabis Act in October 2018, Canada now maintains two distinct mechanisms for accessing cannabis - one for medical cannabis and the other for non-medical cannabis. With two regulatory access mechanisms in place, questions have arisen in the country as to the necessity of maintaining regulatory separation and the integrity of the medical access framework. A single framework would remove the gate-keeping function that the medical profession currently holds, streamlining processes and simplifying the current regulatory landscape. This approach has been advocated for by the Canadian Medical Association, despite objections from multiple stakeholders. Critical questions arise should the medical access framework be dissolved into a single, non medical-based regulatory framework. Insurance coverage, control mechanisms, market incentives, and patient obligations represent some examples of these issues. This paper will expand upon these considerations and highlight why maintaining two separate access mechanismss best serves the Canadian public. As medicinal cannabis continues to be liberated in international jurisdictions, this paper can help to illuminate the current status of medical cannabis in Canada, and provide insights to those from other countries on our current approach and domestic challenges.     

Addressing perinatal health inequities in Dutch municipalities: Protocol for the Healthy Pregnancy 4 All-3 programme

BackgroundHealth inequities are already present at birth and affect individuals’ health and socioeconomic outcomes across the life course. Addressing these inequities requires a cross-sectoral approach, covering the first 1,000 days of life. We believe that - in the Dutch context - municipal governments can be the main responsible actor to drive such an approach, since they are primarily responsible for organising adequate public health. Therefore, we aim to identify and develop transformative change towards the implementation of perinatal health into municipal approaches and policies concerning health inequities.MethodsA transition analysis will be combined with action research in six Dutch municipalities. Interviews and interactive group sessions with professionals and organisations that are relevant for the institutional embedding of perinatal health into approaches and policies regarding health inequities, will be organised in each municipality. As a follow-up, a questionnaire will be administered among all participants one year after completion of the group sessions.DiscussionWe expect to gain insights into the role of municipalities in addressing perinatal health inequities, learn more about the interaction between different key stakeholders, and identify barriers and facilitators for a cross-sectoral approach to perinatal health. This knowledge will serve to inform the development of approaches to perinatal health inequities in areas with relatively poor perinatal health outcomes, both in the Netherlands and abroad.     

基于政策工具的我国三医联动政策量化分析

目的:对我国发布的27份三医联动政策文件的政策工具进行分析,探究我国三医联动政策体系的着重点与缺失点,为健全我国三医联动政策体系提供参考。方法;以我国2014—2019年发布的27份三医联动政策文件为研究对象,以政策工具为视角对纳入分析的政策文件进行摘录和编码,采用内容分析法和定量分析法对各项政策工具进行统计分析,并确定其运用情况。结果:260个政策编号中,需求型,供给型和环境型政策工具分别占6.9%、24.6%和68.5%;医疗、医保和医药政策工具分别占54.2%、24.6%和21.2%。由此可以看出,我国三医联动改革对环境现状的依赖程度较大,需求与供给政策相对不足,而医疗则是三医联动改革的核心关键点。结论:应适当增加需求型和供给型政策工具,着重解决医疗方面的重难点问题,促使医疗、医保、医药三个利益主体达成合力,形成“三医既联又动”的协同发展机制。     

Injecting nation: achieving control of hepatitis C in Australia

Since Australia banned heroin in 1953 consumption of illicit drugs, deaths, crime and corruption related to drugs have steadily increased. Injecting drug use (IDU) in Australia is now a significant public health problem linked each year to approximately 500 overdose deaths and more than 6000 hepatitis C infections. At least 85% of prevalent and incident hepatitis C cases in Australia are injecting drug users (IDUs) with annual incidence estimated at 15%. Although poorly documented, increasing numbers of patients with end-stage liver disease from hepatitis C now appear to present in Australia. This reflects a heroin-injecting epidemic commencing a quarter of a century ago, the close association between drug injecting and hepatitis C and the long delay between hepatitis C infection and complications. The overall health and economic burden of hepatitis C may soon exceed HIV. Control is far more difficult to achieve for hepatitis C than HIV because of much higher baseline prevalence levels and far greater infectiousness by blood to blood spread. Transmission appears to follow minimal breaches of infection control guidelines. Hepatitis C has not yet become a priority public health issue in Australia. No national prevention strategy has been proposed. Prevention strategies (such as needle exchange or methadone) which controlled HIV among IDUs should be expanded, with the expectation of some useful reduction of spread but without achieving control of hepatitis C. Other options for control must be considered. Eradicating illicit drug use in Australia is unachievable. Virtually eradicating injecting drug use by facilitating a switch to non-injecting routes of administration (NIROA) is achievable (although difficult) and this could control hepatitis C. NIROA will have the probable additional benefit of reducing drug overdose deaths. NIROA has begun recently to replace injecting in several countries without government intervention. Powerful cultural, pharmacological and economic factors strongly reinforce drug injecting. Economic impediments to NIROA could be reduced by drug policy reform. Facilitating a switch to NIROA carries some risk of increased discrimination directed against an already marginalized population. A major obstacle to harm reduction is the common assumption that any relaxation of drug policy invariably leads to increased consumption. Switching the predominant route of administration of illicit drugs from IDU to NIROA should be the major focus of national efforts to control hepatitis C and overdose deaths in Australia.     

Accounting for susceptibility in risk assessment: The need for full disclosure

Many Environmental Laws create the unrealistic expectation that science can be used to determine ‘safety'. The many uncertainties surrounding environmental risks, as well as individual, group and societal differences about what is considered ‘safe', make it inevitable that policy decisions must be made. It is appropriate that such decisions be shaped by politics and social issues, as well as be informed by science and economics, but care should be taken to distinguish between policy and fact. Not much is known about the nature and magnitude of environmental susceptibilities. Credible environmental decisions require that scientists, risk assessors and decision-makers acknowledge this, and that they take care to distinguish policy calls from scientific fact.     

Cannabis laws: an analysis of costs

There is evidence that the use of cannabis is increasing in Australia, with stable black-market prices, despite the 9-year National Campaign Against Drug Abuse, increasing expenditure to enforce the laws against cannabis use, and the seizure of large plantations of cannabis plants. Recent government data are used to estimate the conservative cost of drug-law enforcement against cannabis use as being $329m in 1991-92. Alternatives to the existing regime are examined, including expiation, decriminalization, and legalization.     

The development of guidelines for drug and alcohol dependence treatment: affecting policy and practice

The rationale and methodology behind the Australian Quality Assurance Project is described. The Project aimed to develop guidelines for treatment content based on three sources of information: research findings, current practice and expert opinion. The issue of the gap between research and practice is discussed, as well as the role of dissemination in altering clinician behaviour.     

Harnessing harm reduction in Australia: an interview with the Hon. Neal Blewett. Interview by Steve Allsop

The National Campaign Against Drug Abuse (NCADA) was established in April 1985. Aiming to provide a national framework to minimize the harmful consequences of drug use, the original 3-year programme was extended to 1997. A key figure in the NCADA, Dr Neal Blewett, was interviewed to gain his perspective on the development and implementation of the Campaign over its first 10 years.