Kehl Kenneth L, Liao Kai-Ping, Krause Trudy M, Giordano Sharon H
Kenneth L. Kehl, Kai-Ping Liao, and Sharon H. Giordano, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center; and Trudy M. Krause, University of Texas at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, TX.
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Feb 20;35(6):645-651. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.69.9835. Epub 2017 Jan 9.
Purpose The Affordable Care Act expanded access to health insurance in the United States, but concerns have arisen about access to specialized cancer care within narrow provider networks. To characterize the scope and potential impact of this problem, we assessed rates of inclusion of Commission on Cancer (CoC) -accredited hospitals and National Cancer Institute (NCI) -designated cancer centers within federal exchange networks. Methods We downloaded publicly available machine-readable network data and public use files for individual federal exchange plans from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for the 2016 enrollment year. We linked this information to National Provider Identifier data, identified a set of distinct provider networks, and assessed the rates of inclusion of CoC-accredited hospitals and NCI-designated centers. We measured variation in these rates according to geography, plan type, and metal level. Results Of 4,058 unique individual plans, network data were available for 3,637 (90%); hospital information was available for 3,531 (87%). Provider lists for these plans reduced into 295 unique networks for analysis. Ninety-five percent of networks included at least one CoC-accredited hospital, but just 41% of networks included NCI-designated centers. States and counties each varied substantially in the proportion of networks listed that included NCI-designated centers (range, 0% to 100%). The proportion of networks that included NCI-designated centers also varied by plan type (range, 31% for health maintenance organizations to 49% for preferred provider organizations; P = .04) but not by metal level. Conclusion A large majority of federal exchange networks contain CoC-accredited hospitals, but most do not contain NCI-designated cancer centers. These results will inform policy regarding access to cancer care, and they reinforce the importance of promoting access to clinical trials and specialized care through community sites.
目的 《平价医疗法案》扩大了美国医疗保险的覆盖范围,但人们对狭窄的医疗服务提供网络中获得专科癌症护理的机会产生了担忧。为了描述这一问题的范围和潜在影响,我们评估了联邦医保交易所网络中被癌症委员会(CoC)认证的医院和美国国立癌症研究所(NCI)指定的癌症中心的纳入率。方法 我们从医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心下载了2016年参保年度联邦医保交易所个人计划的公开机器可读网络数据和公共使用文件。我们将这些信息与国家提供者识别码数据相链接,识别出一组不同的医疗服务提供网络,并评估CoC认证医院和NCI指定中心的纳入率。我们根据地理位置、计划类型和保险级别测量了这些率的差异。结果 在4058个独特的个人计划中,有3637个(90%)可获得网络数据;有3531个(87%)可获得医院信息。这些计划的提供者名单缩减为295个独特的网络用于分析。95%的网络至少包括一家CoC认证医院,但只有41%的网络包括NCI指定中心。各州和各县列出的包含NCI指定中心的网络比例差异很大(范围为0%至100%)。包含NCI指定中心的网络比例也因计划类型而异(范围为健康维护组织的31%至优先提供者组织的49%;P = 0.04),但不因保险级别而异。结论 绝大多数联邦医保交易所网络包含CoC认证医院,但大多数不包含NCI指定的癌症中心。这些结果将为有关癌症护理获取的政策提供信息,并强化通过社区场所促进临床试验和专科护理获取的重要性。