• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

药物预先授权及其对医疗服务提供者行为的影响:潜在类别分析

Prior Authorization of Medication and Its Influence on Provider Behavior: Latent Class Analysis.

作者信息

Salzbrenner Stephen, Scheier Lawrence M, Qiu Fang

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 985575 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, 68198, United States, 1 4025526007, 1 4025526035.

Lars Research Institute, Sun City, United States.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2025 Jul 29;27:e75361. doi: 10.2196/75361.

DOI:10.2196/75361
PMID:40729624
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12306842/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Insurance companies frequently require prior authorization (PA) for medication prescriptions to ensure quality control and safety. The added layer of scrutiny can contribute to provider dissatisfaction and has been associated with adverse patient outcomes. Health care providers have changed prescribing behaviors to avoid PA. Understanding factors contributing to this phenomenon can facilitate systemic change and better patient care.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study are to identify unique unobserved subgroups of prescribers with similar PA-related behaviors using a finite mixture modeling approach; characterize subgroup membership by important covariates; and examine the influence of subgroup membership on 3 relevant prescribing outcomes.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, web-based, nationwide survey of 1173 prescribers was oversampled for psychiatry in support of developing a software-as-a-solution to facilitate PA. Latent class analysis included 12 indicators assessing the degree of PA involvement, provider-insurance communication, and the methods of obtaining or avoiding PA. Covariates included age, gender, race, provider role, specialty, number of prescribers, and patient load. Three clinical decision outcomes included prescribing medication other than initially preferred due to PA delays, avoiding newer medications due to anticipated need for PA, and modifying a diagnosis to obtain PA.

RESULTS

In total, 1147 prescribers responded with 1144 usable surveys (age, median 50.003 [range 25.00, 72.00] years; 569 (49.74%) females; 67.13% White; 44.84% psychiatrists). In total, 4 unique classes were obtained based on 12 indicators assessing PA-related activities. Classes included a high PA denial class (291 [25.15%]), a Low Volume PA (178 [15.93%]), a class denoted by Problematic Communication Issues with insurers (227 [19.96%]), and a Low Volume PA Class with Problematic Experiences (446 [38.97%]). Only 3 of the 7 covariates (age, specialty type, and patient load) provided additional means to characterize class membership. The observation that certain demographics (race and gender) and provider characteristics (specialty) may not be informative has policy implications and can inform means to improve provider-insurer communication. The largest class reporting problematic PA experiences had significantly higher mean levels for changing their prescribing and diagnostic behaviors than the remaining classes.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers are not homogeneous regarding their experience with PA and insurance companies. It is, therefore, important to recognize subtle behavioral differences and find ways to accommodate the PA process to their unique needs. This will facilitate the appropriate implementation of PA by insurance companies. Providers can then avoid the need to alter medications, change diagnoses, or resist prescribing newer, effective medications that may require lengthy clinical documentation.

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/953a/12306842/5741f29b7e3f/jmir-v27-e75361-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/953a/12306842/5741f29b7e3f/jmir-v27-e75361-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/953a/12306842/5741f29b7e3f/jmir-v27-e75361-g001.jpg
摘要

背景

保险公司经常要求对药物处方进行事先授权(PA),以确保质量控制和安全。这一额外的审查层次可能导致医疗服务提供者不满,并与患者不良结局相关。医疗服务提供者已经改变了处方行为以避免事先授权。了解导致这一现象的因素有助于系统变革和更好的患者护理。

目的

本研究的目的是使用有限混合模型方法识别具有相似PA相关行为的独特未观察到的开处方者亚组;通过重要协变量表征亚组成员资格;并检查亚组成员资格对3个相关处方结果的影响。

方法

对1173名开处方者进行了一项基于网络的全国性横断面调查,对精神病学进行了过度抽样,以支持开发一种软件解决方案来促进事先授权。潜在类别分析包括12个指标,评估事先授权的参与程度、提供者与保险公司的沟通以及获得或避免事先授权的方法。协变量包括年龄、性别、种族、提供者角色、专业、开处方者数量和患者负荷。三个临床决策结果包括由于事先授权延迟而开具非最初首选的药物、由于预期需要事先授权而避免使用更新的药物以及修改诊断以获得事先授权。

结果

共有1147名开处方者回复,其中1144份调查问卷可用(年龄中位数50.003岁[范围25.00,72.00];569名(49.74%)女性;67.13%为白人;44.84%为精神科医生)。基于评估PA相关活动的12个指标,共获得了4个独特的类别。类别包括高PA拒绝类别(291名[25.15%])、低数量PA类别(178名[15.93%])、与保险公司存在沟通问题的类别(227名[19.96%])以及有问题经历的低数量PA类别(446名[38.97%])。7个协变量中只有3个(年龄、专业类型和患者负荷)提供了表征亚组成员资格的额外方法。某些人口统计学特征(种族和性别)以及提供者特征(专业)可能没有信息价值这一观察结果具有政策意义,并可为改善提供者与保险公司沟通的方法提供参考。报告有PA问题经历的最大类别在改变处方和诊断行为方面的平均水平显著高于其他类别。

结论

医疗服务提供者在PA和保险公司方面的经历并非同质化。因此,认识到细微的行为差异并找到方法根据他们的独特需求调整PA流程非常重要。这将有助于保险公司适当实施PA。医疗服务提供者随后可以避免更改药物、改变诊断或拒绝开具可能需要冗长临床文件的更新、有效的药物。

相似文献

1
Prior Authorization of Medication and Its Influence on Provider Behavior: Latent Class Analysis.药物预先授权及其对医疗服务提供者行为的影响:潜在类别分析
J Med Internet Res. 2025 Jul 29;27:e75361. doi: 10.2196/75361.
2
Sexual Harassment and Prevention Training性骚扰与预防培训
3
A New Measure of Quantified Social Health Is Associated With Levels of Discomfort, Capability, and Mental and General Health Among Patients Seeking Musculoskeletal Specialty Care.一种新的量化社会健康指标与寻求肌肉骨骼专科护理的患者的不适程度、能力以及心理和总体健康水平相关。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Apr 1;483(4):647-663. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003394. Epub 2025 Feb 5.
4
[Volume and health outcomes: evidence from systematic reviews and from evaluation of Italian hospital data].[容量与健康结果:来自系统评价和意大利医院数据评估的证据]
Epidemiol Prev. 2013 Mar-Jun;37(2-3 Suppl 2):1-100.
5
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.医疗专业人员在急症医院环境中团队合作教育的经验:对定性文献的系统综述
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.
6
The Black Book of Psychotropic Dosing and Monitoring.《精神药物剂量与监测黑皮书》
Psychopharmacol Bull. 2024 Jul 8;54(3):8-59.
7
[Guidelines for the prevention and management of bronchial asthma (2024 edition)].[支气管哮喘防治指南(2024年版)]
Zhonghua Jie He He Hu Xi Za Zhi. 2025 Mar 12;48(3):208-248. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112147-20241013-00601.
8
Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.审核与反馈:对专业实践的影响
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Mar 25;3(3):CD000259. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000259.pub4.
9
Systemic treatments for metastatic cutaneous melanoma.转移性皮肤黑色素瘤的全身治疗
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 6;2(2):CD011123. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011123.pub2.
10
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.慢性斑块状银屑病的全身药理学治疗:一项网状荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 22;12(12):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub2.

本文引用的文献

1
Influence of prior authorization requirements on provider clinical decision-making.事先授权要求对提供者临床决策的影响。
Am J Manag Care. 2023 Jul;29(7):331-337. doi: 10.37765/ajmc.2023.89394.
2
Perceptions of prior authorization by use of electronic prior authorization software: A survey of providers in the United States.使用电子预先授权软件对预先授权的认知:对美国提供者的调查。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2022 Oct;28(10):1121-1128. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2022.28.10.1121.
3
A Survey of American Psychiatrists Concerning Medication Prior Authorization Requirements.
美国精神科医生关于药物治疗授权要求的调查。
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2020 Jul;208(7):566-573. doi: 10.1097/NMD.0000000000001171.
4
Understanding the medication prior-authorization process: A case study of patients and clinical staff from a large rural integrated health delivery system.理解药物预先授权流程:来自大型农村综合卫生服务系统的患者和临床工作人员的案例研究。
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2019 Mar 19;76(7):453-459. doi: 10.1093/ajhp/zxy083.
5
Prior Authorization and Utilization Management Concepts in Managed Care Pharmacy.管理式医疗药学中的事先授权和利用管理概念。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2019 Jun;25(6):641-644. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2019.19069. Epub 2019 Apr 12.
6
Medication prior authorization from the providers perspective: A prospective observational study.从提供者角度看药物预先授权:一项前瞻性观察研究。
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019 Sep;15(9):1138-1144. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.09.019. Epub 2018 Sep 26.
7
Prior Authorization Reform for Better Patient Care.为改善患者护理进行预先授权改革。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 May 1;71(17):1937-1939. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.03.465.
8
Proceedings of the AMCP Partnership Forum: NCPDP Electronic Prior Authorization Standards-Building a Managed Care Implementation Plan.AMCP 伙伴关系论坛会议记录:NCPDP 电子预授权标准——制定管理式医疗实施计划。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015 Jul;21(7):545-50. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.7.545.
9
Latent Class Analysis With Distal Outcomes: A Flexible Model-Based Approach.具有远端结果的潜在类别分析:一种基于模型的灵活方法。
Struct Equ Modeling. 2013 Jan;20(1):1-26. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2013.742377.
10
The ethics of 'fail first': guidelines and practical scenarios for step therapy coverage policies.“先失败”的伦理:阶梯式治疗覆盖政策的指南和实际情况。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2014 Oct;33(10):1779-85. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0516.