Policy Considerations for Routine Screening for Adverse Childhood Events (ACEs).

In October of 2021, California enacted SB 428, the ACEs Equity Act, which mandates commercial insurance coverage of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) screening in addition to ACEs screening already covered for the state's Medicaid enrollees. California is the first state to expand ACEs screening coverage, but it is possible other states may follow similar paths given the increasing interest in policy action to address ACEs. Increase in stress and trauma among Americans and evidence of the disproportionate impact ACEs have on historically marginalized and disadvantaged communities has increased the urgency with which policy makers, clinicians and researchers have sought to address ACEs and encourage trauma-informed care delivery to better meet the needs of patients. Family practice and other primary care providers are at the core of prevention and are arguably the largest group of stakeholders at the forefront of movements toward increasing ACEs screenings. However, debate persists among policy makers, clinicians, and researchers on whether the ACEs screening approach improves outcomes and avoids harms. In this health policy article, we describe key issues under debate with regards to ACEs screening and estimate potential change in screening utilization and expenditures due to the new ACEs legislation in California. The lessons being learned in California are applicable to other states and the US as a whole.

The Current State Of Telehealth Evidence: A Rapid Review.

Policy makers and practitioners show a continued interest in telehealth's potential to increase efficiency and reach patients facing access barriers. However, telehealth encompasses many applications for varied conditions and populations. It is therefore difficult to draw broad conclusions about telehealth's efficacy. This rapid review examines recent evidence both about telehealth's efficacy by clinical area and about telehealth's impact on utilization. We searched for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the use of telehealth services by patients of any age for any condition published in English in the period January 2004-May 2018. Twenty systematic reviews and associated meta-analyses are included in this review, covering clinical areas such as mental health and rehabilitation. Broadly, telehealth interventions appear generally equivalent to in-person care. However, telehealth's impact on the use of other services is unclear. Many factors should be carefully considered when weighing the evidence of telehealth's efficacy, including modality, evidence quality, population demographics, and point-in-time measurement of outcomes.

Addressing discriminatory benefit design for people living with HIV: a California case study.

Concern is growing in the United States regarding the potential for health insurance benefit designs to discriminate against persons living with HIV as research demonstrates that such practices are occurring. A recent complaint filed against health insurers in seven states alleges that some health insurance companies have been using benefit designs that discourage enrollment of people living with HIV either by not covering essential HIV medications or by requiring cost-sharing for these prohibitively expensive medications. Legislators across the country have reacted by introducing legislation to address these growing problems. This paper describes Assembly Bill 339, legislation passed in California in 2015 and going into effect on 1 January 2017, which provides protection for people living with HIV by requiring coverage for single-tablet regimens to manage HIV while placing a cap on patient cost-sharing. Given California's size and influence, and the uncertainty of the future of the Affordable Care Act, this legislation has the potential to influence the national policy debate.

Implications of dispensing self-administered hormonal contraceptives in a 1-year supply: a California case study.

On September 23, 2016, California became the sixth state to pass legislation requiring health plans and insurers to cover a 12-month supply of FDA-approved self-administered hormonal contraceptives such as contraceptive pills, patches and vaginal rings. This legislation is estimated to result in 38% of current contraceptive pill, patch, and ring users receiving a 12-month supply dispensed at one time. This shift in dispensing patterns was estimated to result in a reduction of 15,000 unintended pregnancies; 2000 fewer miscarriages; and 7000 fewer abortions in California decreasing total net health care expenditures by 0.03%. With similar legislation introduced in 17 states, the findings from this study are important for consideration outside of California.