2015 National Psoriasis Foundation Research Symposium: Emerging Paradigms and Best Practices in Psoriatic Disease Research and Care

2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-43
Author(s):  
Melissa Leavitt ◽  
Laurissa Rybacki ◽  
Michael Siegel
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 178-183
Author(s):  
George Gondo ◽  
Julia Boles ◽  
Patrick Stone ◽  
Leah Howard ◽  
Stacie J. Bell

Introduction: Utilization management (UM) policies are becoming more common among commercial insurance policies. However, little research has been conducted to understand the prevalence of experiencing UM restrictions among patients with psoriatic disease. Objectives: To understand the prevalence of UM policies within the psoriatic patient community and examine their relationship with patient characteristics. Methods: An online survey of 1205 individuals with a psoriatic disease from the National Psoriasis Foundation’s constituent database was conducted. Data were collected from July 7 to July 31, 2019. The main outcomes of interest for the present study were frequency of experiencing UM policies (eg, prior authorization [PA] or step therapy [ST]) from their insurance company, number, and type of UM policies experienced and relationship between patient characteristics and experiencing these policies. Results: Survey respondents reported high rates of experiencing some form of UM restriction (80.5%). Nearly half (45.1%) of the survey respondents indicated their insurer required them to try a therapy other than the therapy originally prescribed by their physician, a practice known as ST or “fail first” and 73% of respondents reported having to receive PA from their insurer before initiating treatment. Conclusions: Individuals with psoriatic disease commonly encounter UM policies from their insurer when attempting to manage their disease. Statistical analyses suggest that UM policies are related to the type of treatment used by patients and the type of psoriatic disease.


2020 ◽  
Vol 83 (6) ◽  
pp. 1704-1716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel M. Gelfand ◽  
April W. Armstrong ◽  
Stacie Bell ◽  
George L. Anesi ◽  
Andrew Blauvelt ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 177-179
Author(s):  
Leah Howard ◽  
Stacie Bell ◽  
Emily Boyd ◽  
Randy Beranek

Author(s):  
Di Yan ◽  
Andrew Blauvelt ◽  
Amit K. Dey ◽  
Rachel S. Golpanian ◽  
Samuel T. Hwang ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Kristen Izaryk ◽  
Robin Edge ◽  
Dawn Lechwar

Purpose The purpose of this article is to explore and describe the approaches and specific assessment tools that speech-language pathologists are currently using to assess social communication disorders (SCDs) in children, in relation to current best practices. Method Ninety-four speech-language pathologists completed an online survey asking them to identify which of the following approaches they use to assess children with SCD: parent/teacher report, naturalistic observation, formal assessment, language sample analysis, interviews, semistructured tasks, and peer/self-report. Participants were also asked to identify specific assessment tools they use within each approach. Results Participants most commonly assess SCDs by combining interviews, naturalistic observation, language sampling, parent/teacher report, and formal assessment. Semistructured tasks and peer/self-report tools were less frequently utilized. Several established parent/teacher report and formal assessment tools were commonly identified for assessing SCDs. Most participants use an informal approach for interviews, language sampling, and naturalistic observations in their SCD assessment process. Conclusions Generally, participants follow best practices for assessing SCDs by combining several different approaches. Some considerations for future assessment are identified, including the use of established protocols in the place of informal approaches in order to make the assessment of SCDs more systematic. Future directions for research are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document