Mental health plans or strategies for nationally defined priority population groups

Author(s):  
Cameron J. Schilling ◽  
Matthew D. Eisenberg ◽  
Alene Kennedy-Hendricks ◽  
Alisa B. Busch ◽  
Haiden A. Huskamp ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Jo Larson ◽  
Kay Miller ◽  
Kathleen J. Fleming ◽  
Judith L. Teich

2019 ◽  
Vol 60 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
François Mauguière ◽  
Jose-Luis Trejo ◽  
Pavle Andjus ◽  
Cristina Vergara ◽  
Roland Pochet
Keyword(s):  

1966 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert C. Schulberg
Keyword(s):  

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 80-80
Author(s):  
Michael T. Halpern ◽  
Matthew Urato ◽  
Margot Schwartz ◽  
Erin E. Kent

80 Background: High-quality EOL care is critical for patients and families. However, little is known about factors influencing patient satisfaction with their healthcare near EOL. This study’s objective is to assess the role of characteristics of individuals with cancer near EOL on their ratings for medical care, health plans, and physicians. Methods: Retrospective analyses of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Medicare Survey linked to NCI’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. CAHPS collected Medicare beneficiaries’ ratings for overall care, physicians, health plans, and 5 composite scores of aspects of care; SEER provided data on cancer diagnosis and characteristics. The study included 5,102 Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with cancer in SEER regions 1997-2011 who completed CAHPS following diagnosis and within one year before death. Logistic regression was used to examine associations of EOL patient characteristics with their ratings. Results: Self-reported very good or excellent (vs. poor) general health significantly (p < 0.05) predicted greater likelihood of higher ratings for all measures (ORs ranged 1.5 to 2.2). Very good/excellent mental health also predicted increased likelihood of higher ratings for all except one category (ORs 1.8 to 2.7). Other patient factors were significantly associated with a subset of ratings. For example, Hispanics (vs. Whites) were more likely to provide higher ratings for health plans (OR 1.5) and specialist physicians (OR 1.7) but lower ratings for getting needed care (OR 0.62). Fee-for-service (vs. Medicare Advantage) beneficiaries were more likely to provide higher ratings for health plans, getting needed care, and getting care quickly (ORs 1.4, 1.3, 1.6). Patient age, cancer site, and time since diagnosis had few or no significant associations with any measure. Conclusions: Among cancer patients near EOL, better self-reported general and mental health consistently predicted higher ratings. Fee-for-service Medicare patients provided higher ratings for several important categories. These results may help guide future research on interventions to improve the EOL experience among Medicare beneficiaries.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document