The effects of expanding public insurance to rural low-income childless adults.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
This study measures the change in health care use after enrollment into a new public insurance program for low-income childless adults.Data sources/study setting
The data sources include claims from a large integrated health system in rural Wisconsin and Medicaid enrollment files, January 2007-September 2012.Study design
We employ a regression discontinuity design to measure the causal effect of public insurance enrollment on counts of outpatient, emergency department, and inpatient events for 2 years following enrollment for a sample of previously uninsured low-income adults in rural Wisconsin.Principal findings
Public insurance enrollment led to substantial increases in outpatient visits including preventive visits, but not mental health visits. Public insurance enrollment also led to increases in inpatient stays, but the study is inconclusive on whether it led to an increase in ED visits.Conclusions
Public insurance expansions to childless adults have the potential to impact the use of health care. The large increase in Medicaid coverage and reduction in rates of uninsurance anticipated to result from the Affordable Care Act should increase the use of inpatient and outpatient services, but they will have an uncertain impact on the use of ED among rural populations.
SUBMITTER: Burns ME
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4241153 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo draw on the experiences under Massachusetts's 2006 reform, the template for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), to provide insights into the potential impacts of the ACA Medicaid expansion for low-income childless adults in other states.Data sources/study settingThe study takes advantage of the natural experiment in Massachusetts and combined data from two surveys-the Massachusetts Health Reform Survey (MHRS) and the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS)-to estimate the impacts of reform on low-income adults.Study designDifference-in-differences models of the impacts of health reform, using propensity-score reweighting to improve the match between Massachusetts and the comparison states.Data collection/extraction methodsData for low-income adults are obtained by combining data from the MHRS and the NHIS, where the MHRS provides a relatively large Massachusetts sample and the NHIS provides data for samples in other states to support the difference-in-differences model. Supplemental data on county economic and health care market characteristics are obtained from the Area Health Resource File.Principal findingsThere are strong increases in coverage and access to health care for low-income adults under health reform in Massachusetts, with the greatest gains observed for childless adults, who were not eligible for public coverage prior to reform.ConclusionsIn the states that implement the Medicaid provisions of the ACA, we would expect to see large increases in coverage rates and commensurate gains in access to care for low-income childless adults. Linking state and federal surveys offers a strategy for leveraging the value of state-specific survey data for stronger policy evaluations.
| S-EPMC4256556 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Medicaid expansions through the Affordable Care Act began in January 2014, but we have little information about what is happening in rural areas where provider access and patient resources might be more limited. In 2008, Oregon held a lottery for restricted access to its Medicaid program for uninsured low-income adults not otherwise eligible for public coverage. The Oregon Health Insurance Experiment used this opportunity to conduct the first randomized controlled study of a public insurance expansion. This analysis builds off of previous work by comparing rural and urban survey outcomes and adds qualitative interviews with 86 rural study participants for context. We examine health care access and use, personal finances, and self-reported health. While urban and rural populations have unique demographic profiles, rural populations appear to have benefited from Medicaid as much as urban. Qualitative interviews revealed the distinctive challenges still facing low-income uninsured and newly insured rural populations.
| S-EPMC5726939 | biostudies-other
Project description:Importance:Federal policy changes in 2002 and 2009 led some states to expand public health insurance coverage to non-US-born children and pregnant women who are lawful permanent residents during their first 5 years of residency in the United States. In other states, there were concerns that insurance expansion could attract immigrants to relocate to gain free health insurance coverage. Objective:To examine whether expansion of public health insurance to non-US-born, lawful permanent resident children and pregnant women during their first 5 years of residency is associated with increased interstate migration among these groups. Design, Setting, and Participants:This difference-in-differences analysis included data on 208?060 immigrants from the American Community Survey from 2000 through 2016, with analysis including all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The study sample included 2 treatment groups that became eligible under the expanded coverage: lawful permanent resident adults with at least 1 non-US-born child younger than 18 years (n?=?36?438) and lawful permanent resident women of reproductive age (n?=?87?418). Control groups that remained ineligible under the expanded coverage included lawful permanent resident adults without non-US-born children (n?=?171?622), lawful permanent resident single men (n?=?56?142), and lawful permanent resident postreproductive women (n?=?15?129). A difference-in-differences design compared migration rates between eligible and ineligible immigrant groups before and after insurance coverage expansions. Data analysis was performed from November 3, 2018, to May 31, 2019. Exposures:Public health insurance coverage for immigrant women and children who were lawful permanent residents within 5 years of residency. Main Outcomes and Measures:Migration to a health expansion state from any other state and from a neighboring state. Results:Of 208?060 immigrants (47% women in the weighted sample; mean [SD] age, 32.97 [12.94] years; 63% Hispanic), the mean (SD) annual move rate across the entire sample was 3% (17%). Expansion of public health insurance to non-US-born children or pregnant women within their first 5 years of residency was not associated with interstate movement for health care benefits. Coverage expansion for non-US-born children of lawful permanent residents was not associated with a change in the rate of in-migration higher than 1.78 percentage points or lower than -1.28 percentage points. The corresponding estimate for coverage expansion of lawful permanent resident pregnant women was a change higher than 1.38 percentage points and lower than -1.20 percentage points. Conclusions and Relevance:The results suggest that states considering expanding health care benefits coverage to recently arrived immigrant children and pregnant women may be unlikely to experience in-migration of these persons from other states, which has important implications for understanding short- and long-term program costs.
| S-EPMC6865314 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe Affordable Care Act created 2 new coverage options for uninsured adults: Medicaid expansion, which in most states provides comprehensive coverage without premiums and deductibles; and private marketplace coverage, which requires a premium contribution and cost-sharing, though with generous federal subsidies at lower incomes. How enrollment rates compare in the marketplace vs Medicaid is an important policy question as states continue to weigh alternative coverage options such as Medicaid buy-in programs, enrolling Medicaid-eligible populations into marketplace plans, or creating a public option.ObjectiveTo assess the association between income eligibility for Medicaid vs marketplace coverage and insurance enrollment among low-income adults in Colorado.Design setting and participantsUsing 2014 and 2015 all-payer claims data from Colorado and detailed income eligibility information, we used a regression discontinuity design to assess the difference in Medicaid and marketplace enrollment just below and just above 138% of the federal poverty level (FPL), the eligibility threshold between the 2 programs. The sample included nonpregnant adults aged 19 to 64 years with incomes between 75% to 400% FPL. We stratified our analysis by age, sex, chronic condition status, and urban vs rural residence. Analysis was conducted from January to October 2020.Main outcome and measuresThe main outcome was total enrollment in either Medicaid or marketplace coverage during marketplace's Open Enrollment period. Income-based health insurance eligibility was assessed as a percentage of FPL at the time of initial application for coverage.ResultsThe primary analytical sample included 32 091 enrollees in 2014 and 55 451 in 2015, with incomes ranging from 120% to 156% FPL. Most enrollees were women (59.26% in 2014, 59.20% in 2015), resided in urban areas (70.36% in 2014, 73.08% in 2015), and had no chronic conditions (74.66% in 2014, 76.11% in 2015). For age, in 2014 and 2015, respectively, 13.22% and 13.93% were aged 19 to 25 years, 27.85% and 28.54% were aged 26 to 34 years, 23.58% and 24.34% were aged 35 to 44 years, 18.35% and 17.75% were aged 45 to 54 years, and 17.00% and 15.44% were aged 55 to 64 years. Marketplace enrollment was 81.3% (95% CI, -86.0% to -75.0%) lower than Medicaid enrollment in 2014 and 88.6% (95% CI, -90.8% to -86.0%) lower in 2015 among those close to the 138% FPL eligibility threshold. The drop-off in marketplace enrollment was largest among younger adults, aged 26 to 34 and 35 to 44 years: relative drop off -88.7% (95% CI, -93.3% to -80.8%) and -87.8% (95% CI, -90.8% to -83.9%) in 2014, and relative drop off -91.9% (95% CI, -94.5% to -87.9%) and -93.0% (95% CI, -94.5% to -91.1%) in 2015, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study using a regression-discontinuity analysis, meaningful gaps in insurance enrollment may have existed for those with incomes just above the eligibility threshold for Medicaid expansion, especially among younger adults. Policies expanding Medicaid income eligibility or zero-dollar premium marketplace plans are likely to be more effective at inducing enrollment than subsidized private plans with premium requirements.
| S-EPMC8796906 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo identify the impact of the Health Center Growth Initiative on access to care for low-income adults.Data sourcesData on federal funding for health centers are from the Bureau of Primary Health Care's Uniform Data System (2000-2007), and individual-level measures of access and use are derived from the National Health Interview Survey (2001-2008).Study designWe estimate person-level models of access and use as a function of individual- and market-level characteristics. By using market-level fixed effects, we identify the effects of health center funding on access using changes within markets over time. We explore effects on low-income adults and further examine how those effects vary by insurance coverage.Data collectionWe calculate health center funding per poor person in a health care market and attach this information to individual observations on the National Health Interview Survey. Health care markets are defined as hospital referral regions.Principal findingsLow-income adults in markets with larger funding increases were more likely to have an office visit and to have a general doctor visit. These results were stronger for uninsured and publicly insured adults.ConclusionsExpansions in federal health center funding had some mitigating effects on the access declines that were generally experienced by low-income adults over this time period.
| S-EPMC4231582 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the effects of longitudinal patterns of health insurance and poverty on out-of-pocket expenditures among low-income late middle-aged adults. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING:Six waves (2002-2012) of the Health and Retirement Study, in combination with RAND Center for the Study of Aging data, were used. STUDY DESIGN:A random coefficient regression analysis was conducted in a multilevel growth curve framework to estimate the impact of health insurance and poverty on out-of-pocket expenditures. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:At baseline, individuals with private insurance or unstable coverage were more likely to have out-of-pocket expenditures and financial burdens than public insurance holders. Over time, the poor who had no insurance, unstable coverage, or insurance type change had higher out-of-pocket expenditures; private coverage holders had higher odds of financial burden. CONCLUSIONS:Unstable insurance coverage had a discernible effect on the long-term, out-of-pocket expenditures among low-income adults. Findings have an important policy implication to protect poor late middle-aged population; as this population enters old age, the high financial burden it faces may exacerbate persistent socioeconomic health disparity among older people with unstable insurance coverage.
| S-EPMC6232446 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9377505 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMedicaid expansion and subsidized private plans purchased on the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) Marketplaces accounted for most of the ACA's coverage gains.ObjectiveCompare access to care and financial strain between Medicaid and Marketplace plans, and benchmark these against employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) plans.DesignCross-sectional survey PARTICIPANTS: A nationally representative, non-institutionalized sample of 37,219 non-elderly adults with incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty level between 2015 and 2018, and a sub-group of individuals with chronic diseases.Main measuresSelf-reported barriers to accessing care, cost-related medication non-adherence, and financial strain.Key resultsMarketplace enrollees were more likely than Medicaid enrollees to delay or avoid care due to cost (19.3% vs 10.0%; adjusted difference (AD), 8.6 [95% CI, 6.8 to 10.4]) and report difficulties affording specialty care (7.7% vs 6.6%; AD, 1.8% [95% CI, 0.3% to 3.3%]), while there were no differences in having insurance accepted by a doctor or ability to afford dental care. Marketplace enrollees were also more likely to report cost-related medication non-adherence (21.5% vs 20.0%; AD, 4.0 [CI, 1.5 to 6.4]), be very worried about not being able to pay medical costs in case of a serious accident (32.3% vs 25.8%; AD, 6.4 [CI, 4.2 to 8.6]), have expenses exceeding $2000 (22.4% vs 5.4%; AD, 8.3 [CI, 6.2 to 10.3]), and have problems paying medical bills (18.4% vs 15.6%; AD, 1.8 [CI, 0.3 to 3.9]). Marketplace-Medicaid differences were larger among persons with a chronic disease. Individuals in ESI plans fared better for most, but not all, outcomes.ConclusionMedicaid offers better protections than Marketplace plans on most measures of access and financial strain.
| S-EPMC8442638 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: The objective of this study was to examine whether delivering technology-assisted case management (TACM) with medication titration by nurses under physician supervision is cost effective compared with usual care (standard office procedures) in low-income rural adults with type 2 diabetes. Methods: One hundred and thirteen low-income, rural adults with type 2 diabetes and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥8%, were randomized to a TACM intervention or usual care. Effectiveness was measured as differences in HbA1c between the TACM and usual care groups at 6 months. Total cost per patient included intervention or usual care cost, medical care cost, and income loss associated with lost workdays. The total cost per patient and HbA1c were used to estimate a joint distribution of incremental cost and incremental effect of TACM compared with usual care. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated to summarize the cost-effectiveness of the TACM intervention relative to usual care to decrease HbA1c by 1%. Results: Costs due to intervention, primary care, other health care, emergency room visits, and workdays missed showed statistically significant differences between the groups (usual care $1,360.49 vs. TACM $5,379.60, p=0.004), with an absolute cost difference of $4,019.11. Based on the intervention cost per patient and the change in HbA1c, the median bootstrapped ICERs was estimated to be $6,299.04 (standard error=731.71) per 1% decrease in HbA1c. Conclusion: Based on these results, a 1% decrease in HbA1c can be obtained with the TACM intervention at an approximate cost of $6,300; therefore, it is a cost-effective option for treating vulnerable populations of adults with type 2 diabetes.
| S-EPMC8317594 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Nearly 9 million Americans live in extreme-poverty neighborhoods, places that also tend to be racially segregated and dangerous. Yet, the effects on the well-being of residents of moving out of such communities into less distressed areas remain uncertain. Using data from Moving to Opportunity, a unique randomized housing mobility experiment, we found that moving from a high-poverty to lower-poverty neighborhood leads to long-term (10- to 15-year) improvements in adult physical and mental health and subjective well-being, despite not affecting economic self-sufficiency. A 1-standard deviation decline in neighborhood poverty (13 percentage points) increases subjective well-being by an amount equal to the gap in subjective well-being between people whose annual incomes differ by $13,000--a large amount given that the average control group income is $20,000. Subjective well-being is more strongly affected by changes in neighborhood economic disadvantage than racial segregation, which is important because racial segregation has been declining since 1970, but income segregation has been increasing.
| S-EPMC3491569 | biostudies-literature