Dataset Information

Health care expenditures for Medicaid-covered males with haemophilia in the United States, 2008.

ABSTRACT: Although haemophilia is an expensive disorder, no studies have estimated health care costs for Americans with haemophilia enrolled in Medicaid as distinct from those with employer-sponsored insurance (ESI). The objective of this study is to provide information on health care utilization and expenditures for publicly insured people with haemophilia in the United States in comparison with people with haemophilia who have ESI. Data from the MarketScan Medicaid Multi-State, Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases were used for the period 2004-2008 to identify cases of haemophilia and to estimate medical expenditures during 2008. A total of 511 Medicaid-enrolled males with haemophilia were identified, 435 of whom were enrolled in Medicaid for at least 11 months during 2008. Most people with haemophilia qualified for Medicaid based on 'disability'. Average Medicaid expenditures in 2008 were $142,987 [median, $46,737], similar to findings for people with ESI. Average costs for males with haemophilia A and an inhibitor were 3.6 times higher than those for individuals without an inhibitor. Average costs for 56 adult Medicaid enrollees with HCV or HIV infection were not statistically different from those for adults without the infection, but median costs were 1.6 times higher for those treated for blood-borne infections. Haemophilia treatment can lead to high costs for payers. Further research is needed to understand the effects of public health insurance on haemophilia care and expenditures, to evaluate treatment strategies and to implement strategies that may improve outcomes and reduce costs of care.

SUBMITTER: Guh S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4684173 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Health care expenditures for Medicaid-covered males with haemophilia in the United States, 2008.

Guh S S Grosse S D SD McAlister S S Kessler C M CM Soucie J M JM

Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia 20111221 2

Although haemophilia is an expensive disorder, no studies have estimated health care costs for Americans with haemophilia enrolled in Medicaid as distinct from those with employer-sponsored insurance (ESI). The objective of this study is to provide information on health care utilization and expenditures for publicly insured people with haemophilia in the United States in comparison with people with haemophilia who have ESI. Data from the MarketScan Medicaid Multi-State, Commercial and Medicare S ...[more]

PMID: 22188641

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:As total health and dental care expenditures in the United States continue to rise, healthcare disparities for low to middle-income Americans creates an imperative to analyze existing expenditures. This study examined health and dental care expenditures in the United States from 1996 to 2016 and explored trends in spending across various population subgroups. METHODS:Using data collected by the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, this study examined health and dental care expenditures in the United States from 1996 to 2016. Trends in spending were displayed graphically and spending across subgroups examined. All expenditures were adjusted for inflation or deflation to the 2016 dollar. RESULTS:Both total health and dental expenditures increased between 1996 and 2016 with total healthcare expenditures increasing from $838.33 billion in 1996 to $1.62 trillion in 2016, a 1.9-fold increase. Despite an overall increase, total expenditures slowed between 2004 and 2012 with the exception of the older adult population. Over the study period, expenditures increased across all groups with the greatest increases seen in older adult health and dental care. The per capita geriatric dental care expenditure increased 59% while the per capita geriatric healthcare expenditure increased 50% across the two decades. For the overall US population, the per capita dental care expenditure increased 27% while the per capita healthcare expenditure increased 60% over the two decades. All groups except the uninsured experienced increased dental care expenditure over the study period. CONCLUSIONS:Healthcare spending is not inherently bad since it brings benefits while exacting costs. Our findings indicate that while there were increases in both health and dental care expenditures from 1996 to 2016, these increases were non-uniform both across population subgroups and time. Further research to understand these trends in detail will be helpful to develop strategies to address health and dental care disparities and to maximize resource utilization.

Project description:ObjectiveTo describe prevalence, trends, and risk factors for catastrophic health expenditures in the year of delivery among birth parents (delivering people).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from 2008-2016. We identified newborn birth parents and a 2:1 nearest-neighbor propensity-matched control cohort of nonpregnant reproductive-aged individuals, then assessed for catastrophic health expenditures (spending greater than 10% of family income) in the delivery year. We applied survey weights to extrapolate to the noninstitutionalized U.S. population and used the adjusted Wald test for significance testing. We compared risk of catastrophic health expenditures between birth parents and the control cohort and described time trends and risk factors for catastrophic spending with subgroup comparisons.ResultsWe analyzed 4,056 birth parents and 7,996 reproductive-aged females without pregnancy in a given year. Birth parents reported higher rates of unemployment (52.6% vs 46.6%, P<.001), and high rates of gaining (22.4%) and losing (25.6%) Medicaid in the delivery year. Birth parents were at higher risk of catastrophic health expenditures (excluding premiums: 9.2% vs 6.8%, odds ratio [OR] 1.95, 95% CI 1.61-2.34; including premiums: 21.3% vs 18.4%, OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.32-1.82). Birth parents living on low incomes had the highest risk of catastrophic health expenditures (18.8% vs 0.7% excluding premiums for 138% or less vs greater than 400% of the federal poverty level, relative risk [RR] 26.9; 29.8% vs 5.9% including premiums, RR 5.1). For birth parents living at low incomes, public insurance was associated with lower risks of catastrophic health expenditures than private insurance, particularly when including premium spending (incomes 138% of the federal poverty level or lower: 18.8% public vs 67.9% private, RR 0.28; incomes 139-250% of the federal poverty level: 6.5% public vs 41.1% private, RR 0.16). The risk of catastrophic spending for birth parents did not change significantly over time from before to after Affordable Care Act implementation.ConclusionPregnancy and delivery are associated with increased risk of catastrophic health expenditures in the delivery year. Medicaid and public coverage were more protective from high out-of-pocket costs than private insurance, particularly among low-income families.

Dataset Information

Health care expenditures for Medicaid-covered males with haemophilia in the United States, 2008.

Publications

Health care expenditures for Medicaid-covered males with haemophilia in the United States, 2008.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets