Dataset Information

Do People with Health Insurance Coverage Who Live in Areas with High Uninsurance Rates Pay More for Emergency Department Visits?

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To investigate the relationship between the percent uninsured in a county and expenditures associated with the typical emergency department visit.

Data sources

The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey linked to county-level data from the American Community Survey, the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, and the Area Health Resources Files.

Study design

We use a nationally representative sample of emergency department visits that took place between 2009 and 2013 to estimate the association between the percent uninsured in counties and the amount paid for a typical visit. Final estimates come from a diagnosis-level fixed-effects model, with additional controls for a wide variety of visit, individual, and county characteristics.

Principal findings

Among those with private insurance, we find that an increase of 1 percentage point in the county uninsurance rate is associated with a $20 increase in the mean emergency department payment. No such association is observed among visits covered by other insurance types.

Conclusions

Results provide tentative evidence that the costs associated with high uninsurance rates spill over to those with insurance, but future research needs to replicate these findings with longitudinal data and methods before drawing causal conclusions. Recent data on changes in area uninsurance rates following the ACA's insurance expansions and subsequent changes in emergency department expenditures afford a valuable opportunity to do this.

SUBMITTER: Kirby JB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5867177 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Do People with Health Insurance Coverage Who Live in Areas with High Uninsurance Rates Pay More for Emergency Department Visits?

Kirby James B JB Cohen Joel W JW

Health services research 20170207 2

<h4>Objective</h4>To investigate the relationship between the percent uninsured in a county and expenditures associated with the typical emergency department visit.<h4>Data sources</h4>The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey linked to county-level data from the American Community Survey, the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, and the Area Health Resources Files.<h4>Study design</h4>We use a nationally representative sample of emergency department visits that took place between 2009 and 2013 t ...[more]

PMID: 28176307

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceInsurers have increasingly adopted policies to reduce emergency department (ED) visits that they consider unnecessary. One common approach is to retrospectively deny coverage if the ED discharge diagnosis is determined by the insurer to be nonemergent.ObjectiveTo characterize ED visits that may be denied coverage if the ED coverage denial policy of a large national insurer, Anthem, Inc, is widely adopted.Design, setting, and participantsA cross-sectional analysis of probability-sampled ED visits from the nationally representative National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey ED subsample occurring from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2015, was conducted. Visits by commercially insured patients aged 15 to 64 years were examined. Those with ED discharge diagnoses defined by Anthem's policy as nonemergent and therefore subject to possible denial of coverage were classified as denial diagnosis visits. The primary presenting symptoms among denial diagnosis visits were identified, and all visits by commercially insured adults presenting with these primary symptoms were classified as denial symptom visits.Main outcomes and measuresEach visit cohort as a weighted proportion of commercially insured adult ED visits. The proportion of each visit cohort that received ED-level care, defined as visits where patients were triaged as urgent or emergent, received 2 or more diagnostic tests, or were admitted or transferred, was also examined.ResultsFrom 2011 to 2015, 15.7% (95% CI, 15.0%-16.4%) of commercially insured adult ED visits (4440 of 28 304) were denial diagnosis visits (mean [SD] patient age, 36.6 [14.0] years; 2592 [58.7%] female and 2962 [63.5%] white). Among these visits, 39.7% (95% CI, 37.1%-42.3%) received ED-level care: 24.5% (95% CI, 21.7%-27.4%) were initially triaged as urgent or emergent and 26.0% (95% CI, 23.8%-28.3%) received 2 or more diagnostic tests. These denial diagnosis visits shared the same presenting symptoms as 87.9% (95% CI, 87.3%-88.4%) of commercially insured adult ED visits (24 882 of 28 304) (mean [SD] patient age, 38.5 [14.1] years; 14 362 [57.9%] female and 17 483 [68.7%] white). Among these denial symptom visits, 65.1% (95% CI, 63.4%-66.9%) received ED-level care: 43.2% (95% CI, 40.2%-46.4%) were triaged as urgent or emergent, 51.9% (95% CI, 50.0%-53.9%) received 2 or more diagnostic tests, and 9.7% (95% CI, 8.8%-10.6%) were admitted or transferred.Conclusions and relevanceAnthem's nonemergent ED discharge diagnoses were not associated with identification of unnecessary ED visits when assessed from the patient's perspective. This cost-reduction policy could place many patients who reasonably seek ED care at risk of coverage denial.

Project description:BackgroundAssisted reproductive technology (ART) insurance mandates promote more selective utilization of ART clinic resources including intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Our objective was to examine whether ICSI utilization differs by state insurance mandates for ART coverage and assess if such a difference is associated with male factor, preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), and/or live birth rates.MethodsIn this retrospective analysis of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) data from 2018, ART clinics in ART-mandated states (n = 8, AR, CT, HI, IL, MD, MA, NJ, RI) were compared individually to one another and with non-mandated states in aggregate (n = 42) for use of ICSI, male factor, PGT, and live birth rates. ANOVA was used to evaluate differences between ART-mandated states and non-mandated states. Individual ART-mandated states were compared using Welch t-tests. Statistical significance was determined by Bonferroni Correction.ResultsThere were significant differences in ICSI rates (%, mean ± SD) between MA (53.3 ± 21.3) and HI (90.7 ± 19.6), p = 0.028; IL (86.5 ± 18.7) and MA, p = 0.002; IL and MD (57.2 ± 30.8), p = 0.039; IL and NJ (62.0 ± 26.8), p = 0.007; between non-mandated states in aggregate (79.9 ± 19.9) and MA, p = 0.006, and NJ (62.0 ± 26.8), p = 0.02. Male factor rates of HI (65.8 ± 16.0) were significantly greater compared to CT (18.8 ± 8.7), IL (26.0 ± 11.9), MA (26.9 ± 6.6), MD (29.3 ± 9.9), NJ (30.6 ± 17.9), and non-mandated states in aggregate (29.7 ± 13.7), all p < 0.0001. No significant differences were reported for use of PGT and/or live birth rates across all age groups regardless of mandate status.ConclusionsICSI use varied significantly among ART-mandated states while demonstrating no differences in live birth rates. These data suggest that the prevalence of male factor and the presence of a state insurance mandate are not the only factors influencing ICSI use. It is suggested that other non-clinical factors may impact the rate of ICSI utilization in a given state.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the association of Private, Medicare, and Medicaid/Uninsured insurance type with 30-day Emergency Department visits/Observation Stays (EDOS), readmissions, and costs in a safety-net hospital (SNH) serving diverse socioeconomic status patients.Summary background dataMedicare's Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) disproportionately penalizes SNHs.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study used inpatient National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2013-2019) data merged with cost data. Frailty, expanded Operative Stress Score, case status, and insurance type were used to predict odds of EDOS and readmissions, as well as index hospitalization costs.ResultsThe cohort had 1,477 Private; 1,164 Medicare; and 3,488 Medicaid/Uninsured cases with a patient mean age 52.1 years [SD=14.7] and 46.8% of the cases were performed on male patients. Medicaid/Uninsured (aOR=2.69, CI=2.38-3.05, P<.001) and Medicare (aOR=1.32, CI=1.11-1.56, P=.001) had increased odds of urgent/emergent surgeries and complications versus Private patients. Despite having similar frailty distributions, Medicaid/Uninsured compared to Private patients had higher odds of EDOS (aOR=1.71, CI=1.39-2.11, P<.001), and readmissions (aOR=1.35, CI=1.11-1.65, P=.004), after adjusting for frailty, OSS, and case status, while Medicare patients had similar odds of EDOS and readmissions versus Private. Hospitalization variable cost %change was increased for Medicare (12.5%) and Medicaid/Uninsured (5.9%), but Medicaid/Uninsured was similar to Private after adjusting for urgent/emergent cases.ConclusionsIncreased rates and odds of urgent/emergent cases in Medicaid/Uninsured patients drive increased odds of complications and index hospitalization costs versus Private. SNHs care for higher cost populations while receiving lower reimbursements and are further penalized by the unintended consequences of HRRP. Increasing access to care, especially for Medicaid/Uninsured patients, could reduce urgent/emergent surgeries resulting in fewer complications, EDOS/readmissions, and costs.

Dataset Information

Do People with Health Insurance Coverage Who Live in Areas with High Uninsurance Rates Pay More for Emergency Department Visits?

Objective

Data sources

Study design

Principal findings

Conclusions

Publications

Do People with Health Insurance Coverage Who Live in Areas with High Uninsurance Rates Pay More for Emergency Department Visits?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets