Dataset Information

Comparison of Access to Eye Care Appointments Between Patients With Medicaid and Those With Private Health Care Insurance.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Although low-income populations have more eye problems, whether they face greater difficulty obtaining eye care appointments is unknown. Objective:To compare rates of obtaining eye care appointments and appointment wait times for those with Medicaid vs those with private insurance. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this prospective, cohort study conducted from January 1, 2017, to July 1, 2017, researchers made telephone calls to a randomly selected sample of vision care professionals in Michigan and Maryland stratified by neighborhood (urban vs rural) and professional type (ophthalmologist vs optometrist) to request the first available appointment. Appointments were sought for an adult needing a diabetic eye examination and a child requesting a routine eye examination for a failed vision screening. Researchers called each practice twice, once requesting an appointment for a patient with Medicaid and the other time for a patient with Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) insurance, and asked whether the insurance was accepted and, if so, when the earliest available appointment could be scheduled. Main Outcomes and Measures:Rate of successfully made appointments and mean wait time for the first available appointment. Results:A total of 603 telephone calls were made to 330 eye care professionals (414 calls [68.7%] to male and 189 calls [31.3%] to female eye care professionals). The sample consisted of ophthalmologists (303 [50.2%]) and optometrists (300 [49.8%]) located in Maryland (322 [53.4%]) and Michigan (281 [46.6%]). The rates of successfully obtaining appointments among callers were 61.5% (95% CI, 56.0%-67.0%) for adults with Medicaid and 79.3% (95% CI, 74.7%-83.9%) for adults with BCBS (P < .001) and 45.4% (95% CI, 39.8%-51.0%) for children with Medicaid and 62.5% (95% CI, 57.1%-68.0%) for children with BCBS (P < .001). Mean wait time did not vary significantly between the BCBS and Medicaid groups for both adults and children. Adults with Medicaid had significantly decreased odds of receiving an appointment compared with those with BCBS (odds ratio [OR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28-0.59; P < .001) but had increased odds of obtaining an appointment if they were located in Michigan vs Maryland (OR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.49-3.87; P < .001) or with an optometrist vs an ophthalmologist (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.31-2.79; P < .001). Children with Medicaid had significantly decreased odds of receiving an appointment compared with those with BCBS (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28-0.60; P < .001) but had increased odds of obtaining an appointment if they were located in Michigan vs Maryland (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.04-2.73; P = .03) or with an optometrist vs an ophthalmologist (OR, 8.00; 95% CI, 5.37-11.90; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance:Callers were less successful in trying to obtain eye care appointments with Medicaid than with BCBS, suggesting a disparity in access to eye care based on insurance status, although confounding factors may have contributed to this finding. Improving access to eye care professionals for those with Medicaid may improve health outcomes and decrease health care spending in the long term.

SUBMITTER: Lee YH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6007883 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundArthroscopic rotator cuff repair is an effective treatment for patients with symptomatic rotator cuff tears. Ensuring timely and appropriate postoperative access to physical therapy (PT) is paramount to the achievement of optimal patient outcomes. Extended immobility due to a lack of formal rehabilitation can lead to decreased range of motion, continued pain, and potential reoperation for stiffness. The purpose of this study is to evaluate national disparities in access to PT services after rotator cuff repair between patients with private vs. Medicaid insurance. This study will further evaluate differences in access to PT services between states that have previously undergone Medicaid expansion as compared with those states which have not.MethodsThe American Physical Therapy Association Website was used to identify 10 physical therapy practices from the capital city in every state. Each physical therapy practice was contacted using a mock-patient script for a patient with Medicaid insurance or private (Blue Cross Blue Shield) insurance. To maintain anonymity, calls were made by two separate investigators. Univariate analysis included independent sample t-test for differences between the study groups for continuous variables. Chi square or Fisher's exact test assessed differences in discrete variables between the study groups.ResultsContact was made with 465 of 510 (91.2%) physical therapy practices. Overall, 52.7% accepted Medicaid insurance, while 94.9% accepted private insurance (P < .001). Medicaid insurance was more likely to be accepted in a Medicaid expansion state than a nonexpansion state (56.1% vs. 46.3%, P = .05). Private insurance was also more likely to be accepted in a Medicaid expansion state than a nonexpansion state (96.7% vs. 91.3%, P = .01). The time to first appointment varied more in Medicaid expansion states (private range: 0-43 days, Medicaid range: 0-72 days) than in nonexpansion states (private range: 0-11 days, medicaid range: 0-10 days).ConclusionSignificantly fewer PT practices accepted Medicaid insurance nationally compared with private insurance, which suggests that patients with Medicaid insurance have greater difficulty accessing PT after rotator cuff repair in the United States compared with patients with private insurance. While Medicaid insurance was more likely to be accepted in a Medicaid expansion state, this finding was only borderline significant, which indicates that patients in Medicaid expansion states are still having difficulty accessing PT, despite efforts to expand government insurance coverage to improve access to care. Orthopedic surgeons should counsel their patients with Medicaid insurance to seek out PT as early as possible in the postoperative period to avoid delays in rehabilitation.

Project description:ImportanceContemporary data directly comparing experiences between individuals with public and private health insurance among the 5 major forms of coverage in the US are limited.ObjectiveTo compare individual experiences related to access to care, costs of care, and reported satisfaction with care among the 5 major forms of health insurance coverage in the US.Design, setting, and participantsThis survey study used data from the 2016-2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System on 149 290 individuals residing in 17 states and the District of Columbia, representing the experiences of more than 61 million US adults.ExposurePrivate (individually purchased and employer-sponsored coverage) or public health insurance (Medicare, Medicaid, and Veterans Health Administration [VHA] or military coverage).Main outcomes and measuresA pairwise multivariable analysis was performed, controlling for underlying health status of US adults covered by private and public health insurance plans, and responses to survey questions on access to care, costs of care, and reported satisfaction with care were compared. Estimates are weighted.ResultsA total of 149 290 individuals responded to the survey (mean [SD] age, 50.7 [0.2] years; 52.8% female). Among the respondents, most were covered by private insurance (95 396 [63.9%]), followed by Medicare (35 531 [23.8%]), Medicaid (13 286 [8.9%]), and VHA or military (5074 [3.4%]) coverage. Among those with private insurance, most (117 939 [79.0%]) had employer-sponsored coverage. Compared with those covered by Medicare, individuals with employer-sponsored insurance were less likely to report having a personal physician (odds ratio [OR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.48-0.57) and were more likely to report instability in insurance coverage (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.30-1.83), difficulty seeing a physician because of costs (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.77-2.27), not taking medication because of costs (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.27-1.62), and having medical debt (OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 2.69-3.17). Compared with those covered by Medicare, individuals with employer-sponsored insurance were less satisfied with their care (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.56-0.64). Compared with individuals covered by Medicaid, those with employer-sponsored insurance were more likely to report having medical debt (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.83-2.32) and were less likely to report difficulty seeing a physician because of costs (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.95) and not taking medications because of costs (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66-0.92). No difference in satisfaction with care (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.87-1.06) was found between individuals with employer-sponsored private health insurance and those with Medicaid coverage.Conclusions and relevanceIn this survey study, individuals with private insurance were more likely to report poor access to care, higher costs of care, and less satisfaction with care compared with individuals covered by publicly sponsored insurance programs. These findings suggest that public health insurance options may provide more cost-effective care than private options.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Access to Eye Care Appointments Between Patients With Medicaid and Those With Private Health Care Insurance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets