Dataset Information

Assessment of Medicaid Beneficiaries Included in Community Engagement Requirements in Kentucky.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

States are pursuing Section 1115 Medicaid demonstration waiver authority to apply community engagement (CE) requirements (eg, participation in work, volunteer activities, or training) to beneficiaries deemed able-bodied as a condition of coverage. Understanding the size and characteristics of the populations included in these requirements can help inform policy initiatives and anticipate effects.

Objective

To estimate the number and characteristics of Kentucky Medicaid beneficiaries who would have to meet CE requirements.

Design, setting, and participants

Cross-sectional study in which administrative records for the entire population of Medicaid beneficiaries in Kentucky as of February 2018 and original survey data, based on responses from 9396 Medicaid beneficiaries included in the waiver program, were analyzed.

Exposures

Eligibility for Kentucky's Medicaid demonstration waiver as of the originally planned implementation date (July 2018).

Main outcomes and measures

Number of beneficiaries included in CE requirements, including those already meeting vs not meeting hour quotas and those who may qualify for medical frailty exemptions.

Results

Among the 9396 individuals included in the Section 1115 waiver program who participated in the survey, the mean weighted (SD) age was 36.1 (11.9) years; a weighted 47.2% of respondents were female, and most beneficiaries (weighted percentage, 78.2%) were non-Hispanic white participants. We estimated that 132 790 (95% CI, 129 132-136 449) beneficiaries would have been required to meet CE requirements in July 2018, amounting to 40.2% of Medicaid beneficiaries included in the demonstration waiver. Of this group, 25 422 (95% CI, 23 135-27 710) beneficiaries may have qualified for a medical frailty exemption either by self-attestation (after confirmation by their Medicaid insurer) or by being identified as eligible by physicians or their insurer. Another 58 943 (95% CI, 55 687-62 196) beneficiaries likely would have met CE hour requirements and been required to report compliance. Ultimately, 48 427 (95% CI, 45 281-51 574) individuals would have had to add new activities to meet CE requirements, amounting to 14.7% of those included in the demonstration waiver as a whole and 36.3% of those included in the CE component of the waiver. Beneficiaries in the potentially medically frail group reported worse socioeconomic status, poorer health outcomes, and higher rates of hospital admission and emergency department use than those meeting CE requirements. Similarly, the group currently not meeting and not exempt from CE hour requirements reported worse socioeconomic status than those meeting the CE requirements, although magnitudes of the differences were smaller.

Conclusions and relevance

Findings suggest that most beneficiaries who would be included in CE programs either already meet activity requirements, which they will be required to proactively report, or may qualify for a medical frailty exemption. Consequently, the outcomes of CE programs will depend on states' processes for addressing health-related, socioeconomic, and administrative barriers to participating in and reporting CE activities and identifying medical frailty.

SUBMITTER: Venkataramani AS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6647552 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceFederal and state policymakers continue to pursue work requirements and premiums as conditions of Medicaid participation. Opinion polling should distinguish between general policy preferences and specific views on quotas, penalties, and other elements.ObjectiveTo identify views of adults in Kentucky regarding the design of Medicaid work requirements and premiums.Design, setting, and participantA cross-sectional survey was conducted via telephone and the internet from June 27 through July 11, 2019, of 1203 Kentucky residents 9 months before the state intended to implement Medicaid work requirements and mandatory premiums. Statistical analysis was performed from October 2019 to August 2023.Main outcomes and measuresAgreement, disagreement, or neutral views on policy components were the main outcomes. Recruitment for the survey used statewide random-digit dialing and an internet panel to recruit residents aged 18 years or older. Findings were weighted to reflect state demographics. Of 39 110 landlines called, 209 reached an eligible person (of whom 150 participated), 8654 were of unknown eligibility, and 30 247 were ineligible. Of 55 305 cell phone lines called, 617 reached an eligible person (of whom 451 participated), 29 951 were of unknown eligibility, and 24 737 were ineligible. Internet recruitment (602 participants) used a panel of adult Kentucky residents maintained by an external data collector.ResultsPercentages were weighted to resemble the adult population of Kentucky residents. Of the participants in the study, 52% (95% CI, 48%-55%) were women, 80% (95% CI, 77%-82%) were younger than 65 years, 41% (95% CI, 38%-45%) were enrolled in Medicaid, 36% (95% CI, 32%-39%) were Republican voters, 32% (95% CI, 29%-36%) were Democratic voters, 14% (95% CI, 11%-16%) were members of racial and ethnic minority groups (including but not limited to American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black, Hispanic or Latinx, and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander), and 48% (95% CI, 44%-52%) were employed. Most participants supported work requirements generally (69% [95% CI, 66%-72%]) but did not support terminating benefits due to noncompliance (43% [95% CI, 39%-46%]) or requiring quotas of 20 or more hours per week (34% [95% CI, 31%-38%]). Support for monthly premiums (34% [95% CI, 31%-38%]) and exclusion penalties for premium nonpayment (22% [95% CI, 19%-25%]) was limited. Medicaid enrollees were significantly less supportive of these policies than nonenrollees. For instance, regarding work requirements, agreement was lower (64% [95% CI, 59%-69%] vs 72% [95% CI, 68%-77%]) and disagreement higher (26% [95% CI, 21%-31%] vs 20% [95% CI, 16%-24%]) among current Medicaid enrollees compared with nonenrollees (P = .04). Among Medicaid enrollees, some beliefs about work requirements varied significantly by employment status but not by political affiliation. Among nonenrollees, beliefs about work requirements, premiums, and Medicaid varied significantly by political affiliation but not by employment.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that even when public constituencies express general support for Medicaid work requirements or premiums, they may oppose central design features, such as quotas and termination of benefits. Program participants may also hold significantly different beliefs than nonparticipants, which should be understood before policies are changed.

Project description:ImportanceDisruptions in care during the COVID-19 pandemic may have decreased access to care for patients with opioid use disorder.ObjectiveTo examine trends in opioid use disorder treatment including buprenorphine possession, urine drug testing, and opioid treatment program services during the COVID-19 public health emergency.Design setting and participantsThis cohort study included 6453 parent and childless adult Medicaid beneficiaries, aged 18 to 64 years, with opioid use disorder and continuous enrollment from December 1, 2018, to September 30, 2020, in Wisconsin. Logistic regression compared differences in study outcomes before, early, and later in the COVID-19 public health emergency. Analyses were conducted from January 2021 to October 2021.ExposuresEarly (March 16, 2020, to May 15, 2020) and later (May 16, 2020, to September 30, 2020) in the public health emergency.Main outcomes and measuresPerson-week outcomes included possession of buprenorphine, completion of outpatient urine drug testing, and receipt of opioid treatment program services.ResultsThe final cohort of 6453 participants included 3986 (61.8%) childless adults; 5741 (89%) were younger than 50 years, 3435 (53.2%) were women, 5036 (78.0%) White, and 22.0% were racial and ethnic minority groups (American Indian, 269 [4.2%]; Asian, 26 [0.4%]; Black, 458 [7.1%]; Hispanic, 292 [4.5%]; Pacific Islander, 1 [.02%]; Multiracial, 238 [3.7%]). Overall, 2858 (44.3%), 5074 (78.6%), and 2928 (45.4%) received buprenorphine, urine drug testing, or opioid treatment program services during the study period, respectively. Probability of buprenorphine possession did not change in the early or later part of the public health emergency. Probability of urine drug testing initially decreased (marginal effect [ME], -0.04; 95% CI, -0.04 to -0.03; P < .001) and then partially recovered in the later public health emergency (ME, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.03 to -0.02; P < .001). Probability of opioid treatment program services followed a similar pattern, with an early decrease (ME, -0.05; 95% CI, -0.05 to -0.04; P < .001) followed by partial recovery (ME, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.03 to -0.02; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn a sample of continuously enrolled adult Medicaid beneficiaries, the COVID-19 public health emergency was not associated with decreased probability of buprenorphine possession, but was associated with decreased probability of urine drug testing and opioid treatment program services. These findings suggest patients in office-based settings retained access to buprenorphine despite decreased on-site services like urine drug tests, whereas patients at opioid treatment programs experienced greater disruption in care. Given the importance of medications for opioid use disorder in preventing overdose, policy makers should consider permanent policy changes based on lessons learned from the public health emergency to enable ongoing enhanced access to these medications.

Project description:ImportanceLittle is known about primary care physicians who provide contraceptive services to Medicaid beneficiaries. Evaluating this workforce may help explain barriers to accessing these services since contraceptive care access is critical for Medicaid beneficiaries' health.ObjectiveTo describe the primary care physician workforce that provides contraceptive services to Medicaid beneficiaries and explore the factors associated with their Medicaid contraceptive service provision.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study, conducted from August 1 to October 10, 2022, used data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System from 2016 for primary care physicians from 4 specialties (family medicine, internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology [OBGYN], and pediatrics).Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcomes were providing intrauterine devices (IUDs) or contraceptive implants to at least 1 Medicaid beneficiary, prescribing hormonal birth control methods (including a pill, patch, or ring) to at least 1 Medicaid beneficiary, the total number of Medicaid beneficiaries provided IUDs or implants, and the total number Medicaid beneficiaries prescribed hormonal birth control methods in 2016. Physician- and community-level factors associated with contraceptive care provision were assessed using multivariate regression methods.ResultsIn the sample of 251 017 physicians (54% male; mean [SD] age, 49.17 [12.58] years), 28% were international medical graduates (IMGs) and 70% practiced in a state that had expanded Medicaid in 2016. Of the total physicians, 48% prescribed hormonal birth control methods while 10% provided IUDs or implants. For OBGYN physicians, compared with physicians younger than 35 years, being aged 35 to 44 years (odds ratio [OR], 3.51; 95% CI, 2.93-4.21), 45 to 54 years (OR, 3.01; 95% CI, 2.43-3.72), or 55 to 64 years (OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.82-2.83) was associated with higher odds of providing IUDs and implants. However, among family medicine physicians, age groups associated with lower odds of providing IUDs or implants were 45 to 54 years (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55-0.80), 55 to 64 years (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.39-0.65), and 65 years or older (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.19-0.44). Except for those specializing in OBGYN, being an IMG was associated with lower odds of providing hormonal contraceptive service (family medicine IMGs: OR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.73-0.88]; internal medicine IMGs: OR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.77-0.93]; and pediatric IMGs: OR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.78-0.93]). Practicing in a state that expanded Medicaid by 2016 was associated with higher odds of prescribing hormonal contraception for family medicine (OR 1.50; 95% CI, 1.06-2.12) and internal medicine (OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.18-2.48) physicians but not for physicians from other specialties.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of primary care physicians, physician- and community-level factors, such as specialty, age, and the Medicaid expansion status of their state, were significantly associated with how they provided contraceptive services to Medicaid beneficiaries. However, the existence of associations varied across clinical specialties. Ensuring access to contraception among Medicaid beneficiaries may therefore require policy and program approaches tailored for different physician types.

Project description:ObjectiveLive interactive telemedicine is increasingly covered by state Medicaid programs, but whether telemedicine is improving equity in utilization of subspecialty care is not known. We examined patterns of telemedicine use for outpatient pediatric subspecialty care within the state Medicaid programs.MethodsWe identified children ≤17 years old in 2014 Medicaid Analysis eXtract data for 12 states. We identified telemedicine-using and telemedicine-nonusing medical and surgical subspecialists. Among children cared for by telemedicine-using subspecialists, we assessed child and subspecialist characteristics associated with any telemedicine visit using logistic regression with subspecialist-level random effects. Among children cared for by telemedicine-using and nonusing subspecialists, we compared visit rates across child characteristics by assessing negative binomial regression interaction terms.ResultsOf 12,237,770 pediatric Medicaid beneficiaries, 2,051,690 (16.8%) had ≥1 subspecialist visit. Of 42,695 subspecialists identified, 146 (0.3%) had ≥1 telemedicine claim. Among children receiving care from telemedicine-using subspecialists, likelihood of any telemedicine use was increased for rural children (odds ratio [OR] 10.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.3-17.1 compared to large metropolitan referent group) and those >90 miles from the subspecialist (OR 13.4, 95% CI 10.2-17.7 compared to 0-30 mile referent group). Compared to children receiving care from telemedicine-nonusing subspecialists, matched children receiving care from telemedicine-using subspecialists had larger differences in visit rates by distance to care, county rurality, ZIP code median income, and child race/ethnicity (P < .001 for interaction terms).ConclusionsChildren in rural communities and at distance to subspecialists had increased likelihood of telemedicine use. Use overall was low, and results indicated that early telemedicine policies and implementation did not close disparities in subspecialty visit rates by child geographic and sociodemographic characteristics.