Dataset Information

Public Health Insurance Expansion for Immigrant Children and Interstate Migration of Low-Income Immigrants.

ABSTRACT: 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.

SUBMITTER: Yasenov VI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6865314 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Public Health Insurance Expansion for Immigrant Children and Interstate Migration of Low-Income Immigrants.

Yasenov Vasil I VI Lawrence Duncan D Mendoza Fernando S FS Hainmueller Jens J

JAMA pediatrics 20200101 1

<h4>Importance</h4>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.<h4>Objective</h4>To examine whether expansion of public health insurance to non-US-born, lawful permane ...[more]

PMID: 31738388

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAn increasing diversity of children's health coverage options under the US Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, together with uncertainty regarding reauthorization of the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) beyond 2017, merits renewed attention on the quality of these options for children.ObjectiveTo compare health care access, quality, and cost outcomes by insurance type (Medicaid, CHIP, private, and uninsured) for children in households with low to moderate incomes.Design, setting, and participantsA repeated cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the 2003, 2007, and 2011-2012 US National Surveys of Children's Health, comprising 80,655 children 17 years or younger, weighted to 67 million children nationally, with household incomes between 100% and 300% of the federal poverty level. Multivariable logistic regression models compared caregiver-reported outcomes across insurance types. Analysis was conducted between July 14, 2014, and May 6, 2015.ExposuresInsurance type was ascertained using a caregiver-reported measure of insurance status and each household's poverty status (percentage of the federal poverty level).Main outcomes and measuresCaregiver-reported outcomes related to access to primary and specialty care, unmet needs, out-of-pocket costs, care coordination, and satisfaction with care.ResultsAmong the 80,655 children, 51,123 (57.3%) had private insurance, 11,853 (13.6%) had Medicaid, 9554 (18.4%) had CHIP, and 8125 (10.8%) were uninsured. In a multivariable logistic regression model (with results reported as adjusted probabilities [95% CIs]), children insured by Medicaid and CHIP were significantly more likely to receive a preventive medical (Medicaid, 88% [86%-89%]; P < .01; CHIP, 88% [87%-89%]; P < .01) and dental (Medicaid, 80% [78%-81%]; P < .01; CHIP, 77% [76%-79%]; P < .01) visits than were privately insured children (medical, 83% [82%-84%]; dental, 73% [72%-74%]). Children with all insurance types experienced challenges in access to specialty care, with caregivers of children insured by CHIP reporting the highest rates of difficulty accessing specialty care (28% [24%-32%]), problems obtaining a referral (23% [18%-29%]), and frustration obtaining health care services (26% [23%-28%]). These challenges were also magnified for privately insured children with special health care needs, whose caregivers reported significantly greater problems accessing specialty care (29% [26%-33%]) and frustration obtaining health care services (36% [32%-41%]) than did caregivers of children insured by Medicaid, and a lower likelihood of insurance always meeting the child's needs (63% [60%-67%]) than children insured by Medicaid or CHIP. Caregivers of privately insured children were also significantly more likely to experience out-of-pocket costs (77% [75%-78%]) than were caregivers of children insured by Medicaid (26% [23%-28%]; P < .01) or CHIP (38% [35%-40%]; P < .01).Conclusions and relevanceThis examination of caregiver experiences across insurance types revealed important differences that can help guide future policymaking regarding coverage for families with low to moderate incomes.

Dataset Information

Public Health Insurance Expansion for Immigrant Children and Interstate Migration of Low-Income Immigrants.

Publications

Public Health Insurance Expansion for Immigrant Children and Interstate Migration of Low-Income Immigrants.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets