Breast Screening Utilization and Cost Sharing Among Employed Insured Women After the Affordable Care Act.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Carlos RC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7384237 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceReducing out-of-pocket costs is associated with improved patterns of contraception use. It is unknown whether reducing out-of-pocket costs is associated with fewer births.ObjectiveTo evaluate changes in birth rates by income level among commercially insured women before (2008-2013) and after (2014-2018) the elimination of cost sharing for contraception under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA).Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used data from Clinformatics Data Mart database from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2018, for women aged 15 to 45 years who were enrolled in an employer-based health plan and had pregnancy benefits for at least 1 year. Women without household income information and women with evidence of having undergone a hysterectomy were excluded.ExposureSection 2713 of the ACA.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of reproductive-aged women with a live birth by year (measured yearly from 2008 to 2018 [11 time points]) within 3 income categories. The secondary outcome was the distribution of contraceptive method fills in 3 categories by year: (1) most effective methods (long-acting reversible contraception or sterilization), (2) moderately effective methods (pill, patch, ring, and injectable), and (3) no prescription or surgical method.ResultsThe analytic sample included 4 590 989 women (mean [SD] age; 30.8 [9.1] years in 2013; 3 069 053 White [66.9%]) enrolled in 47 721 health plans. A total of 500 898 participants (40.8%) resided in households with incomes less than 400% of the federal poverty level in 2013. In all 3 years (2008, 2013, and 2018), women in the lowest income category were younger than women in the other income groups (median range, 21-22 years vs 30-34 years) and in households with a higher median number of dependents (9-10 vs 2-4). There was an associated decrease in births in all income groups in the period after the elimination of out-of-pocket costs. The estimated probability of birth decreased most precipitously among women in the lowest income group from 8.0% (95% CI, 7.4%-8.5%) in 2014 to 6.2% (95% CI, 5.7%-6.7%) in 2018, representing a 22.2% decrease (P < .001). The estimated probability decreased in the middle income group by 9.4%, from 6.4% (95% CI, 6.3%-6.4%) to 5.8% (95% CI, 5.7%-5.8%) (P < .001), and in the highest income group by 1.8%, from 5.6% (95% CI, 5.6%-5.7%) to 5.5% (95% CI, 5.4%-5.5%) (P < .001) in the period after the elimination of cost sharing.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, the elimination of cost sharing for contraception under the ACA was associated with improvements in contraceptive method prescription fills and a decrease in births among commercially insured women. Women with low income had more precipitous decreases than women with higher income, suggesting that enhanced access to contraception may address well-documented income-related disparities in unintended birth rates.
| S-EPMC7648257 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Affordable Care Act (ACA) eliminated cost-sharing for evidence-based preventive services in an effort to encourage use.To evaluate use of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in a national population-based sample before and after implementation of the ACA.Repeated cross-sectional analysis of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) between 2009 and 2012 comparing CRC screening rates before and after implementation of the ACA.Adults 50-64 with private health insurance and adults 65-75 with Medicare.Self-reported receipt of screening colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or fecal occult blood test (FOBT) within the past year among those eligible for screening.Our study included 8617 adults aged 50-64 and 3761 adults aged 65-75. MEPS response rates ranged from 58 to 63%. Among adults aged 50-64, 18.9-20.9% received a colonoscopy in the survey year, 0.59-2.1% received a sigmoidoscopy, and 7.9-10.4% received an FOBT. For adults aged 65-75, 23.6-27.7% received a colonoscopy, 1.3-3.2% a sigmoidoscopy, and 13.5-16.4% an FOBT. In adjusted analyses, among participants aged 50-64, there was no increase in yearly rates of colonoscopy (-0.28 percentage points, 95% CI -2.3 to 1.7, p?=?0.78), sigmoidoscopy (-1.1%, 95% CI -1.7 to -0.46, p?=?<0.001), or FOBT (-1.6%, 95% CI -3.2 to -0.03, p?=?0.046) post-ACA. For those aged 65-75, rates of colonoscopy (+2.3%, 95% CI -1.4 to 6.0, p?=?0.22), sigmoidoscopy (+0.34%, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.6, p?=?0.58) and FOBT (-0.65, 95% CI -4.1 to 2.8, p?=?0.72) did not increase. Among those aged 65-75 with Medicare and no additional insurance, the use of colonoscopy rose by 12.0% (95% CI 3.3 to 20.8, p?=?0.007). Among participants with Medicare living in poverty, colonoscopy use also increased (+5.7%, 95% CI 0.18 to 11.3, p?=?0.043).Eliminating cost-sharing for CRC screening has not resulted in changes in the use of CRC screening services for many Americans, although use may have increased in the post-ACA period among some Medicare beneficiaries.
| S-EPMC4762811 | biostudies-other
Project description:ImportanceThe Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) expanded Medicaid eligibility at the discretion of states to US individuals earning up to 138% of the federal poverty level (FPL) and made private insurance subsidies available to most individuals earning up to 400% of the FPL. Its national impact remains debated.ObjectiveTo determine the association of the ACA with ambulatory quality, patient experience, utilization, and cost.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used difference-in-differences (DiD) analyses comparing outcomes before (2011-2013) and after (2014-2016) ACA implementation for US adults aged 18 to 64 years with income below and greater than or equal to 400% of the FPL. Participants were respondents to the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a nationally representative annual survey. Data analysis was performed from January 2021 to March 2022.ExposuresACA implementation.Main outcomes and measuresFor quality and experience, this study examined previously published composites based on individual measures, including high-value care composites (eg, preventive testing) and low-value care composites (eg, inappropriate imaging), an overall patient experience rating, a physician communication composite, and an access-to-care composite. For utilization, outpatient, emergency, and inpatient encounters and prescribed medicines were examined. Overall and out-of-pocket expenditures were analyzed for cost.ResultsThe total sample included 123 171 individuals (mean [SD] age, 39.9 [13.4] years; 65 034 women [52.8%]). After ACA implementation, adults with income less than 400% of the FPL received increased high-value care (diagnostic and preventive testing) compared with adults with income 400% or higher of the FPL (change from 70% to 72% vs change from 84% to 84%; adjusted DiD, 1.20%; 95% CI, 0.18% to 2.21%; P = .02) with no difference in any other quality composites. Individuals with income less than 400% of the FPL had larger improvements in experience, communication, and access composites compared with those with income greater than or equal to 400% of the FPL (global rating of health, change from 69% to 73% vs change from 79% to 81%; adjusted DiD, 2.12%; 95% CI, 0.18% to 4.05%; P = .03). There were no differences in utilization or cost, except that receipt of primary care increased for those with lower income vs those with higher income (change from 65% to 66% vs change from 80% to 77%; adjusted DiD, 2.97%; 95% CI, 1.18% to 4.77%; P = .001) and total out-of-pocket expenditures decreased for those with lower income vs those with higher income (change from $504 to $439 vs from $757 to $769; adjusted DiD, -$105.50; 95% CI, -$167.80 to -$43.20; P = .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional national study, the ACA was associated with improved patient experience, communication, and access and decreased out-of-pocket expenditures, but little or no change in quality, utilization, and total cost.
| S-EPMC9206183 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansions (ME) increased insurance coverage for low-income Americans, among whom unmet need for mental health care is high. Empirical evidence regarding the impact of expanding insurance coverage on use of mental health services among low income and minority populations is lacking.MethodsData on mental health service use collected between 2007 and 2015 by the Medical Expenditures Panel Survey from nationally representative cross-sectional samples of low income (income<138% of the federal poverty line) adults were analyzed. Use trends among people in states that expanded Medicaid (ME states; n=29,827) were compared with concurrent trends among people in states that did not (non-ME states; n=22,873), with statistical adjustment for demographic characteristics and psychological distress.ResultsAnnual outpatient visits for mental health conditions increased by 0.513 (0.053-0.974) visits per person, from a baseline rate in ME states of 0.894 visits per person. However, no significant changes were observed in number of mental health related hospital stays, emergency department visits or prescription fills. The increase outpatient visits was limited to Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites, with no increase in service use observed among non-Hispanic Blacks. There was no apparent increase in the number of users of outpatient mental health care (AOR=0.992, P=0.942) and a marginally significant (P=0.096) increase of 3.144 visits per user.DiscussionME had a limited but positive impact on use of mental health services by low income Americans, although it may also have increased racial/ethnic disparities.
| S-EPMC7483910 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCost sharing can deter the use of health services and act as a potential contributor to racial/ethnic disparities in cancer. The Affordable Care Act required most health plans to cover, without cost sharing, preventive services, including colorectal cancer screening. Population-based data were used to estimate the impact of the Affordable Care Act's cost-sharing provision (together with other Affordable Care Act provisions targeting preventive care) on ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening, comparing Hispanics with non-Hispanics.MethodsAn interrupted time series quasi-experimental analysis was used to examine ethnic differences in colorectal cancer screening pre- and post-implementation of the Affordable Care Act (analysis performed in 2018). The study cohort included insured individuals aged 50-64 years who participated in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from 2007 through 2015 (n=44,343).ResultsDuring the pre-Affordable Care Act period, screening rates decreased annually for non-Hispanics by -0.38 per 100 adults per year (95% CI= -0.55, -0.22) but remained level for Hispanics (annual trend per 100 adults: 0.01, 95% CI= -0.34, 0.35). After cost sharing was eliminated in 2011, colorectal cancer screening rates increased for both Hispanics (by 1.29 per 100 adults, 95% CI=0.69, 1.89) and non-Hispanics (by 0.58 per 100 adults, 95% CI=0.18, 0.99). The difference in trend increases between Hispanics and non-Hispanics was not statistically significant (0.70%, 95% CI= -0.24, 1.64).ConclusionsThese findings suggest that Affordable Care Act implementation resulted in increased colorectal cancer screening; however, the effect of the law was not significantly different between Hispanics and non-Hispanics. These results provide indications that more needs to be done to reduce racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening.
| S-EPMC8285085 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 156,300 (95% CI 144,100-165,900) Americans living with HIV in 2012 were unaware of their infection. To increase knowledge of HIV status, CDC guidelines seek to make HIV screening a routine part of medical care. This paper examines how routinely California primary care providers test for HIV and how providers' knowledge of California's streamlined testing requirements, use of sexual histories, and having an electronic medical record prompt for HIV testing, relate to test offers.MethodsWe surveyed all ten California health plans offered under health reform's Insurance Exchange (response rate = 50%) and 322 primary care providers to those plans (response rate = 19%) to assess use of HIV screening and risk assessments.ResultsOnly 31.7% of 60 responding providers reported offering HIV tests to all or most new enrollees and only 8.8% offered an HIV test of blood samples all or most of the time despite the California law requiring that providers offer HIV testing of blood samples in primary care settings. Twenty-eight of the 60 providers (46.6%) were unaware that California had reduced barriers to HIV screening by eliminating the requirement for written informed consent and pre-test counseling. HIV screening of new enrollees all or most of the time was reported by 53.1% of the well-informed providers, but only 7.1% of the less informed providers, a difference of 46 percentage points (95% CI: 21.0%-66.5%). Providers who routinely obtained sexual histories were 29 percentage points (95% CI: 0.2%-54.9%) more likely to screen for HIV all or most of the time than those who did not ask sexual histories.ConclusionChanging HIV screening requirements is important, but not sufficient to make HIV testing a routine part of medical care. Provider education to increase knowledge about the changed HIV testing requirements could positively impact testing rates.
| S-EPMC4587809 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study objectiveThe 2010 provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) extended eligibility for health insurance for young adults aged 19 to 25 years. It is unclear, however, how expanded coverage changes health care behavior and promotes efficient use of emergency department (ED) services. Our objective was to use population-level emergency department data to characterize any changes in diagnoses seen in ED among young adults since the implementation of the ACA dependent coverage expansion.MethodsWe performed a difference-in-differences analysis of 2009 to 2011 ED visits from California, Florida, and New York, using all-capture administrative data to determine how the use of ED services changed for clinical categories after the ACA provision among young adults aged 19 to 25 years compared with slightly older adults unaffected by the provision, aged 26 to 31 years.ResultsWe analyzed a total of 10,158,254 ED visits made by 4,734,409 patients. After the implementation of the 2010 ACA provision, young adults had a relative decrease of 0.5% ED visits per 1,000 people compared with the older group. For the majority of diagnostic categories, young adults' rates and risk of visit did not change relative to that of slightly older adults after the implementation of the ACA. However, although young adults' ED visits significantly increased for mental illnesses (2.6%) and diseases of the circulatory system (eg, nonspecific chest pain) (4.8%), visits decreased for pregnancy-related diagnoses and diseases of the skin (eg, cellulitis, abscess) compared with that of the older group (3.7% and 3.1%, respectively).ConclusionOur results indicate that increased coverage has kept young adults out of the ED for specific conditions that can be cared for through access to other channels. As EDs face capacity challenges, these results are encouraging and offer insight into what could be expected under further insurance expansions from health care reform.
| S-EPMC4917390 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Affordable Care Act (ACA) expanded the coverage of Medicaid to include entire population with income below 138% of federal poverty line. It remains unclear whether this policy change has improved access to and utilization of health care, particularly use of mammography and Pap tests among poor women.MethodsWe used a difference-in-difference (DID) design to estimate the impact of Medicaid expansion on mammography and Pap tests utilization among low-income women. Expansion states are the treatment group and non-expansion states are the control group. The years 2012-13 are the pre-expansion period and 2015-16 are the post-expansion period for the purpose of estimating the DID parameters.ResultsThe difference-in-difference estimate show that likelihood of utilizing mammograms did not change significantly among low-income women after the implementation of Medicaid expansion (DID coefficient -0.0476 with t-statistics at -1.26), Pap test decreased (coefficient -0.0615, t-statistics -2.76), and Medicaid enrollment has increased significantly among low-income women living in expansion states (coefficient 0.0889 with t-value of 3.68).ConclusionExpansion of Medicaid was associated with increased Medicaid enrollment but did not yield near-term improvement in use of mammography and Pap tests among low-income women. Factors beyond health insurance coverage may be important in determining the likelihood of obtaining these screenings. Policy makers should try to identify other barriers to cancer screenings among low-income women in the USA.
| S-EPMC6447234 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo determine the impact of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on utilization of benefits of both eye care and primary care examinations in individuals who did not have health insurance prior to the ACA.MethodsPatients examined in an urban eye clinic from 2017 to 2018 were invited to participate. Patients were classified into two groups: Insured Group, who had health insurance before and after the ACA; The ACA Group, who had insurance only after the ACA. Patients were surveyed on how often they were examined by their eye care and primary care physicians before and after the ACA. The care utilization frequency was categorized into 3 levels: Frequent Care Use, Rare Care Use, and Never. To test the utilization of benefits frequency difference between two groups, the z-ratio was calculated.ResultsA total of 4,355 patients were enrolled with 87.1% in the Insured Group and 12.9% in the ACA Group. After the ACA implementation, the percentage of "Frequent Care Use" of the eye care and primary care in the ACA Group patients significantly increased from 31.2% and 53.7% to 57.9% and 74.9%, respectively (P<0.001), but were significantly lower than those in the Insured Group (76.6% and 93.9%, P < 0.001).ConclusionThe ACA significantly improved utilization of benefits of eye care and primary care for individuals in the ACA Group. Although improved, those patients who received health insurance through the ACA still had lower utilization of benefits than those in the Insured Group.
| S-EPMC7605705 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4116441 | biostudies-literature