Dataset Information

Changes in Health Care-Related Financial Burden for US Families With Children Associated With the Affordable Care Act.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) sought to improve access and affordability of health insurance. Although most ACA policies targeted childless adults, the extent to which these policies also impacted families with children remains unclear.

Objective

To examine changes in health care-related financial burden for US families with children before and after the ACA was implemented based on income eligibility for ACA policies.

Design, setting, and participants

Data used for this cohort study were obtained from the 2000-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a nationally representative, population-based survey. Multivariable regression with a difference-in-differences estimator was used to examine changes in family financial burden before and after ACA implementation according to income-based ACA eligibility groups (≤138% [lowest-income], 139%-250% [low-income], 251%-400% [middle-income], and >400% [high-income] federal poverty level). The cohort included 92 165 families with 1 or more children (age ≤18 years) and 1 or more adult parents/guardians.

Exposures

Income-based eligibility groups during post-ACA years (calendar years 2014-2017) vs pre-ACA years (calendar years 2000-2013).

Main outcomes and measures

Family annual out-of-pocket (OOP) health care and premium cost burden relative to income. High OOP burden was determined based on a previously validated algorithm with relative cost thresholds that vary across incomes, and extreme OOP burden was defined as costs exceeding 10% of income. Premiums exceeding 9.5% of income were classified as burdensome and premiums relative to median household income defined an unaffordability index.

Results

Compared with high-income families who experienced a lesser change post-ACA implementation (high OOP burden, 1.1% pre-ACA vs 0.9% post-ACA), the lowest-income families saw the greatest reduction in high OOP burden (35.6% pre-ACA vs 23.7% post-ACA; difference-in-differences: -11.4%; 95% CI, -13.2% to -9.5%) followed by low-income families (24.6% pre-ACA vs 17.3% post-ACA, difference-in-differences: -6.8%; 95% CI, -8.7% to -4.9%) and middle-income families (6.1% pre-ACA vs 4.6% post-ACA, difference-in-differences: -1.2%; 95% CI, -2.3% to -0.01%). Although premiums rose for all groups, premium unaffordability was the least exacerbated for the lowest-, low-, and middle-income families compared with higher-income families.

Conclusions and relevance

The findings of this study suggest that low- and middle-income families with children who were eligible for ACA Medicaid expansions and Marketplace subsidies experienced greater reductions in health care-related financial burden after the ACA was implemented compared with families with higher incomes. However, despite ACA policies, many low- and middle-income families with children appear to continue to face considerable financial burden from premiums and OOP costs.

SUBMITTER: Wisk LE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7522777 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough all 11- or 12-year-olds in the US were recommended to receive a 3-dose series of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine within a 12-month period prior to 2016, rates of completion of the HPV vaccine series remained suboptimal. The effects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), including private insurance coverage with no cost-sharing and health insurance expansions, on HPV vaccine completion are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the associations between the ACA's 2010 provisions and 2014 insurance expansions with HPV vaccine completion by sex and health insurance type.MethodsUsing 2009-2015 public and private health insurance claims from Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts, we identified 9-to-26-year-olds who had at least one HPV vaccine dose. We conducted a logistic regression model to examine the associations between the ACA policy changes with HPV vaccine completion (defined as receiving a 3-dose series within 12 months from the date of initiation) as well as interactions by sex and health insurance type.ResultsOver the study period, among females and males who initiated the HPV vaccine, 27.6 and 28.0%, respectively, completed the series within 12 months. Among females, the 2010 ACA provision was associated with a 4.3 percentage point increases in HPV vaccine completion for the privately-insured (0.043; 95% CI: 0.036-0.061) and a 5.7 percentage point increase for Medicaid enrollees (0.057; 95% CI: 0.032-0.081). The 2014 health insurance expansions were associated with a 9.4 percentage point increase in vaccine completion for females with private insurance (0.094; 95% CI: 0.082-0.107) and a 8.5 percentage point increase for Medicaid enrollees (0.085; 95% CI: 0.068-0.102). Among males, the 2014 ACA reforms were associated with a 5.1 percentage point increase in HPV vaccine completion for the privately-insured (0.051; 95% CI: 0.039-0.063) and a 3.4 percentage point increase for Medicaid enrollees (0.034; 95% CI: 0.017-0.050). In a sensitivity analysis, findings were similar with HPV vaccine completion within 18 months.ConclusionsDespite low HPV vaccine completion overall, both sets of ACA provisions were associated with increases in completion among females and males. Our results suggest that expanding Medicaid across the remaining states could increase HPV vaccine completion among publicly-insured youth and prevent HPV-related cancers.

Project description:BackgroundDespite public perception, most of the nearly 20 million US veterans have health coverage outside the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), and VHA eligibility and utilization vary across veterans. Out-of-pocket healthcare spending thus remains a potential source of financial hardship for veterans. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) aimed to expand health insurance access, but its effect on veterans' financial risk protection has not been explored.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether ACA implementation was associated with changes in veterans' risk of catastrophic health expenditures, and to characterize drivers of catastrophic health spending among veterans post-ACA.DesignUsing multivariable linear probability regression, we examined changes in likelihood of catastrophic health spending after ACA implementation, stratifying by age (18-64 vs 65+), household income tercile, and payer (VHA vs non-VHA). Among veterans with catastrophic spending post-ACA, we evaluated sources of out-of-pocket spending.ParticipantsNationally representative sample of 13,030 veterans aged 18+ from the 2010 to 2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.InterventionACA implementation, January 1, 2014.Main measuresLikelihood of catastrophic health expenditures, defined as household out-of-pocket spending exceeding 10% of household income.Key resultsAmong veterans aged 18-64, ACA implementation was associated with a 26% decrease in likelihood of catastrophic health expenditures (absolute change, -1.4 percentage points [pp]; 95% CI, -2.6 to -0.2; p=0.03), which fell from 5.4% pre-ACA to 3.9% post-ACA. This was driven by a 38% decrease in catastrophic spending among veterans with non-VHA coverage (absolute change, -1.8pp; 95% CI, -3.0 to -0.6; p=0.003). In contrast, catastrophic expenditure rates among veterans aged 65+ remained high, at 13.0% pre- and 12.5% post-ACA. Major drivers of veterans' spending post-ACA include dental care, prescription drugs, and home care.ConclusionsACA implementation was associated with reduced household catastrophic health expenditures for younger but not older veterans. These findings highlight gaps in veterans' financial protection and areas amenable to policy intervention.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Nearly one quarter of trauma patients are uninsured and hospitals recoup less than 20% of inpatient costs for their care. This study examines changes to hospital reimbursement for inpatient trauma care if the full coverage expansion provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) were in effect. METHODS:We abstracted nonelderly adults (ages 18-64 years) admitted for trauma from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample during 2010-the last year before most major ACA coverage expansion policies. We calculated national and facility-level reimbursements and trauma-related contribution margins using Nationwide Inpatient Sample-supplied cost-to-charge ratios and published reimbursement rates for each payer type. Using US census data, we developed a probabilistic microsimulation model to determine the proportion of pre-ACA uninsured trauma patients that would be expected to gain private insurance, Medicaid, or remain uninsured after full implementation of the ACA. We then estimated the impact of these coverage changes on national and facility-level trauma reimbursement for this population. RESULTS:There were 145,849 patients (representing 737,852 patients nationwide) included. National inpatient trauma costs for patients aged 18 years to 64 years totaled US $14.8 billion (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.5,17.1). Preexpansion reimbursements totaled US $13.7 billion (95% CI, 10.8-14.7), yielding a national margin of -7.9% (95% CI, -10.6 to -5.1). Postexpansion projected reimbursements totaled US $15.0 billion (95% CI, 12.7-17.3), increasing the margin by 9.3 absolute percentage points to +1.4% (95% CI, -0.3 to +3.2). Of the 263 eligible facilities, 90 (34.2%) had a positive trauma-related contribution margin in 2010, which increased to 171 (65.0%) using postexpansion projections. Those facilities with the highest proportion of uninsured and racial/ethnic minorities experienced the greatest gains. CONCLUSION:Health insurance coverage expansion for uninsured trauma patients has the potential to increase national reimbursement for inpatient trauma care by over one billion dollars and nearly double the proportion of hospitals with a positive margin for trauma care. These data suggest that insurance coverage expansion has the potential to improve trauma centers' financial viability and their ability to provide care for their communities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Economic analysis, level II.

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about changes in socioeconomic disparities in noninsurance and care unaffordability among nonelderly cancer survivors following the Affordable Care Act (ACA).MethodsCancer survivors aged 18-64 years nationwide were identified from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Trend and difference-in-differences analyses were conducted to examine changes in percent uninsured and percent reporting care unaffordability pre-(2011 to 2013) and post-(2014 to 2017) ACA Medicaid expansion, by sociodemographic factors.ResultsA total of 118 631 cancer survivors were identified from Medicaid expansion (n = 72 124) and nonexpansion (n = 46 507) states. Following the ACA, percent uninsured and percent reporting care unaffordability decreased nationwide. Medicaid expansion was associated with a 1.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.1 to 3.5) percentage points (ppt) net decrease in noninsurance and a 2.9 (95% CI = 0.7 to 5.1) ppt net decrease in care unaffordability. In stratified analyses by sociodemographic factors, substantial decreases were observed in female survivors, those with low or medium household incomes, the unemployed, and survivors with multiple comorbidities. However, we observed slightly increased percentages in reporting noninsurance (ppt = 1.7; 95% CI = -1.2 to 4.5) and care unaffordability (ppt = 3.1, 95% CI = -0.4 to 6.5) in nonexpansion states between 2016 and 2017, translating to 67 163 and 124 160 survivors, respectively.ConclusionWe observed reductions in disparities by sociodemographic factors in noninsurance and care unaffordability among nonelderly cancer survivors following the ACA, with largest decreases in women, those with low or medium income, multiple comorbid conditions, the unemployed, and those residing in Medicaid expansion states. However, the uptick of 82 750 uninsured survivors in 2017, mainly from nonexpansion states, is concerning. Ongoing monitoring of the effects of the ACA is warranted, especially in evaluating health outcomes.