Dataset Information

Co-payment policies and breast and cervical cancer screening in Medicaid.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

This study investigated the relationship between state Medicaid co-payment policies and cancer screening for Medicaid-enrolled women.

Study design

Cross-sectional analysis of administrative claims and enrollment data.

Methods

Our data included Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) outpatient claims files across 43 states in 2003, 2008, and 2010, the years for which both MAX data and state cost-sharing data were available. Data on enrollee demographics and screening services from enrollment and claims files were merged with state-year data on co-payment policies and county-level controls from the Area Health Resources File. Participants were nonelderly, nondisabled, nonpregnant women in the recommended age range for each screening service (50-64 years for mammograms; 21-64 years for Pap tests) enrolled in fee-for-service Medicaid. The main independent variable is whether an enrollee faced cost sharing for preventive services. We examined 3 categories of cost sharing: co-payments for all visits, including for preventive services; co-payments for outpatient visits but waived for preventive services; and no co-payments. The main outcome measure was receipt of mammogram or Pap test within a 12-month period.

Results

Medicaid enrollees with co-payments for preventive services were less likely to receive both screening mammograms and Pap tests than enrollees in states not requiring cost sharing for preventive services.

Conclusions

Co-payments for preventive services discourage breast and cervical cancer screening among Medicaid enrollees. The effect is larger for breast cancer screening, which is costlier and requires an additional visit. Considering this evidence, cost sharing for preventive services may lead to adverse health consequences and greater long-term costs.

SUBMITTER: Sabik LM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8011838 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Despite healthcare reforms mandating expanded insurance coverage and reduced out-of-pocket costs for preventive care, cancer screening rates remain relatively static. No study has measured cancer screening rates for multiple tests among non-Medicare patients. METHODS:This retrospective, population-based claims analysis, conducted in 2016-2017, of commercially insured and Medicaid-insured women aged 30-59 years enrolled in IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicaid Databases (containing approximately 90 and 17 million enrollees, respectively) during 2010-2015 describes screening rates for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer. Key outcomes were (1) proportion screened for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer among the age-eligible population compared with accepted age-based recommendations and (2) proportion with longer-than-recommended intervals between tests. RESULTS:One half (54.7%) of commercially insured women aged 40-59 years (n=1,538,444) were screened three or more times during the 6-year study period for breast cancer; for Medicaid-insured women (n=78,897), the rates were lower (23.7%). One third (43.4%) of commercially insured and two thirds (68.9%) of Medicaid-insured women had a >2.5-year gap between mammograms. Among women aged 30-59 years, 59.3% of commercially insured women and 31.4% of Medicaid-insured women received two or more Pap tests. The proportion of patients with a >3.5-year gap between Pap tests was 33.9% (commercially insured) and 57.1% (Medicaid-insured). Among women aged 50-59 years, 63.3% of commercially insured women and 47.2% of Medicaid-insured women were screened at least one time for colorectal cancer. Almost all women aged 30-59 years (commercially insured, 99.1%; Medicaid-insured, 98.9%) had at least one healthcare encounter. CONCLUSIONS:Breast and cervical cancer screenings remain underutilized among both commercially insured and Medicaid-insured populations, with lower rates among the Medicaid-insured population. However, almost all women had at least one healthcare encounter, suggesting opportunities for better coordinated care.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Although state Medicaid programs cover cancer screening, Medicaid beneficiaries are less likely to be screened for cancer and are more likely to present with tumors of an advanced stage than are those with other insurance. The current study was performed to determine whether state Medicaid eligibility and reimbursement policies affect the receipt of breast, cervical, and colon cancer screening among Medicaid beneficiaries. METHODS:Cross-sectional regression analyses of 2007 Medicaid data from 46 states and the District of Columbia were performed to examine associations between state-specific Medicaid reimbursement/eligibility policies and receipt of cancer screening. The study sample included individuals aged 21 years to 64 years who were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicaid for at least 4 months. Subsamples eligible for each screening test were: Papanicolaou test among 2,136,511 patients, mammography among 792,470 patients, colonoscopy among 769,729 patients, and fecal occult blood test among 753,868 patients. State-specific Medicaid variables included median screening test reimbursement, income/financial asset eligibility requirements, physician copayments, and frequency of eligibility renewal. RESULTS:Increases in screening test reimbursement demonstrated mixed associations (positive and negative) with the likelihood of receiving screening tests among Medicaid beneficiaries. In contrast, increased reimbursements for office visits were found to be positively associated with the odds of receiving all screening tests examined, including colonoscopy (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.06-1.08), fecal occult blood test (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.08-1.10), Papanicolaou test (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.02-1.03), and mammography (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.02-1.03). Effects of other state-specific Medicaid policies varied across the screening tests examined. CONCLUSIONS:Increased reimbursement for office visits was consistently associated with an increased likelihood of being screened for cancer, and may be an important policy tool for increasing screening among this vulnerable population.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Reaching an acceptable participation rate in screening programs is challenging. With the objective of supporting the Belarus government to implement mammography screening as a single intervention, we analyse the main determinants of breast cancer screening participation. METHODS:We developed a discrete choice experiment using a mixed research approach, comprising a literature review, in-depth interviews with key informants (n = 23), "think aloud" pilots (n = 10) and quantitative measurement of stated preferences for a representative sample of Belarus women (n = 428, 89% response rate). The choice data were analysed using a latent class logit model with four classes selected based on statistical (consistent Akaike information criterion) and interpretational considerations. RESULTS:Women in the sample were representative of all six geographic regions, mainly urban (81%), and high-education (31%) characteristics. Preferences of women in all four classes were primarily influenced by the perceived reliability of the test (sensitivity and screening method) and costs. Travel and waiting time were important components in the decision for 34% of women. Most women in Belarus preferred mammography screening to the existing clinical breast examination (90%). However, if the national screening program is restricted in capacity, this proportion of women will drop to 55%. Women in all four classes preferred combined screening (mammography with clinical breast examination) to single mammography. While this preference was stronger if lower test sensitivity was assumed, 28% of women consistently gave more importance to combined screening than to test sensitivity. CONCLUSION:Women in Belarus were favourable to mammography screening. Population should be informed that there are no benefits of combined screening compared to single mammography. The results of this study are directly relevant to policy makers and help them targeting the screening population.

Project description:BackgroundIndigenous women are vulnerable to cervical cancer. Screening is a strategy to reduce the burden of the disease.ObjectiveTo evaluate the prevalence profile of cervical cancer screening cytological results in Brazilian indigenous women by age and frequency of tests compared to non-indigenous women.MethodsA cross-sectional study evaluating the prevalences of screening test results in indigenous women assisted in the Brazilian Amazon from 2007 to 2019 (3,231 tests), compared to non-indigenous women (698,415 tests). The main outcome was the cytological result. Other variables were frequency, age groups, and population. The frequency was categorized as "1st test", the first test performed by the women in their lifetime, or "screening test," tests from women who had previously participated in screening. Analyzes were based on prevalences by age group and population. We used Prevalence Ratios (PR) and 95% Confidence Intervals for risks and linear regression for trends.ResultsData from the 1st test showed a higher prevalence of Low-grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion (LSIL) in indigenous women. Peaks were observed in indigenous under 25, 35 to 39, 45 to 49, and 60 to 64. The prevalence of High-grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion or more severe (HSIL+) was low in both groups in women younger than 25. The indigenous HSIL+ prevalence curve showed a rapid increase, reaching peaks in women from 25 to 34 years, following a slight decrease and a plateau. In screening tests, HSIL+ was more prevalent in indigenous from 25 to 39 (PR 4.0,2.3;6.8) and 40 to 64 (PR 3.8,1.6;9.0). In indigenous, the PR of HSIL+ results in screening tests over 1st tests showed no screening effect in all age groups. In non-indigenous, there was a significant effect toward protection in the age groups over 25.ConclusionThis screening study of indigenous women from diverse ethnicities showed a higher prevalence of cytological LSIL and HSIl+ than in non-indigenous women. The protective screening effect in reducing HSIL+ prevalence was not observed in indigenous.