Dataset Information

Associations of Insurance Churn and Catastrophic Health Expenditures With Implementation of the Affordable Care Act Among Nonelderly Patients With Cancer in the United States.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Health insurance coverage is dynamic in the United States, potentially changing from month to month. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) aimed to stabilize markets and reduce financial burden, particularly among those with preexisting conditions.

Objective

To describe the risks of insurance churn (ie, gain, loss, or change in coverage) and catastrophic health expenditures among nonelderly patients with cancer in the United States, assessing for changes associated with ACA implementation.

Design, setting, and participants

This retrospective, cross-sectional study uses data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a representative sample of the US population from 2005 to 2018. Respondents included were younger than 65 years, identified by health care use associated with a cancer diagnosis code in the given year. Statistical analysis was conducted from July 30, 2020, to January 5, 2021.

Exposures

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Main outcomes and measures

Survey weights were applied to generate estimates for the US population. Annual risks of insurance churn (ie, any uninsurance or insurance change or loss) and catastrophic health expenditures (spending >10% income) were calculated, comparing subgroups with the adjusted Wald test. Weighted multivariable linear regression was used to assess for changes associated with ACA implementation.

Results

From 6069 respondents, we estimated a weighted mean of 4.78 million nonelderly patients (95% CI, 4.55-5.01 million; female patients: weighted mean, 63.9% [95% CI, 62.2%-65.7%]; mean age, 50.3 years [95% CI, 49.7-50.8 years]) with cancer annually in the United States. Patients with cancer experienced lower annual risks of insurance loss (5.3% [95% CI, 4.5%-6.1%] vs 7.6% [95% CI, 7.4%-7.8%]) and any uninsurance (14.6% [95% CI, 13.3%-16.0%] vs 24.1% [95% CI, 23.5%-24.7%]) but increased risk of catastrophic health expenditures (expenses alone: 12.4% [95% CI, 11.2%-13.6%] vs 6.3% [95% CI, 6.2%-6.5%]; including premiums: 26.6% [95% CI, 25.0%-28.1%] vs 16.5% [95% CI, 16.1%-16.8%]; P < .001) relative to the population without cancer. Patients with cancer from low-income families and with full-year private coverage were at particularly high risk of catastrophic health expenditures (including premiums: 81.7% [95% CI, 74.6%-88.9%]). After adjustment, low income was the factor most strongly associated with both insurance churn and catastrophic spending, associated with annual risk increases of 6.5% (95% CI, 4.2%-8.8%) for insurance loss, 17.3% (95% CI, 13.4%-21.2%) for any uninsurance, and 37.4% (95% CI, 33.3%-41.6%) for catastrophic expenditures excluding premiums (P < .001). In adjusted models relative to 2005-2009, full ACA implementation (2014-2018) was associated with a decreased annual risk of any uninsurance (-4.2%; 95% CI, -7.4% to -1.0%; P = .01) and catastrophic spending by expenses alone (-3.0%; 95% CI, -5.3% to -0.8%; P = .008) but not including premiums (0.4%; 95% CI, -2.8% to 4.5%; P = .82).

Conclusions and relevance

In this cross-sectional study, US patients with cancer faced significant annual risks of insurance churn and catastrophic health spending. Despite some improvements with ACA implementation, large burdens remained, and further reform is needed to protect this population from excessive hardship.

SUBMITTER: Albright BB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8427370 | 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:Importance:Trauma is an expensive and unpredictable source of out-of-pocket spending for American families. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) sought to improve financial protection by expanding health insurance coverage, but its association with health care spending for patients with traumatic injury remains largely unknown. Objective:To evaluate the association of ACA implementation with out-of-pocket spending, premiums, and catastrophic health expenditures (CHE) among adult patients with traumatic injury. Design, Setting, and Participants:Data from a nationally representative sample of US adults aged 19 to 64 years who had a hospital stay or emergency department visit for a traumatic injury from January 2010 to December 2017 were analyzed using the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Multivariable generalized linear models were used to evaluate changes in spending after ACA implementation. Additionally, 4 income subgroups were evaluated based on ACA thresholds for program eligibility: lowest-income patients (earning 138% or less of the federal poverty level [FPL]), low-income patients (earning 139% to 250% of the FPL), middle-income patients (earning 251% to 400% of the FPL), and high-income patients (earning more than 400% of the FPL). Data were analyzed from February to December 2019. Exposures:Implementation of the ACA, beginning January 1, 2014. Main Outcomes and Measures:Out-of-pocket spending, premium spending, out-of-pocket plus premium spending, and likelihood of experiencing CHE, defined as out-of-pocket plus premium spending exceeding 19.5% of family income. Results:Of the 6288 included patients, 2995 (weighted percentage, 51.3%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 41.4 (12.8) years. Implementation of the ACA was associated with 31% lower odds of CHE (adjusted odds ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.87; P = .002). Changes were greatest in lowest-income patients, who experienced 30% lower out-of-pocket spending (adjusted percentage change, -30.4%; 95% CI, -46.6% to -9.4%; P = .01), 26% lower out-of-pocket plus premium spending (adjusted percentage change, -26.3%; 95% CI, -41.0% to -8.1%; P = .01), and 39% lower odds of CHE (adjusted odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.84; P = .002). Low-income patients experienced decreased out-of-pocket spending and out-of-pocket plus premium spending but no changes in CHE, while middle-income and high-income patients experienced no significant changes in any spending outcome. In the post-ACA period, 1 in 11 of all patients with traumatic injury and 1 in 5 with the lowest incomes continued to experience CHE each year. Conclusions and Relevance:Implementation of the ACA was associated with improved financial protection for US adults with traumatic injury, especially lowest-income individuals targeted by the law's Medicaid expansions. Despite these gains, injured patients remain at risk of financial strain.

Project description:ObjectiveTo describe prevalence, trends, and risk factors for catastrophic health expenditures in the year of delivery among birth parents (delivering people).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from 2008-2016. We identified newborn birth parents and a 2:1 nearest-neighbor propensity-matched control cohort of nonpregnant reproductive-aged individuals, then assessed for catastrophic health expenditures (spending greater than 10% of family income) in the delivery year. We applied survey weights to extrapolate to the noninstitutionalized U.S. population and used the adjusted Wald test for significance testing. We compared risk of catastrophic health expenditures between birth parents and the control cohort and described time trends and risk factors for catastrophic spending with subgroup comparisons.ResultsWe analyzed 4,056 birth parents and 7,996 reproductive-aged females without pregnancy in a given year. Birth parents reported higher rates of unemployment (52.6% vs 46.6%, P<.001), and high rates of gaining (22.4%) and losing (25.6%) Medicaid in the delivery year. Birth parents were at higher risk of catastrophic health expenditures (excluding premiums: 9.2% vs 6.8%, odds ratio [OR] 1.95, 95% CI 1.61-2.34; including premiums: 21.3% vs 18.4%, OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.32-1.82). Birth parents living on low incomes had the highest risk of catastrophic health expenditures (18.8% vs 0.7% excluding premiums for 138% or less vs greater than 400% of the federal poverty level, relative risk [RR] 26.9; 29.8% vs 5.9% including premiums, RR 5.1). For birth parents living at low incomes, public insurance was associated with lower risks of catastrophic health expenditures than private insurance, particularly when including premium spending (incomes 138% of the federal poverty level or lower: 18.8% public vs 67.9% private, RR 0.28; incomes 139-250% of the federal poverty level: 6.5% public vs 41.1% private, RR 0.16). The risk of catastrophic spending for birth parents did not change significantly over time from before to after Affordable Care Act implementation.ConclusionPregnancy and delivery are associated with increased risk of catastrophic health expenditures in the delivery year. Medicaid and public coverage were more protective from high out-of-pocket costs than private insurance, particularly among low-income families.