Dataset Information

Association of Medicaid vs Marketplace Eligibility on Maternal Coverage and Access With Prenatal and Postpartum Care.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Policy makers are considering insurance expansions to improve maternal health. The tradeoffs between expanding Medicaid or subsidized private insurance for maternal coverage and care are unknown.

Objective

To compare maternal coverage and care by Medicaid vs marketplace eligibility.

Design, setting, and participants

A retrospective cohort study using a difference-in-difference research design was conducted from March 14, 2020, to April 22, 2021. Maternal coverage and care use were compared among women with family incomes 100% to 138% of the federal poverty level (FPL) residing in 10 Medicaid expansion sites (exposure group) who gained Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act and in 5 nonexpansion sites (comparison group) who gained marketplace eligibility before (2011-2013) and after (2015-2018) insurance expansion implementation. Participants included women aged 18 years or older from the 2011-2018 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System survey.

Exposures

Eligibility for Medicaid or marketplace coverage under the Affordable Care Act.

Main outcomes and measures

Outcomes included coverage in the preconception and postpartum periods, early and adequate prenatal care, and postpartum checkups and effective contraceptive use.

Results

The study population included 11 432 women age 18 years and older (32% age 18-24 years, 33% age 25-29 years, 35% age ≥30 years) with incomes 100% to 138% FPL: 7586 in a Medicaid state (exposure group) and 3846 in a nonexpansion marketplace state (comparison group). Women in marketplace states were younger, had higher educational level and marriage rates, and had less racial and ethnic diversity. Medicaid relative to marketplace eligibility was associated with increased Medicaid coverage (20.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 12.8 to 30.0 percentage points), decreased private insurance coverage (-10.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -13.3 to -7.5 percentage points), and decreased uninsurance (-8.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -20.1 to -0.1 percentage points) in the preconception period, increased postpartum Medicaid (17.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.7 to 34.3 percentage points) and increased adequate prenatal care (4.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 11.0 percentage points) in difference-in-difference models. No evidence of significant differences in early prenatal care, postpartum check-ups, or postpartum contraception was identified.

Conclusions and relevance

In this cohort study, eligibility for Medicaid was associated with increased Medicaid, lower preconception uninsurance, and increased adequate prenatal care use. The lower rates of preconception uninsurance among Medicaid-eligible women suggest that women with low incomes were facing barriers to marketplace enrollment, underscoring the potential importance of reducing financial barriers for the population with low incomes.

SUBMITTER: Eliason EL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8649838 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe Affordable Care Act created 2 new coverage options for uninsured adults: Medicaid expansion, which in most states provides comprehensive coverage without premiums and deductibles; and private marketplace coverage, which requires a premium contribution and cost-sharing, though with generous federal subsidies at lower incomes. How enrollment rates compare in the marketplace vs Medicaid is an important policy question as states continue to weigh alternative coverage options such as Medicaid buy-in programs, enrolling Medicaid-eligible populations into marketplace plans, or creating a public option.ObjectiveTo assess the association between income eligibility for Medicaid vs marketplace coverage and insurance enrollment among low-income adults in Colorado.Design setting and participantsUsing 2014 and 2015 all-payer claims data from Colorado and detailed income eligibility information, we used a regression discontinuity design to assess the difference in Medicaid and marketplace enrollment just below and just above 138% of the federal poverty level (FPL), the eligibility threshold between the 2 programs. The sample included nonpregnant adults aged 19 to 64 years with incomes between 75% to 400% FPL. We stratified our analysis by age, sex, chronic condition status, and urban vs rural residence. Analysis was conducted from January to October 2020.Main outcome and measuresThe main outcome was total enrollment in either Medicaid or marketplace coverage during marketplace's Open Enrollment period. Income-based health insurance eligibility was assessed as a percentage of FPL at the time of initial application for coverage.ResultsThe primary analytical sample included 32 091 enrollees in 2014 and 55 451 in 2015, with incomes ranging from 120% to 156% FPL. Most enrollees were women (59.26% in 2014, 59.20% in 2015), resided in urban areas (70.36% in 2014, 73.08% in 2015), and had no chronic conditions (74.66% in 2014, 76.11% in 2015). For age, in 2014 and 2015, respectively, 13.22% and 13.93% were aged 19 to 25 years, 27.85% and 28.54% were aged 26 to 34 years, 23.58% and 24.34% were aged 35 to 44 years, 18.35% and 17.75% were aged 45 to 54 years, and 17.00% and 15.44% were aged 55 to 64 years. Marketplace enrollment was 81.3% (95% CI, -86.0% to -75.0%) lower than Medicaid enrollment in 2014 and 88.6% (95% CI, -90.8% to -86.0%) lower in 2015 among those close to the 138% FPL eligibility threshold. The drop-off in marketplace enrollment was largest among younger adults, aged 26 to 34 and 35 to 44 years: relative drop off -88.7% (95% CI, -93.3% to -80.8%) and -87.8% (95% CI, -90.8% to -83.9%) in 2014, and relative drop off -91.9% (95% CI, -94.5% to -87.9%) and -93.0% (95% CI, -94.5% to -91.1%) in 2015, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study using a regression-discontinuity analysis, meaningful gaps in insurance enrollment may have existed for those with incomes just above the eligibility threshold for Medicaid expansion, especially among younger adults. Policies expanding Medicaid income eligibility or zero-dollar premium marketplace plans are likely to be more effective at inducing enrollment than subsidized private plans with premium requirements.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral states expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act using Section 1115 waivers to implement healthy behavior incentive (HBI) programs, but the impact of this type of expansion relative to traditional expansion is not well understood.ObjectiveTo examine whether Medicaid expansion with healthy behavior incentive programs and traditional Medicaid expansion were associated with differential changes in coverage, access, and self-rated health outcomes among low-income adults.DesignDifference-in-differences analysis of American Community Survey and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from 2011 to 2017.ParticipantsLow-income adults ages 19-64 in the Midwest Census region (American Community Survey, n = 665,653; Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, n = 71,959).InterventionsExposure to either HBI waiver or traditional Medicaid expansion in the state of residence.Main measuresCoverage: Medicaid, private, or any health insurance coverage; access: routine checkup, personal doctor, delaying care due to cost; health: cancer screening, preventive care, healthy behaviors, self-reported health.Key resultsHealthy behavior incentive (HBI) and traditional expansion (TE) states experienced reductions in uninsurance (- 5.6 [- 7.5, - 3.7] and - 6.2 [- 8.1, - 4.4] percentage points, respectively) and gains in Medicaid (HBI, + 7.6 [2.4, 12.8]; TE, + 9.7 [5.9, 13.4] percentage points) relative to non-expansion states. Both expansion types were associated with increases in rates of having a personal doctor (HBI, + 3.8 [2.0, 5.6]; TE, + 5.9 [2.2, 9.6] percentage points) and mammography (HBI, + 5.6 [0.6, 10.6]; TE, + 7.3 [0.7, 13.9] percentage points). Meanwhile, checkups increased more in HBI than in TE states (p < 0.01), but no other changes in health care services differed between expansion types.ConclusionsMedicaid expansion was associated with improvements in coverage and access to care with few differences between expansion types.

Project description:ImportanceAccess to postpartum care is restricted for low-income women who are recent or undocumented immigrants enrolled in Emergency Medicaid.ObjectiveTo examine the association of a policy extending postpartum coverage to Emergency Medicaid recipients with attendance at postpartum visits and use of postpartum contraception.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study linked Medicaid claims and birth certificate data from 2010 to 2019 to examine changes in postpartum care coverage on postpartum care and contraception use. A difference-in-difference design was used to compare the rollout of postpartum coverage in Oregon with a comparison state, South Carolina, which did not cover postpartum care. The study used 2 distinct assumptions to conduct the analyses: first, preintervention differences in postpartum visit attendance and contraceptive use would have remained constant if the policy expanding coverage had not been passed (parallel trends assumption), and second, differences in preintervention trends would have continued without the policy change (differential trend assumption). Data analysis was performed from September 2020 to October 2021.ExposuresMedicaid coverage of postpartum care.Main outcomes and measuresAttendance at postpartum visits and postpartum contraceptive use, defined as receipt of any contraceptive method within 60 days of delivery.ResultsThe study population consisted of 27 667 live births among 23 971 women (mean [SD] age, 29.4 [6.0] years) enrolled in Emergency Medicaid. The majority of all births were to multiparous women (21 289 women [76.9%]; standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.08) and were delivered vaginally (20 042 births [72.4%]; SMD = 0.03) and at term (25 502 births [92.2%]; SMD = 0.01). Following Oregon's expansion of postpartum coverage to women in Emergency Medicaid, there was a large and significant increase in postpartum care visits and contraceptive use. Assuming parallel trends, postpartum care attendance increased by 40.6 percentage points (95% CI, 34.1-47.1 percentage points; P < .001) following the policy change. Under the differential trends assumption, postpartum visits increased by 47.9 percentage points (95% CI, 41.3-54.6 percentage points; P < .001). Postpartum contraception use increased similarly. Under the parallel trends assumption, postpartum contraception within 60 days increased by 33.2 percentage points (95% CI, 31.1-35.4 percentage points; P < .001). Assuming differential trends, postpartum contraception increased by 28.2 percentage points (95% CI, 25.8-30.6 percentage points; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that expanding Emergency Medicaid benefits to include postpartum care is associated with significant improvements in receipt of postpartum care and contraceptive use.

Project description:ImportanceMedicaid enrollees typically report worse access to care than other insured populations. Expansions in Medicaid through less restrictive income eligibility requirements and the resulting influx of new enrollees may further erode access to care for those already enrolled in Medicaid.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of previous Medicaid expansions on self-reported access to care and the use of emergency department services by Medicaid enrollees.Design, setting, and participantsQuasi-experimental difference-in-differences design among 1714 adult Medicaid enrollees in 10 states that expanded Medicaid between June 1, 2000, and October 1, 2009, and 5097 Medicaid enrollees in 14 bordering control states that did not expand Medicaid.Main outcomes and measuresSelf-reported access to care and annualized emergency department use.ResultsAmong states expanding their Medicaid program for adults, the mean income eligibility level increased from 82.6% to 144.2% of the federal poverty level. Income eligibility in matched control states remained constant at 77.1% of the federal poverty level. The proportion of adults reporting being enrolled in Medicaid increased from 7.2% to 8.8% in expansion states and from 6.1% to 6.4% in matched control states. In Medicaid program expansion states, the proportion of Medicaid enrollees reporting poor access to care declined from 8.5% before the expansion to 7.3% after the expansion. In matched control states, the proportion of Medicaid enrollees reporting poor access to care remained constant at 5.3%. The proportion of enrollees reporting any emergency department use decreased from 41.2% to 40.1% in expansion states and from 37.3% to 36.1% in matched control states. In the period following expansions, newly eligible enrollees reported poorer access to care than previously enrolled beneficiaries, although the overall difference between groups did not reach statistical significance.Conclusions and relevanceWe found no evidence that expanding the number of individuals eligible for Medicaid coverage eroded perceived access to care or increased the use of emergency services among adult Medicaid enrollees.