Dataset Information

Association of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act With Ambulatory Quality, Patient Experience, Utilization, and Cost, 2014-2016.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

The 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.

Objective

To determine the association of the ACA with ambulatory quality, patient experience, utilization, and cost.

Design, setting, and participants

This 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.

Exposures

ACA implementation.

Main outcomes and measures

For 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.

Results

The 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 relevance

In 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.

SUBMITTER: Levine DM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9206183 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

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.

Project description:ImportanceUnder the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), US hospitals were exposed to a number of reforms intended to reduce spending, many of which, beginning in 2012, targeted acute care hospitals and often focused on specific diagnoses (eg, acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia) for Medicare patients. Other provisions enacted in the ACA and under budget sequestration (beginning in 2013) mandated Medicare fee cuts.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between the enactment of ACA reforms and 30-day price-standardized hospital episode spending.Design, setting, and participantsThis policy evaluation included index discharges between January 1, 2008, and August 31, 2015, from a national random 20% sample of Medicare beneficiaries. Data analysis was performed from February 1, 2019 to July 8, 2020.ExposurePayment reforms after passage of the ACA.Main outcomes and measures30-day price-standardized episode payments. Three alternative estimation approaches were used to evaluate the association between reforms following the ACA and episode spending: (1) a difference-in-difference (DID) analysis among acute care hospitals, comparing spending for diagnoses commonly targeted by ACA programs with nontargeted diagnoses; (2) a DID analysis comparing acute care hospitals and critical access hospitals (not exposed to reforms); and (3) a generalized synthetic control analysis, comparing acute care and critical access hospitals. Supplemental analysis examined the degree to which Medicare fee cuts contributed to spending reductions.ResultsA total of 7 634 242 index discharges (4 525 630 [59.2%] female patients; mean [SD] age, 79.31 [8.02] years) were included. All 3 approaches found that reforms following the ACA were associated with a significant reduction in episode spending. The DID estimate comparing targeted and untargeted diagnoses suggested that reforms following the ACA were associated with a -$431 (95% CI, -$492 to -$369; -2.87%) change in total spending, while the generalized synthetic control analysis suggested that reforms were associated with a -$1232 (95% CI, -$1488 to -$965; -10.12%) change in total episode spending, amounting in a total annual savings of $5.68 billion. Cuts to Medicare fees accounted for most of these savings.Conclusions and relevanceIn this policy evaluation, the ACA was associated with large reductions in US hospital episode spending.

Project description:ImportanceMedicaid expansion is associated with increased access to health services, increased quality of medical care delivered, and reduced mortality, but little is known about its association with use of long-term care.ObjectiveTo examine the association of Medicaid expansion under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) with long-term care use among newly eligible low-income adults and among older adults whose eligibility did not change.Design, setting, and participantsThis difference-in-difference cohort study used data from the Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative longitudinal survey of persons 50 years or older. Long-term care use from 2008 to 2012 was compared with use from 2014 to 2016 among low-income adults aged 50 to 64 years without Medicare coverage residing in states in which Medicaid coverage expanded in 2014 and those living in states without expansion. Low-income adults who were covered by Medicare and were ineligible for expanded Medicaid were also included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from January 15, 2018, to December 31, 2019.ExposuresResidence in a state with Medicaid expansion in 2014.Main outcomes and measuresAny home health care use or any nursing home use in 2014 or 2016. All estimates are weighted to account for the Health and Retirement Study sampling design.ResultsAmong the 891 individuals likely eligible for expanded Medicaid, the mean (SD) age was 55.2 (3.1) years; 534 (53.4%) were women, 482 (49.5%) were married, and 661 (45.9%) were White non-Hispanic. Before the ACA-funded Medicaid expansion, 0.4% (95% CI, -0.3% to 1.1%) in expansion states and 1.0% (95% CI, -0.1% to 2.2%) in nonexpansion states used nursing homes, and 1.9% (95% CI, 0.4%-3.4%) in expansion states and 7.1% (95% CI, 4.7%-9.5%) in nonexpansion states used any formal home care. The ACA-funded Medicaid expansion was associated with an increase of 4.4 percentage points (95% CI, 2.8-6.1 percentage points) in the probability of any long-term care use among low-income, middle-aged adults, with increases in home health use (3.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 2.0-5.6 percentage points) and in any nursing home use (2.1 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.9-3.3 percentage points).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, ACA-funded Medicaid expansion was associated with an increase in any long-term care use among newly eligible low-income, middle-aged adults, suggesting that the population covered by the Medicaid expansion may have had unmet long-term care needs before expansion.

Project description:ImportanceThe Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) increased 2013 to 2014 Medicaid payment rates for qualifying primary care physicians (PCPs) and services to higher Medicare payment levels, with the goal of improving primary care access for Medicaid enrollees.ObjectivesTo evaluate the payment increase policy and to assess whether it was associated with changes in Medicaid participation rates or Medicaid service volume among PCPs.Design, setting, and participantsThis study used 2012 to 2015 IMS Health aggregated medical claims and encounter data from PCPs eligible for the payment increase practicing in all states except Alaska and Hawaii and included 20 723 PCPs with observations in each month from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2015. Data are for professional services performed in ambulatory settings, including office, hospital outpatient department, and emergency department. Regression models were used to test whether outcomes differed in months subject to higher payment rates relative to months before the increase and after the expiration of the increase in some states. The models controlled for time-invariant physician characteristics and time-varying characteristics, such as Medicaid enrollment. Interaction terms were included to estimate differential associations in subgroups of states (eg, by Medicaid managed care penetration) and physicians (eg, by specialty).Main outcomes and measuresPhysician-month records subject to higher Medicaid payment rates were flagged using state-specific implementation and end dates for the payment increase. Five outcomes were measured for each physician-month observation, including (1) an indicator for seeing any patients enrolled in Medicaid, (2) an indicator for seeing more than 5 patients enrolled in Medicaid, (3) the Medicaid share of total patients, (4) a count of new patient evaluation and management visits furnished to patients enrolled in Medicaid, and (5) a count of existing patient evaluation and management visits furnished to patients enrolled in Medicaid.ResultsAmong 20 723 PCPs, the payment increase had no association with PCP participation in Medicaid or Medicaid service volume. The estimated average marginal effects for all 5 outcomes were not statistically distinguishable from 0. This null result was robust to sensitivity analyses, including different time trend specifications and analyses focusing on the payment increase implementation and expiration time frames. Descriptively, the Medicaid share of patients increased by about 25% from 2012 to 2015, although the share did not increase differentially in states and months subject to higher payment rates.Conclusions and relevanceThe limited duration and design of the payment increase may have dampened its effectiveness. Future efforts to improve access through payment changes or other means can benefit from better understanding of the outcomes of this policy.

Project description:Importance:Expanding insurance coverage may be associated with overuse of medical care because newly insured patients are insulated from having to pay the full cost. Objective:To examine the use of ambulance transport before and after the rollout of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) in New York City (NYC), New York. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this case-control study, the volume of ambulance dispatches in NYC for minor injuries before and after the rollout of the ACA was examined. Data were drawn from a census of all ambulance dispatches in NYC between January 1, 2013, and July 31, 2016. Ambulance dispatches for more severe injuries, which are more difficult to characterize as unnecessary, were used as the control group. Analyses were conducted from August 17, 2017, to May, 10, 2019. Main Outcome and Measures:The main outcome was the number of ambulance dispatches for minor injuries, defined per month per dispatch zone. The implementation of the ACA was measured using an indicator variable of 1 for dispatches starting January 1, 2014, and 0 for dispatches before January 1, 2014. The number of ambulance dispatches for injuries and major injuries was used to account for secular trends. Injury severity was classified by the dispatchers based on information from the 911 callers with a severity score on a scale of 1 to 8, where 1 is the most severe; minor injuries had a score of 7; injuries, 5; and major injuries, 3. Results:There were 4 787 180 ambulance dispatches in NYC during the study. After the 2014 expansion of insurance coverage under the ACA, there was an increase in ambulance dispatches for minor injuries compared with dispatches for more severe injuries. Compared with the preimplementation mean (SD) of 20.75 (14.24) minor injury dispatches per dispatch zone per month, there were 7.71 (95% CI, 1.23-14.19) additional minor injury dispatches per dispatch zone per month compared with dispatches for other types of injuries, an increase of 37.2%. Given that NYC has 31 dispatch zones, this increase is equivalent to approximately 239 additional dispatches per month or 2868 additional dispatches per year for minor injuries. Conclusions and Relevance:There was a significant increase in use of ambulance transport for minor injuries in NYC after the ACA insurance expansion, suggesting that the change in health insurance structure was associated with increased use of emergency medical services in nonemergent situations. Future reforms to the US health insurance system should take into account the potential for increased use of emergency medical services in nonemergent situations, which the literature suggests may lead to congestion and slower response times.