The Impact of the Eligibility Threshold of a French Means-Tested Health Insurance Programme on Doctor Visits: A Regression Discontinuity Analysis

Patients like any others? Providing coverage to undocumented migrants in France: effects on access to care and usual source of care

Medical State Assistance is a French public health insurance programme that allows undocumented migrants (UM) to access primary, secondary, and tertiary care services free of user charge, either premium or out-of-pocket. The objective of this study is to assess the effect of Medical State Assistance on access to healthcare services and on usual source of care (USC). We rely on representative data of 1,223 UM attending places of assistance to vulnerable populations in Paris and in the greater area of Bordeaux (France). In this sample, 51% of UM are covered by Medical State Assistance. We use probit and ordinary least square regressions to model healthcare uses of undocumented migrants. The results show that UM covered by Medical State Assistance are more likely to access outpatient healthcare services (by +22.4 percentage points) and less likely to do so on non-governmental organizations (by -6.7 percentage points) than their eligible but uncovered counterpart. Additionally, covered undocumented migrants made 36.9% more medical visits in outpatient healthcare services and 65.4% fewer visits in non-governmental organizations than eligible but uncovered ones. Moreover, covered UM are also more likely to report that primary care services are their USC, in preference to emergency departments and other outpatient care services. UM covered by Medical State Assistance are more likely to consult in outpatient healthcare services.

Real-world effectiveness of long-acting injectable antipsychotic treatments in a nationwide cohort of 12,373 patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders

This mirror-image study aimed to evaluate the real-life effectiveness of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAI) in schizophrenia. Patients with schizophrenia initiating LAIs January 2015-December 2016 were enrolled from the French National Health Data System (SNDS). Standardized mean differences (SMD > 0.1 deemed clinically significant) were calculated for psychiatric healthcare resource utilization measures assessed one year before (during oral AP treatment) and one year after LAI initiation. LAI effectiveness was analyzed overall and by age group, gender and compliance to oral AP, defined as exposure to an AP for at least 80% of the year before LAI initiation. 12,373 patients were included. LAIs were more frequently initiated in men (58.1%), young (18-34 years, 42.0%) and non-compliant (63.7%) patients. LAI initiation was effective in reducing the number and duration of psychiatric hospitalizations and psychiatric emergency department (ED) admissions in non-compliant patients (SMD = -0.19, -0.26 and -0.12, respectively), but not in compliant patients. First-generation LAIs, paliperidone and aripiprazole LAIs reduced psychiatric hospitalizations (SMD = -0.20, -0.24, -0.21, respectively) and ED admissions (SMD = -0.15, -0.13, -0.15, respectively). No differences in effectiveness were found for age or gender. In compliant patients, only aripiprazole LAI reduced the number of psychiatric hospitalizations (SMD = -0.13). Risperidone and paliperidone LAIs increased hospitalization duration (SMD = 0.15 and 0.18, respectively). The prescription of LAIs (except risperidone) should be recommended in all non-compliant patients, even in women and patients aged 35 or older. The lower frequency of administration of LAIs than of oral APs may improve compliance and hence reduce the risk of relapse. Aripiprazole LAI may represent a treatment of choice for compliant patients that should be further investigated.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-COVID-19 hospital mortality in patients with schizophrenia: a nationwide population-based cohort study

It remains unknown to what degree resource prioritization toward SARS-CoV-2 (2019-nCoV) coronavirus (COVID-19) cases had disrupted usual acute care for non-COVID-19 patients, especially in the most vulnerable populations such as patients with schizophrenia. The objective was to establish whether the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-COVID-19 hospital mortality and access to hospital care differed between patients with schizophrenia versus without severe mental disorder. We conducted a nationwide population-based cohort study of all non-COVID-19 acute hospitalizations in the pre-COVID-19 (March 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019) and COVID-19 (March 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020) periods in France. We divided the population into patients with schizophrenia and age/sex-matched patients without severe mental disorder (1:10). Using a difference-in-differences approach, we performed multivariate patient-level logistic regression models (adjusted odds ratio, aOR) with adjustment for complementary health insurance, smoking, alcohol and substance addiction, Charlson comorbidity score, origin of the patient, category of care, intensive care unit (ICU) care, major diagnosis groups and hospital characteristics. A total of 198,186 patients with schizophrenia were matched with 1,981,860 controls. The 90-day hospital mortality in patients with schizophrenia increased significantly more versus controls (aOR = 1.18; p < 0.001). This increased mortality was found for poisoning and injury (aOR = 1.26; p = 0.033), respiratory diseases (aOR = 1.19; p = 0.008) and for both surgery (aOR = 1.26; p = 0.008) and medical care settings (aOR = 1.16; p = 0.001). Significant changes in the case mix were noted with reduced admission in the ICU and for several somatic diseases including cancer, circulatory and digestive diseases and stroke for patients with schizophrenia compared to controls. These results suggest a greater deterioration in access to, effectiveness and safety of non-COVID-19 acute care in patients with schizophrenia compared to patients without severe mental disorders. These findings question hospitals' resilience pertaining to patient safety and underline the importance of developing specific strategies for vulnerable patients in anticipation of future public health emergencies.

Practice variation in long-term care access and use: The role of the ability to pay

Practice variation in publicly financed long-term care (LTC) may be inefficient and inequitable, similarly to practice variation in the health care sector. Although most OECD countries spend an increasing share of their gross domestic product on LTC, it has received comparatively little attention to date compared with the health care sector. This paper contributes to the literature by assessing and comparing regional practice variation in both access to and use of institutional LTC and investigating its relation with income and out-of-pocket payment. For this, we have access to unique individual-level data covering the entire Dutch population. Even though we found practice variation in the use of LTC once access was granted, the variation between regions was still relatively small compared with international standards. In addition, we showed how a co-payment measure could be used to reduce practice variation across care office regions and income classes making the LTC system not only more efficient but also more equitable.