Utilization of High-Volume Hospitals for High-Risk Cancer Surgery in California Following Medicaid Expansion

The Role of Medicaid Expansion on the Receipt of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Lung Cancer

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to utilize a nationally representative database to study the effect of Medicaid expansion on the receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy in eligible patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of the National Cancer Database (NCDB) was performed between 2006 and 2019. Patients with clinical T1-T3, N1, and M0 were included. Patients with nodal disease or tumors > 4 cm were eligible for adjuvant therapy. Demographic and clinical information were collected. A difference-in-difference analysis was performed to compare changes in the rate of adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Total 9954 eligible patients were treated in states that expanded Medicaid coverage in January 2014 or later, with 4809 patients treated in the pre-expansion years (2012-2013) and 5145 patients treated in the postexpansion years (2017-2018). Following Medicaid expansion, eligible patients were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy (70.2% vs. 62.3%; P < .001). Compared with the pre-expansion period, patients who received adjuvant therapy were more likely to use Medicaid insurance postexpansion (7.8% vs. 5%, P < .001). Among patients using Medicaid coverage only, a greater percentage started adjuvant therapy within 8 weeks of resection following Medicaid expansion (46.6% vs. 38.3%, P = .048). The observed difference-in-difference in the change in adjuvant therapy rate from the pre-expansion period to the postexpansion period between expansion and nonexpansion states was 1.25% (95% Bootstrap CI -0.36% to -3.18%). There was a modest survival benefit in expansion states postexpansion.

CONCLUSION

Medicaid expansion appears to be associated with increased access to care, as shown by the increased receipt of adjuvant systemic therapy in eligible patients.

Poverty and Its Impact on Surgical Care

In this article, the authors explore the intricate relationship between poverty and surgical care, underscoring its multifaceted nature and its profound impact on access and outcomes. Poverty extends beyond financial constraints to encompass barriers related to healthcare infrastructure, geographic isolation, education, mental health, and social determinants of health, resulting in persistent disparities in access to high-quality surgical care, especially for those in persistently impoverished areas and access-sensitive surgical conditions. Additionally, the authors delve into the complex intersection of poverty, race, and ethnicity, emphasizing the heightened risks faced by minority patients in surgical care.

Impact of Medicaid Expansion on Abdominal Surgery Morbidity, Mortality, and Hospital Readmission

INTRODUCTION

Medicaid expansion's (ME) impact on postoperative outcomes after abdominal surgery remains poorly defined. We aimed to evaluate ME's effect on surgical morbidity, mortality, and readmissions in a state that expanded Medicaid (Virginia) compared to a state that did not (Tennessee) over the same time period.

METHODS

Virginia Surgical Quality Collaborative (VSQC) American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data for Medicaid, uninsured, and private insurance patients undergoing abdominal procedures before Virginia's ME (3/22/18-12/31/18) were compared with post-ME (1/1/19-12/31/19), as were corresponding non-ME state Tennessee Surgical Quality Collaborative (TSQC) data for the same 2018 and 2019 time periods. Postexpansion odds ratios for 30-d morbidity, 30-d mortality, and 30-d unplanned readmission were estimated using propensity score-adjusted logistic regression models.

RESULTS

In Virginia, 4753 abdominal procedures, 2097 pre-ME were compared to 2656 post-ME. In Tennessee, 5956 procedures, 2484 in 2018 were compared to 3472 in 2019. VSQC's proportion of Medicaid population increased following ME (8.9% versus 18.8%, P < 0.001) while uninsured patients decreased (20.4% versus 6.4%, P < 0.001). Post-ME VSQC had fewer 30-d readmissions (12.2% versus 6.0%, P = 0.013). Post-ME VSQC Medicaid patients had significantly lower probability of morbidity (-8.18, 95% confidence interval: -15.52 ∼ -0.84, P = 0.029) and readmission (-6.92, 95% confidence interval: -12.56 ∼ -1.27, P = 0.016) compared to pre-ME. There were no differences in probability of morbidity or readmission in the TSQC Medicaid population between study periods (both P > 0.05); there were no differences in mortality between study periods in VSQC and TSQC patient populations (both P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

ME was associated with decreased 30-d morbidity and unplanned readmissions in the VSQC. Data-driven policies accounting for ME benefits should be considered.

Medicaid Expansion and Postoperative Mortality in Women with Gynecologic Cancer: A Difference-in-Difference Analysis

BACKGROUND

The association between Medicaid expansion and postoperative mortality after surgery for gynecologic cancer is unknown. Our objective was to compare 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality after gynecologic cancer surgery before and after 2014 in states that did and did not expand Medicaid.

METHODS

We searched the National Cancer Database for women aged 40-64 years old between 2010 and 2016 who underwent surgery for a primary gynecologic malignancy. We used pre/post and quasi-experimental difference-in-difference (DID) multivariable logistic regressions to evaluate mortality pre-2014 (2010-2013) and post-2014 (2014-2016) for states that did and did not expand Medicaid in January 2014. We completed univariable logistic regressions for covariates of interest.

RESULTS

Among 169,731 women, 30-day postoperative mortality in expansion states after 2014 significantly decreased for endometrial cancer (odds ratio [OR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-0.67) and ovarian cancer (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.99) and increased for cervical cancer (OR 3.82, 95% CI 1.12-13.01). Compared with non-expansion states, expansion states had improved 30-day postoperative mortality for endometrial cancer after 2014 (DID OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31-0.96). Univariable analysis demonstrated improved 30-day postoperative mortality for Black women with endometrial cancer in expansion states (DID OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-0.95). There was improved 90-day postoperative mortality for endometrial cancer in expansion states (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.85), and improved 90-day postoperative mortality for Midwestern women with ovarian cancer in expansion states on univariable analysis (DID OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.26-0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

State Medicaid legislation was associated with improved postoperative survival in women with endometrial cancer and subgroups of women with endometrial and ovarian cancer.

Understanding the Implications of Medicaid Expansion for Cancer Care in the US: A Review

Importance

Insurance status has been linked to important differences in cancer treatment and outcomes in the US. With more than 15 million individuals gaining health insurance through Medicaid expansion, there is an increasing need to understand the implications of this policy within the US cancer population. This review provides an overview of the fundamental principles and nuances of Medicaid expansion, as well as the implications for cancer care.

Observations

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act presented states with an option to expand Medicaid coverage by broadening the eligibility criteria (eg, raising the eligible income level). During the past 10 years, Medicaid expansion has been credited with a 30% reduction in the population of uninsured individuals in the US. Such a significant change in the insurance profile could have important implications for the 1.7 million patients diagnosed with cancer each year, the oncology teams that care for them, and policy makers. However, several factors may complicate efforts to characterize the effect of Medicaid expansion on the US cancer population. Most notably, there is considerable variation among states in terms of whether Medicaid expansion took place, when expansion occurred, eligibility criteria for Medicaid, and coverage types that Medicaid provides. In addition, economic and health policy factors may be intertwined with factors associated with Medicaid expansion. Finally, variability in the manner in which cancer care has been captured and depicted in large databases could affect the interpretation of findings associated with expansion.

Conclusions and Relevance

The expansion of Medicaid was a historic public policy initiative. To fully leverage this policy to improve oncological care and to maximize learning for subsequent policies, it is critical to understand the effect of Medicaid expansion. This review aims to better prepare investigators and their audiences to fully understand the implications of this important health policy initiative.

Complications After Complex Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: Benefits and Costs Associated with Inter-hospital Transfer Among Medicare Beneficiaries

BACKGROUND

Inter-hospital transfer (IHT) may help reduce failure-to-rescue (FTR) by transferring patients to centers with a higher level of expertise than the index hospital. We sought to identify factors associated with an IHT and examine if IHT was associated with improved outcomes after complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Medicare Inpatient Standard Analytic Files were utilized to identify patients with >1 postoperative complication following resection for esophageal, pancreatic, liver, or colorectal cancer between 2013 and 2017. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association of different factors with the chance of IHT, as well as the impact of IHT on failure-to-rescue (FTR) and expenditures.

RESULTS

Among 39,973 patients with >1 postoperative complications, 3090 (7.7%) patients were transferred to a secondary hospital. The median LOS at the index hospital prior to IHT was 10 days (IQR, 6-17 days). Patients who underwent IHT more often had experienced multiple complications at the index hospital compared with non-IHT patients (57.7% vs. 38.9%) (p<0.001). Transferred patients more commonly had undergone surgery at a low-volume index hospital (n=218, 60.2%) compared with non-IHT (n=10,351, 25.9%) patients (p<0.001). On multivariate analysis, hospital volume remained strongly associated with transfer to an acute care hospital (ACH) (OR 5.53; 95% CI 3.91-7.84; p<0.001), as did multiple complications (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.56-2.57). The incidence of FTR was much higher among IHT-ACH patients (20.2%) versus non-IHT patients (11.5%) (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.11-2.05) (p<0.001). Medicare expenditures were higher among patients who had IHT-ACH ($72.1k USD; IQR, $48.1k-$116.7k) versus non-IHT ($38.5k USD; IQR, $28.1k-$59.2k USD) (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Approximately 1 in 13 patients had an IHT after complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery. IHT was associated with high rates of FTR, which was more pronounced among patients who underwent surgery at an index low-volume hospital. IHT was associated with higher overall CMS expenditures.