The Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act Evaluation Findings on Children's Health Insurance Coverage in an Evolving Health Care Landscape

Children's Health Insurance Program Expansions: What Works for Families?

We examine the impact of Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) eligibility expansions 1999 to 2012 on child and joint parent/child insurance coverage. We use changes in state CHIP income eligibility levels and data from the Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement to create child/parent dyads. We use logistic regression to estimate marginal effects of eligibility expansions on coverage in families with incomes below 300% federal poverty level (FPL) and, in turn, 150% to 300% FPL. The latter is the income range most expansions targeted. We find CHIP expansions increased public coverage among children in families 150% to 300% FPL by 2.5 percentage points (pp). We find increased joint parent/child coverage of 2.3 pp (P = .055) but only in states where the public eligibility levels for parent and child are within 50 pp. In these states, the CHIP expansion increased the probability that both parent/child are publicly insured (2.5 pp) among insured dyads, but where the eligibility levels are further apart (51-150 pp; >150 pp), CHIP expansions increase the probability of mixed coverage—one public, one private—by 0.9 to 1.5 pp. Overall, families made decisions regarding coverage that put the child first but parents took advantage of joint parent/child coverage when eligibility levels were close. Joint public parent/child coverage can have positive care-seeking effects as well as reduced financial burdens for low-income families.

Economic Dimensions of Health Inequities: The Role of Implementation Research

Health inequities are well-documented, but their economic dimensions have received less attention. In this report, we describe four economic dimensions of health inequities in the United States. First, we describe an economic conceptual framework that connects poverty and health inequities at both individual and population levels and conveys the concept of reverse causality, where poverty worsens health inequities and health inequities worsen poverty. This framework can help us understand the key elements of health inequity and its drivers. Second, we describe economic measurements used for quantifying the economic burden of health inequalities and summarize the empirical findings from studies. Third, we review the evidence on the return-on-investment of economic interventions that are aimed at reducing health inequities. Finally, we highlight the importance of cross disciplinary perspectives from economics and implementation research in effectively delivering interventions that can mitigate health inequities.

Does Medicaid Insurance Provide Sufficient Access to Pediatric Orthopedic Care Under the Affordable Care Act?

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act had a profound impact on health insurance coverage of children. Given the importance of pediatric specialty care, this study assessed access to pediatric orthopedic urgent care for a child’s likely operative distal radius fracture. Researchers called 180 pediatric orthopedic surgeons in 8 states requesting appointments for the caller’s fictitious 11-year-old child who suffered a distal radius fracture. Each office was called twice to assess the ability to obtain an appointment for Medicaid and privately insured patients. Overall, significantly fewer offices scheduled appointments for Medicaid than privately insured patients (38.3% vs 82.8%, P < .001). Patients with Medicaid in states without Medicaid expansion were more successful in obtaining appointments than patients with Medicaid in states with Medicaid expansion (41 [47%] vs 28 [30%]; P < .001; 95% confidence interval = 0.3-0.9). Pediatric Medicaid patients experienced reduced access to care, and this access was worse in states that had expanded Medicaid eligibility.

Emergency department use for acute rhinosinusitis: Insurance dependent for children and adults

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Patients with Medicaid or self-pay insurance status are more likely to present to the emergency department (ED) for uncomplicated acute rhinosinusitis (ARS). Our aim was to determine if this pattern holds true for both pediatric and adult visits.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using the 2005 to 2012 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys and National Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys.

METHODS

We included all visits with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes for ARS and without codes for ARS complications. We tested for associations between insurance type and presentation to an ED versus a primary care physician (PCP), stratifying children versus adults. We used univariate and multivariable logistic regression modeling, controlling for clinical and demographic characteristics for analysis.

RESULTS

There were 51,579,977 uncomplicated ARS visits to PCPs (48,213,335 visits) and EDs (3,366,642 visits). Medicaid and uninsured patients were under-represented for ARS visits. Medicaid insurance was significantly associated with ED presentation for ARS for both children (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 7.0, P < 0.001) and adults (adjusted OR = 6.8, P < 0.001). Children with ARS and self-pay insurance status were much more likely to present to the ED (adjusted OR = 48.8, P < 0.001) than adults (adjusted OR = 5.2, P < 0.001); this difference between children and adults with self-pay insurance was significant (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

With respect to absolute numbers of visits, patients with Medicaid or no insurance use less care overall for uncomplicated ARS than do privately insured patients. Medicaid is associated with ED presentation for ARS for pediatric and adult visits. Self-pay insurance status is strongly associated with ED presentation for adult and pediatric visits, and is significantly more common for children. These results suggest limitations in primary care access for uncomplicated ARS based on insurance status, particularly for uninsured pediatric patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4. Laryngoscope, 128:299-303, 2018.

Pediatric and Adult Physician Networks in Affordable Care Act Marketplace Plans

OBJECTIVES

To describe and compare pediatric and adult specialty physician networks in marketplace plans.

METHODS

Data on physician networks, including physician specialty and address, in all 2014 individual marketplace silver plans were aggregated. Networks were quantified as the fraction of providers in the underlying rating area within a state that participated in the network. Narrow networks included none available networks (ie, no providers available in the underlying area) and limited networks (ie, included <10% of the available providers in the underlying area). Proportions of narrow networks between pediatric and adult specialty providers were compared.

RESULTS

Among the 1836 unique silver plan networks, the proportions of narrow networks were greater for pediatric (65.9%) than adult specialty (34.9%) networks (P < .001 for all specialties). Specialties with the highest proportion of narrow networks for children were infectious disease (77.4%) and nephrology (74.0%), and they were highest for adults in psychiatry (49.8%) and endocrinology (40.8%). A larger proportion of pediatric networks (43.8%) had no available specialists in the underlying area when compared with adult networks (10.4%) (P < .001 for all specialties). Among networks with available specialists in the underlying area, a higher proportion of pediatric (39.3%) than adult (27.3%) specialist networks were limited (P < .001 except psychiatry).

CONCLUSIONS

Narrow networks were more prevalent among pediatric than adult specialists, because of both the sparseness of pediatric specialists and their exclusion from networks. Understanding narrow networks and marketplace network adequacy standards is a necessary beginning to monitor access to care for children and families.

Children with Special Health Care Needs in CHIP: Access, Use, and Child and Family Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To assess how the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) affects outcomes for children with special health care needs (CSHCN).

METHODS

We used data from a survey of parents of recent and established CHIP enrollees conducted from January 2012 through March 2013 as part of a congressionally mandated evaluation of CHIP. We identified CSHCN in the sample using the Child and Adolescent Health Measurement Initiative's CSHCN screener. We compared the health care experiences of established CHIP enrollees to the pre-enrollment experiences of previously uninsured and privately insured recent CHIP enrollees, controlling for observable characteristics.

RESULTS

Parents of 4142 recent enrollees and 5518 established enrollees responded to the survey (response rates, 46% recent enrollees and 51% established enrollees). In the 10 survey states, about one-fourth of CHIP enrollees had a special health care need. Compared to being uninsured, parents of CSHCN who were established CHIP enrollees reported greater access to and use of medical and dental care, less difficulty meeting their child's health care needs, fewer unmet needs, and better dental health status for their child. Compared to having private insurance, parents of CSHCN who were established CHIP enrollees reported similar levels of access to and use of medical and dental care and unmet needs, and less difficulty meeting their child's health care needs.

CONCLUSIONS

CHIP has significant benefits for eligible CSHCN and their families compared to being uninsured and appears to have some benefits compared to private insurance.