Our flawed but beneficial Medicaid program

Comparison of Utilization, Costs, and Quality of Medicaid vs Subsidized Private Health Insurance for Low-Income Adults

IMPORTANCE

There has been little rigorous evidence to date comparing public vs private health insurance. With policy makers considering a range of policies to expand coverage, understanding the trade-offs between these coverage types is critical.

OBJECTIVE

To compare months of coverage, utilization, quality, and costs between low-income adults with Medicaid vs those with subsidized private (Marketplace) insurance.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study used a propensity score-matched sample of adults enrolled in either Medicaid or Marketplace plans at any point between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2015. The sample was restricted to individuals with incomes narrowly above and below 138% of the federal poverty level (FPL), which represented the eligibility cutoff between the programs. Data were obtained from 3 state agencies merging comprehensive insurance claims with income eligibility data for Colorado Medicaid expansion and Marketplace enrollees. Income data were linked with an all-payer claims database, and generalized linear models were used to adjust for clinical and demographic confounders. Participants included 8182 low-income nonpregnant adults aged 19 to 64 years enrolled in Medicaid or Marketplace coverage during the 2014 to 2015 period, with incomes between 134% and 143% of the FPL.

EXPOSURES

Health insurance through Colorado Medicaid or Colorado's state-based Marketplace.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary analytical approach was a multivariate regression analysis of the propensity score-matched sample. Primary outcomes were months of coverage in Medicaid or Marketplace insurance, office and emergency department (ED) visits, ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations, and total costs. For secondary quality outcomes, the propensity score-matched sample was widened to 129% to 148% of the FPL to ensure adequate sample size. Secondary outcomes included prescription drug utilization, types of ED visits, hospitalizations, out-of-pocket costs, and clinical quality measures. Primary data analysis was between September 2018 to July 2019, with revisions finalized in November 2020.

RESULTS

The propensity score-matched narrow-income sample included a total of 8182 participants (4091 Medicaid eligible [50%]: mean [SD] age, 42.8 [13.6] years; 2230 women [54.5%]; 4091 Marketplace eligible [50%]: mean [SD] age, 42.7 [13.9] years; 2229 women [54.5%]). Demographic differences across the 2 groups were well balanced, with all standardized mean differences less than 0.10. Marketplace coverage was associated with fewer ED visits (mean, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.32-0.40] visits vs 0.56 [95% CI, 0.50-0.62] visits; P < .001) and more office (outpatient) visits than Medicaid (mean, 2.22 [95% CI, 2.11-2.32] visits vs 1.73 [95% CI, 1.64-1.81] visits; P < .001). No differences in ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations were found (0.004 [95% CI, 0.001-0.006] vs 0.007 [95% CI, 0.002-0.011]; P = .15). Total costs were 83% higher in Marketplace coverage (mean, $4553 [95% CI, $3368-$5738] vs $2484 [95% CI, $1760-$3209]; P < .001) owing almost entirely to higher prices, and out-of-pocket costs were 10 times higher (mean, $569 [95% CI, $337-$801] vs $45 [95% CI, $26-$65]; P < .001). Five of 12 secondary quality measures favored private insurance, and 1 favored Medicaid.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cross-sectional propensity score-matched study, Medicaid and Marketplace coverage differed in important ways. Public coverage through Medicaid was associated with more ED visits and fewer office visits than private Marketplace coverage, which may reflect barriers to outpatient care or lower cost-sharing barriers to ED care in Medicaid. Results suggest that Medicaid coverage was substantially less costly to beneficiaries and society than private coverage, with mixed results on health care quality.

Adequate access to healthcare and added life expectancy among older adults in China

BACKGROUND

Adequate access to healthcare is associated with lower risks of mortality at older ages. However, it is largely unknown how many more years of life can be attributed to having adequate access to healthcare compared with having inadequate access to healthcare.

METHOD

A nationwide longitudinal survey of 27,794 older adults aged 65+ in mainland China from 2002 to 2014 was used for analysis. Multivariate hazard models and life table techniques were used to estimate differences in life expectancy associated with self-reported access to healthcare (adequate vs. inadequate). The findings were assessed after adjusting for a wide range of demographic factors, socioeconomic status, family/social support, health practices, and health conditions.

RESULTS

At age 65, adequate access to healthcare increased life expectancy by approximately 2.0-2.5 years in men and women and across urban-rural areas compared with those who reported inadequate access to healthcare. At age 85, the corresponding increase in life expectancy was 1.0-1.2 years. After adjustment for multiple confounding factors, the increase in life expectancy was reduced to approximately 1.1-1.5 years at age 65 and 0.6-0.8 years at age 85. In women, the net increase in life expectancy attributable to adequate access to healthcare was 6 and 8% at ages 65 and 85, respectively. In men, the net increases in life expectancy were generally greater (10 and 14%) and consistent after covariate adjustments. In contrast, the increase in life expectancy was slightly lower in rural areas (2.0 years at age 65 and 1.0 years at age 85) than in urban areas (2.1 years at age 65 and 1.1 years age 85) when no confounding factors were taken into account. However, the increase in life expectancy was greater in rural areas (1.0 years at age 65 and 0.6 years at age 85) than in urban areas (0.4 years at age 65 and 0.2 years at age 85) after accounting for socioeconomic and other factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Adequate access to healthcare was associated with longer life expectancy among older adults in China. These findings have important implications for efforts to improve access to healthcare among older populations in China.

Antipsychotic Treatment Among Youths With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

IMPORTANCE

Significant concern exists over treating youths with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) with antipsychotic medications, yet little is known about the factors associated with antipsychotic treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the percentage of youths who fill antipsychotic prescriptions in the year following a new diagnosis of ADHD and characterize the clinical and demographic factors associated with antipsychotic initiation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective longitudinal cohort analysis of antipsychotic treatment was performed in 187 563 youths, aged 3 to 24 years, with a new diagnosis of ADHD (without recent diagnosis of any US Food and Drug Administration [FDA]-indicated conditions for antipsychotic treatment). The sample was derived from the 2010 to 2015 MarketScan Commercial Database, with the analysis completed between November 1, 2018, and May 30, 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The percentage of youths prescribed an antipsychotic in the first year following a new diagnosis of ADHD. Among those prescribed antipsychotic medications, the percentage who received a diagnosis of conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, or a disorder for which 1 or more antipsychotic medication has received an indication for use in youths from the FDA (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and Tourette disorder) and the percentage that filled an antipsychotic prescription before filling a stimulant prescription (methylphenidate or amphetamine derivative).

RESULTS

Of the 187 563 youths included in the study, 114 305 (60.9%) were male with a mean (SD) age of 13.74 (5.61) years. In the year following a new ADHD diagnosis, 4869 youths (2.6%; 95% CI, 2.5%-2.7%) with ADHD were prescribed an antipsychotic. Youths treated with antipsychotics with ADHD were more likely than their peers who were not receiving an antipsychotic to have recently received diagnoses of self-harm and/or suicidal ideation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 7.5; 95% CI, 5.9-9.6), oppositional defiant disorder (aOR, 4.4; 95% CI, 3.9-4.9), and substance use disorder (aOR, 4.0; 95% CI, 3.6-4.5). The youths who received antipsychotics were also more likely to have received inpatient treatment (aOR, 7.9; 95% CI, 6.7-9.3). During the year following the new ADHD diagnosis, 52.7% (95% CI, 51.3%-54.1%) of youths treated with antipsychotics received a diagnosis for which antipsychotics have either an FDA or evidence-supported indication for their use. Among youths who initiated antipsychotic medications, 47.9% (95% CI, 46.5%-49.3%) did not receive a stimulant prescription between their ADHD diagnosis and antipsychotic initiation. Antipsychotic prescribing was proportionally highest for preschool-aged children (4.3%) and associated with neurodevelopmental disorders (aOR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.3-11.2) and recent inpatient mental health treatment (aOR, 8.9; 95% CI, 1.7-45.8).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Approximately half of youths with a new ADHD diagnosis may have an evidence-supported indication for an antipsychotic medication. Less than half of these youths received a stimulant; the evidence-supported first line treatment for ADHD, before the antipsychotic was initiated. Use of antipsychotic prescribing appears to be associated with high levels of psychiatric comorbidity.

Age and sex differences in the association between access to medical care and health outcomes among older Chinese

BACKGROUND

Whether the association between access to medical care and health outcomes differs by age and gender among older adults in China is unclear. We aimed to investigate the associations between self-reported inadequate access to care and multiple health outcomes among older men and women in mainland China.

METHODS

Based on four latest waves available so far from a national longitudinal study in mainland China in 2005-2014, we used multilevel random-effect logistic models to estimate the contemporaneous relationships between inadequate access to care and disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) and cognitive impairment in men and women at ages 65-74, 75-84, 85-94, and 95+, separately. We also used multilevel hazard models to investigate the relationships between reported access to care and mortality in 2005-2014. Nested models were used to adjust for survey design, sociodemographic background, enrollment in health insurance, and health behaviors.

RESULTS

Approximately 6.5% of older adults in China reported inadequate access to care in the period of 2005-2014; and the percentages increased with age and were higher among women at older ages (≥75 years). Overall, older adults with self-reported inadequate access to care had greater odds of IADL and ADL disabilities and cognitive impairment than those with adequate access to healthcare. The elevated odds ratios (ORs) in men were higher in middle-old (75-84) and old-old (85-94) age groups compared to other age groups; whereas the elevated ORs in women were higher in young-old (65-74) and middle-old (75-84) age groups. The relationship between access to care and the health outcomes was generally weakest at the oldest-old ages (95+). Inadequate access to care was also linked with higher mortality risk, primarily in adults aged 75-84, and it was somewhat more pronounced in women than in men.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased odds of physical disability and cognitive impairment and increased risk of mortality are linked with inadequate access to care. The associations were generally stronger in women than in men and varied across age groups. The findings of the present study have important implications for further improving access to health care and improving health outcomes of older adults in China.

Outpatient Office Wait Times And Quality Of Care For Medicaid Patients

The time patients spend in a doctor's waiting room prior to a scheduled appointment is an important component of the quality of the overall health care experience. We analyzed data on twenty-one million outpatient visits obtained from electronic health record systems, which allowed us to measure time spent in the waiting room beyond the scheduled appointment time. Median wait time was a little more than four minutes. Almost one-fifth of visits had waits longer than twenty minutes, and 10 percent were more than thirty minutes. Waits were shorter for early-morning appointments, for younger patients, and at larger practices. Median wait time was 4.1 minutes for privately insured patients and 4.6 minutes for Medicaid patients. After adjustment for patient and appointment characteristics, Medicaid patients were 20 percent more likely than the privately insured patients to wait longer than twenty minutes, with most of this disparity explained by differences in practices and providers they saw. Wait times for Medicaid patients relative to privately insured patients were longer in states with relatively lower Medicaid reimbursement rates. The study complements other work that suggests that Medicaid patients face some additional barriers in the receipt of care.

Low-Value Medical Services in the Safety-Net Population

IMPORTANCE

National patterns of low-value and high-value care delivered to patients without insurance or with Medicaid could inform public policy but have not been previously examined.

OBJECTIVE

To measure rates of low-value care and high-value care received by patients without insurance or with Medicaid, compared with privately insured patients, and provided by safety-net physicians vs non-safety-net physicians.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multiyear cross-sectional observational study included all patients ages 18 to 64 years from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (2005-2013) and the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (2005-2011) eligible for any of the 21 previously defined low-value or high-value care measures. All measures were analyzed with multivariable logistic regression and adjusted for patient and physician characteristics.

EXPOSURES

Comparison of patients by insurance status (uninsured/Medicaid vs privately insured) and safety-net physicians (seeing >25% uninsured/Medicaid patients) vs non-safety-net physicians (seeing 1%-10%).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Delivery of 9 low-value or 12 high-value care measures, based on previous research definitions, and composite measures for any high-value or low-value care delivery during an office visit.

RESULTS

Overall, 193 062 office visits were eligible for at least 1 measure. Mean (95% CI) age for privately insured patients (n = 94 707) was 44.7 (44.5-44.9) years; patients on Medicaid (n = 45 123), 39.8 (39.3-40.3) years; and uninsured patients (n = 19 530), 41.9 (41.5-42.4) years. Overall, low-value and high-value care was delivered in 19.4% (95% CI, 18.5%-20.2%) and 33.4% (95% CI, 32.4%-34.3%) of eligible encounters, respectively. Rates of low-value and high-value care delivery were similar across insurance types for the majority of services examined. Among Medicaid patients, adjusted rates of use were no different for 6 of 9 low-value and 9 of 12 high-value services compared with privately insured beneficiaries, whereas among the uninsured, rates were no different for 7 of 9 low-value and 9 of 12 high-value services. Safety-net physicians provided similar care compared with non-safety-net physicians, with no difference for 8 out of 9 low-value and for all 12 high-value services.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Overuse of low-value care is common among patients without insurance or with Medicaid. Rates of low-value and high-value care were similar among physicians serving vulnerable patients and other physicians. Overuse of low-value care is a potentially important focus for state Medicaid programs and safety-net institutions to pursue cost savings and improved quality of health care delivery.

Impact of state medicaid expansion status on length of stay and in-hospital mortality for general medicine patients at US academic medical centers

BACKGROUND

Medicaid is often associated with longer hospitalizations and higher in-hospital mortality than other insurance types.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the impact of state Medicaid expansion status under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on payer mix, length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital mortality.

DESIGN/SETTING/PATIENTS

Retrospective cohort study of general medicine patients discharged from academic medical centers (AMCs) within the University HealthSystem Consortium from October 1, 2012 to September 30, 2015.

INTERVENTION/MEASUREMENTS

Hospitals were stratified according to state Medicaid expansion status. The proportion of discharges by primary payer, LOS index, and mortality index were compared between Medicaid-expansion and nonexpansion hospitals before and after ACA implementation. ACA implementation was defined as January 1, 2014, for all states except Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Indiana, which had unique dates of Medicaid expansion.

RESULTS

We identified 3,144,488 discharges from 156 hospitals in 24 Medicaid-expansion states and Washington, DC, and 1,114,464 discharges from 55 hospitals in 14 nonexpansion states during the study period. Hospitals in Medicaid-expansion states experienced a significant 3.7% increase in Medicaid discharges (P = 0.013) and a 2.9% decrease in uninsured discharges (P < 0.001) after ACA implementation, whereas hospitals in nonexpansion states saw no significant change in payer mix. In a difference-in-differences analysis, the changes in LOS and mortality indices pre- to post-ACA implementation did not differ significantly between hospitals in Medicaid-expansion versus nonexpansion states.

CONCLUSIONS

The differential shift in payer mix between Medicaid-expansion and nonexpansion states under the ACA did not influence LOS or in-hospital mortality for general medicine patients at AMCs in the United States. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2015;11:847-852. © 2015 Society of Hospital Medicine.

Health Insurance Effects on Preventive Care and Health: A Methodologic Review

The Affordable Care Act has led to significant gains in insurance coverage and reduced the cost of preventive care for millions of Americans. There is considerable interest in understanding how these changes will impact the use of preventive care services and health outcomes. Obtaining unbiased estimates of the impact of insurance on these outcomes is challenging because of inherent differences between insured and uninsured individuals. This article reviews common experimental and quasi-experimental approaches researchers have used in the past to address this problem, including RCTs, differences-in-differences analyses, and regression discontinuity. In each case, the key assumptions underlying the models are discussed alongside some of the main research findings related to prevention and health. The review concludes with a discussion of how experimental and quasi-experimental methods can be used to study the impact of the Affordable Care Act on preventive care and health outcomes.

Thinking About Clinical Outcomes in Medicaid

As Medicaid expands in scope and influence, it is evolving toward being a "purchaser" of quality health care. This commentary discusses measurement and incentivization of clinical outcomes in Medicaid. Advantages and disadvantages of outcome versus process measures are discussed. Distinctions are drawn between the roles of Medicare and Medicaid, including the implications of the growth in Medicaid managed care. Medicaid's influence is particularly notable for obstetric, pediatric, newborn, and long-term care. We provide data on 3 Medicaid outcomes: potentially preventable hospital admissions, readmissions, and complications. The commentary concludes with suggestions for choosing and implementing outcome-oriented value-based purchasing initiatives in Medicaid.

Health insurance and chronic conditions in low-income urban whites

Little is known about how health insurance contributes to the prevalence of chronic disease in the overlooked population of low-income urban whites. This study uses cross-sectional data on 491 low-income urban non-elderly non-Hispanic whites from the Exploring Health Disparities in Integrated Communities-Southwest Baltimore (EHDIC-SWB) study to examine the relationship between insurance status and chronic conditions (defined as participant report of ever being told by a doctor they had hypertension, diabetes, stroke, heart attack, anxiety or depression, asthma or emphysema, or cancer). In this sample, 45.8 % were uninsured, 28.3 % were publicly insured, and 25.9 % had private insurance. Insured participants had similar odds of having any chronic condition (odds ratios (OR) 1.06; 95 % confidence intervals (CI) 0.70-1.62) compared to uninsured participants. However, those who had public insurance had a higher odds of reporting any chronic condition compared to the privately insured (OR 2.29; 95 % CI 1.21-4.35). In low-income urban areas, the health of whites is not often considered. However, this is a significant population whose reported prevalence of chronic conditions has implications for the Medicaid expansion and the implementation of health insurance exchanges.

Sound policy trumps politics: states should expand Medicaid

By virtue of the Supreme Court's decision on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, states may reject the law's expansion of Medicaid without losing all Medicaid funding from the federal government. The Court's ruling potentially permits a range of Medicaid options for states, including some that may be very attractive from state officials' political perspectives. In the context of the presidential campaign, the uncompensated care problem, and their concerns about costs of expansion, state officials are weighing their options, and some have already pledged to opt out of expansion. We argue that despite the politics, expansion is in fact good for patients, providers, and taxpayers, and states should therefore comply.

Mortality and access to care among adults after state Medicaid expansions

BACKGROUND

Several states have expanded Medicaid eligibility for adults in the past decade, and the Affordable Care Act allows states to expand Medicaid dramatically in 2014. Yet the effect of such changes on adults' health remains unclear. We examined whether Medicaid expansions were associated with changes in mortality and other health-related measures.

METHODS

We compared three states that substantially expanded adult Medicaid eligibility since 2000 (New York, Maine, and Arizona) with neighboring states without expansions. The sample consisted of adults between the ages of 20 and 64 years who were observed 5 years before and after the expansions, from 1997 through 2007. The primary outcome was all-cause county-level mortality among 68,012 year- and county-specific observations in the Compressed Mortality File of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Secondary outcomes were rates of insurance coverage, delayed care because of costs, and self-reported health among 169,124 persons in the Current Population Survey and 192,148 persons in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

RESULTS

Medicaid expansions were associated with a significant reduction in adjusted all-cause mortality (by 19.6 deaths per 100,000 adults, for a relative reduction of 6.1%; P=0.001). Mortality reductions were greatest among older adults, nonwhites, and residents of poorer counties. Expansions increased Medicaid coverage (by 2.2 percentage points, for a relative increase of 24.7%; P=0.01), decreased rates of uninsurance (by 3.2 percentage points, for a relative reduction of 14.7%; P<0.001), decreased rates of delayed care because of costs (by 2.9 percentage points, for a relative reduction of 21.3%; P=0.002), and increased rates of self-reported health status of "excellent" or "very good" (by 2.2 percentage points, for a relative increase of 3.4%; P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

State Medicaid expansions to cover low-income adults were significantly associated with reduced mortality as well as improved coverage, access to care, and self-reported health.