Financial impact of California's new law to increase HIV screening by mandating insurance coverage

HIV tests and new diagnoses declined after california budget cuts, but reallocating funds helped reduce impact

Historically, California supplemented federal funding of HIV prevention and testing so that Californians with HIV could become aware of their infection and obtain lifesaving treatment. However, budget deficits in 2009 led the state to eliminate its supplemental funding for HIV prevention. We analyzed the impact of California's HIV resource allocation change between state fiscal years 2009 and 2011. We found that the number of HIV tests declined 19 percent, from 66,629 to 53,760, in local health jurisdictions with high HIV burden. In low-burden jurisdictions, the number of HIV tests declined 90 percent, from 20,302 to 2,116. New diagnoses fell from 2,434 in 2009 to 2,235 in 2011 (calendar years) in high-burden jurisdictions and from 346 to 327 in low-burden ones. California's budget crunch prompted state and local programs to redirect remaining HIV funds from risk reduction education to testing activities. Thus, the impact of the budget cuts on HIV tests and new HIV diagnoses was smaller than might have been expected given the size of the cuts. As California's fiscal outlook improves, we recommend that the state restore supplemental funding for HIV prevention and testing.

Paying for prevention: challenges to health insurance coverage for biomedical HIV prevention in the United States

Reducing the incidence of HIV infection continues to be a crucial public health priority in the United States, especially among populations at elevated risk such as men who have sex with men, transgender women, people who inject drugs, and racial and ethnic minority communities. Although most HIV prevention efforts to date have focused on changing risky behaviors, the past decade yielded efficacious new biomedical technologies designed to prevent infection, such as the prophylactic use of antiretroviral drugs and the first indications of an efficacious vaccine. Access to prevention technologies will be a significant part of the next decade's response to HIV and advocates are mobilizing to achieve more widespread use of these interventions. These breakthroughs, however, arrive at a time of escalating healthcare costs; health insurance coverage therefore raises pressing new questions about priority-setting and the allocation of responsibility for public health. The goals of this Article are to identify legal challenges and potential solutions for expanding access to biomedical HIV prevention through health insurance coverage. This Article discusses the public policy implications of HIVprevention coverage decisions, assesses possible legal grounds on which insurers may initially deny coverage for these technologies, and evaluates the extent to which these denials may survive external and judicial review. Because several of these legal grounds may be persuasive, particularly denials on the basis of medical necessity, this Article also explores alternative strategies for financing biomedical HIV prevention efforts.

HIV testing: the cornerstone of HIV prevention efforts in the USA

An estimated 1.2 million persons in the USA are infected with HIV, of whom approximately 20% are unaware they are infected. HIV testing and knowledge of HIV serostatus have important individual and public health benefits, including reduction of morbidity, mortality and HIV transmission. Although testing is the necessary first step to prevention, more than half of the US adult population has never been tested for HIV. However, this proportion is increasing due to revised national recommendations to make HIV testing a routine part of healthcare, expansion of testing efforts at local, state and national levels, and progress in the development and adoption of new testing technologies. In this article, we describe the essential role of HIV testing as a public health prevention strategy, examine recent advances in HIV testing technologies and testing implementation, and identify future directions for HIV testing in the USA.