The Changing Health Insurance Coverage Landscape in the United States

Hospital Encounters Within 1 Year Postpartum Across Insurance Types, Oregon 2012-2017

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the timing and frequency of postpartum hospital encounters and postpartum visit attendance and how they may be associated with insurance types. Research on health insurance and its association with postpartum care utilization is often limited to the first 6 weeks.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether postpartum utilization (hospital encounters within 1 year postpartum and postpartum visit attendance within 12 weeks) differs by insurance type at birth (Medicaid, high deductible health plans, and other commercial plans) and whether rates of hospital encounters differ by postpartum visit attendance and insurance status.

METHODS

Time-to-event analysis of Oregon hospital births from 2012 to 2017 using All Payer All Claims data. We conducted weighted Cox Proportional Hazard regressions and accounted for differences in insurance type at birth using multinomial propensity scores.

RESULTS

Among 202,167 hospital births, 24.9% of births had at least 1 hospital encounter within 1 year postpartum. Births funded by Medicaid had a higher risk of a postpartum emergency department (ED) visit (hazard ratio: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.99, 2.12) and lower postpartum visit attendance (hazard ratio: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.70, 0.72) compared with commercial plans. Among Medicaid beneficiaries, missing the postpartum visit in the first 6 weeks was associated with a lower risk of subsequent readmissions (adjusted hazard ratio 0.77, 95% CI: 0.68, 0.87) and ED visits (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.87 (0.85, 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Medicaid beneficiaries received more care in the ED within 1 year postpartum compared with those enrolled in other commercial plans. This highlights potential issues in postpartum care access.

Proximity to Radiotherapy Center, Population, Average Income, and Health Insurance Status as Predictors of Cancer Mortality at the County Level in the United States

PURPOSE

Sufficient radiotherapy (RT) capacity is essential to delivery of high-quality cancer care. However, despite sufficient capacity, universal access is not always possible in high-income countries because of factors beyond the commonly used parameter of machines per million people. This study assesses the barriers to RT in a high-income country and how these affect cancer mortality.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study used US county-level data obtained from Center for Disease Control and Prevention and the International Atomic Energy Agency Directory of Radiotherapy Centres. RT facilities in the United States were mapped using Geographic Information Systems software. Univariate analysis was used to identify whether distance to a RT center or various socioeconomic factors were predictive of all-cancer mortality-to-incidence ratio (MIR). Significant variables (P ≤ .05) on univariate analysis were included in a step-wise backward elimination method of multiple regression analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-one percent of US counties have at least one RT facility and 8.3% have five or more. The median linear distance from a county's centroid to the nearest RT center was 36 km, and the median county all-cancer MIR was 0.37. The amount of RT centers, linear accelerators, and brachytherapy units per 1 million people were associated with all-cancer MIR (P < .05). Greater distance to RT facilities, lower county population, lower average income per county, and higher proportion of patients without health insurance were associated with increased all-cancer MIR (R-squared, 0.2113; F, 94.22; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This analysis used unique high-quality data sets to identify significant barriers to RT access that correspond to higher cancer mortality at the county level. Geographic access, personal income, and insurance status all contribute to these concerning disparities. Efforts to address these barriers are needed.

Trends in cigarette use and health insurance coverage among US adults with mental health and substance use disorders

AIMS

To estimate recent trends in cigarette use and health insurance coverage for United States adults with and without mental health and substance use disorders (MH/SUD).

DESIGN

Event study analysis of smoking and insurance coverage trends among US adults with and without MH/SUD using 2008-19 public use data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, an annual, cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

USA.

PARTICIPANTS

A nationally representative sample of non-institutionalized respondents aged 18-64 years (n = 448 762).

MEASUREMENTS

Outcome variables were three measures of recent cigarette use and one measure of past-year health insurance coverage. We compared outcomes between people with and without MH/SUD (MH disorder: past-year mental illness, predicted from Kessler-6 and the World Health Organization-Disability Assessment Schedule impairment scale; SUD: met survey-based DSM-IV criteria for past-year alcohol, cannabis, cocaine or heroin use disorder) and over time.

FINDINGS

Comparing pooled data from 2008 to 2009 and from 2018 to 2019, current smoking rates of adults with MH/SUD decreased from 37.9 to 27.9% while current smoking rates of adults without MH/SUD decreased from 21.4 to 16.3%, a significant difference in decrease of 4.9 percentage points (pts) [95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.3-6.6 pts]. Daily smoking followed similar patterns (difference in decrease of 3.9 pts (95% CI = 2.3-5.4 pts). Recent smoking abstinence rates for adults with MH/SUD increased from 7.4 to 10.9%, while recent smoking abstinence rates for adults without MH/SUD increased from 9.6 to 12.0%, a difference in increase of 1.0 pts (95% CI = -3.0 to 0.9 pts). In 2018-19, 11% of net reductions in current smoking, 12% of net reductions in daily smoking and 12% of net increases in recent smoking abstinence coincided with greater gains in insurance coverage for adults with MH/SUD compared to those without MH/SUD.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvements in smoking and abstinence outcomes for US adults with mental health and substance use disorders appear to be associated with increases in health insurance coverage.

Insurance-Mediated Disparities in Gynecologic Oncology Care

Insurance coverage has lagged behind improvements in gynecologic cancer care, with one third of women never seeing a gynecologic oncologist and half experiencing financial toxicity during cancer treatment.

With 102,000 new cases of gynecologic cancer, 30,000 associated deaths annually, and increasing rates of endometrial cancer, gynecologic cancer is a growing problem. Although gynecologic cancer care has advanced significantly in the past decade owing to new therapeutics and specialized training in radical surgery, even insured women face major barriers to accessing and affording quality gynecologic cancer care. This commentary reviews current literature on insurance-mediated disparities in gynecologic cancer and provides education to clinicians on barriers to care. One third of women with a gynecologic cancer never see a gynecologic oncologist. Up to 40% of Medicare Advantage plans lack an in-network gynecologic oncologist, and 33% of private insurance plans do not include an in-network National Cancer Institute-accredited cancer center, limiting access to surgical advances and clinical trials. Women with Medicaid insurance and gynecologic cancer are 25% less likely to receive guideline-concordant care. Among insured women, 50% experience financial toxicity during gynecologic cancer treatment, and costs may be even higher for certain Medicare enrollees. Addressing these insurance-mediated disparities will be important to help our patients fully benefit from the scientific advances in our field and thrive after a gynecologic cancer diagnosis.