Credit where it is due: Investigating pathways from earned income tax credit expansion to maternal mental health.

While earned income tax credit (EITC) expansions are typically associated with improvements in maternal mental health, little is known about the mechanisms through which the program affects this outcome. The EITC could primarily affect mental health through changes in family financial resources, changes in labor supply or changes in health insurance coverage of participants. We attempt to disentangle these mechanisms by assessing the effects of state and federal EITC expansion on mental health, employment, and health insurance by maternal marital status. We find that federal EITC expansions are associated with improved self-reported mental health for all mothers and large positive effects on employment for unmarried mothers. State EITC expansions are associated with improvements in mental health for married mothers only and have no effect on employment for married or unmarried mothers. Overall and for most subgroups of mothers, we find little association between EITC expansions and changes in health insurance coverage. These findings suggest that while EITC expansions improved mental health for unmarried mothers through a combination of the credit and employment effects, for married mothers, improved mental health is driven through the direct credit alone.

How Workers Fared under the ACA.

Many politicians, policy makers, and analysts have debated whether the Affordable Care Act (ACA) would have negative effects on the labor market, such as reducing employment, earnings, or hours worked. Building on the existing literature, we investigated how workers' coverage changed under the ACA and whether coverage gains were associated with changes in labor market outcomes across occupations through 2017. We also examined whether occupations experiencing increased coverage through nonemployment sources (i.e., Medicaid or individual plans purchased on the ACA's Marketplaces) also experienced offsetting declines in employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) coverage. Finally, we investigated whether the employer mandate was associated with changes in ESI offers to workers. Among workers in occupations experiencing larger coverage gains under the ACA, we found no evidence that employment, hours worked, or earnings fell relative to workers in occupations that had little change in coverage rates over the same period. Moreover, ESI offers remained stable, even among workers in firms likely subject to the employer mandate. Overall, we found that predictions that the coverage provisions and mandates of the ACA would lead to adverse labor market effects did not materialize.

Using Data From the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project for State Health Policy Research.

BACKGROUND: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), the nation's most complete source of all-payer hospital care data, supports analyses at the national, regional, state and community levels. However, national HCUP data are often used in inappropriate ways in studies of state-specific issues. OBJECTIVE: To describe the opportunities and challenges of using HCUP data to conduct state health policy research and to provide empirical examples of what can go wrong when using the national HCUP data inappropriately. RESEARCH DESIGN: Comparison of results from state-level analyses using national HCUP data and the state-specific HCUP data recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Analyses included trends in state-specific rates of cesarean delivery and a difference-in-differences analysis of Connecticut's Medicaid expansion. SUBJECTS: Hospital discharges from the 2004 to 2011 HCUP Nationwide Inpatient Samples (NIS) and State Inpatient Databases (SID). MEASURES: Cesarean delivery rates, discharges per capita, and discharges by the payer. RESULTS: State-level estimates derived from the NIS are volatile and often provide misleading policy conclusions relative to estimates from the SID. CONCLUSIONS: The NIS should not be used for state-level research. AHRQ provides resources to assist analysts with state-specific studies using SID files.

Effects of ACA Medicaid Expansions on Health Insurance Coverage and Labor Supply.

We examined the effect of the expansion of Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act on health insurance coverage and labor supply of low-educated and low-income adults. We found that the Medicaid expansions were associated with large increases in Medicaid coverage, for example, 50 percent among childless adults, and corresponding decreases in the proportion uninsured. There was relatively little change in private insurance coverage, although the expansions tended to decrease such coverage slightly. In terms of labor supply, estimates indicated that the Medicaid expansions had little effect on work effort despite the substantial changes in health insurance coverage. Most estimates suggested that the expansions increased work effort, although not significantly.

Assessing Between- and Within-Hospital Differences in Patient Safety Between Medicaid and Privately Insured Hospital Patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study are to investigate differences in rates of adverse safety events between nonelderly adult patients with Medicaid and those with private insurance and to assess whether differences are driven by differences in access to quality hospitals or differences in the quality of care delivered within hospitals. DATA SOURCE: Inpatient records from 26 states in 2017 were collected from the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality's Hospital Cost and Utilization Project. STUDY DESIGN: This study measures differences in 11 patient safety indicators between patients with Medicaid coverage and patients with private insurance coverage. I use regression analysis to investigate differences in adverse safety events within hospitals. I further establish hospital-level quality based on overall rates of adverse safety events and use regression analysis to evaluate the difference in the probability of admission to high-quality hospitals. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION: This study uses hospital discharge data that is restricted to adults ages 19-64 with Medicaid or private coverage. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Relative to privately insured patients, Medicaid patients had significantly higher rates of adverse safety events on 8 of 11 patient safety indicators, including on 6 of 7 surgery-related patient safety indicators. Medicaid patients experience respiratory failure and sepsis infections at rates that are 2.9 and 2.5 cases per 1000 greater than rates experienced by privately insured patients. After adjusting for demographic characteristics, patient diagnostic classifications and comorbidities, and geographic factors, 6 of 11 differences in patient safety indicators remained large and statistically significant. These differences were unchanged when further including hospital indicators, indicating that Medicaid and privately insured patients receive different quality of care within hospitals. There is little association between overall hospital quality and differences in the probability of admission between Medicaid and privately covered patients. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid patients received lower quality of care, based on patient safety metrics, relative to privately insured patients within the same hospitals. Reducing payer disparities in adverse safety events requires reforming staffing and treatment patterns for Medicaid and privately insured patients within hospitals. STUDY DATE AND LOCATION: Analysis for this study was conducted in 2023 at the Urban Institute and at Loyola University Chicago.

How structural racism, neighborhood deprivation, and maternal characteristics contribute to inequities in birth outcomes.

Decades of disparities in health between infants born to Black and White mothers have persisted in recent years, despite policy initiatives to improve maternal and reproductive health for Black mothers. Although scholars have increasingly recognized the critical role that structural racism plays in driving health outcomes for Black people, measurement of this relationship remains challenging. This study examines trends in preterm birth and low birth weight between 2007 and 2018 separately for births to Black and White mothers. Using a multivariate regression model, we evaluated potential factors, including an index of racialized disadvantage as well as community- and individual-level factors that serve as proxy measures for structural racism, that may contribute to White-Black differences in infant health. Finally, we assessed whether unequal effects of these factors may explain differences in birth outcomes. We found that differences in the effects of these factors appear to explain about half of the underlying disparity in infant health.

Medicaid physician fees and the use of primary care services: evidence from before and after the ACA fee bump.

We examine whether fees paid by Medicaid for primary care affects the use of health care services among adults with Medicaid coverage who have a high school or less than high school degree. The analysis spans the large changes in Medicaid fees that occurred before and after the ACA-mandated fee increase for primary care services in 2013-2014. We use data from the Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance System and a difference-in-differences approach to estimate the association between Medicaid fees and whether a person has a personal doctor; a routine check-up or flu shot in the past year; whether a woman had a pap test or a mammogram in the past year; whether a person has ever been diagnosed with asthma, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, cancer, COPD, arthritis, depression, or kidney diseases; and, whether a person reports good-to-excellent health. Estimates indicate that Medicaid fee increases were associated with small increases in the likelihood of having a personal doctor, or receiving a flu shot, although only having a personal doctor remained significant when accounting for multiple hypothesis testing. We conclude that Medicaid fees did not have a major impact on the use of primary care or on the consequences of that care.

Assessing the difference in racial and ethnic disparities in access to and use of care between Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage.

OBJECTIVE: Test whether racial-ethnic disparities in the access and use of care differ between Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA). DATA SOURCE: Secondary data from the 2015-2018 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS). STUDY DESIGN: Measure Black-White and Hispanic-White disparities in access to care and use of preventive services within TM, within MA, and assess the difference-in-disparities between the two programs with and without controls for factors that could influence enrollment, access, and use. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION: Pool 2015-2018 MCBS data and restrict to non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White, or Hispanic respondents. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Black enrollees have worse access to care relative to White enrollees in TM and MA, particularly for cost-related measures such as not having problems paying medical bills (11-13 pp. lower for Black enrollees; p < 0.05) and satisfaction with out-of-pocket costs (5-6 pp. lower; p < 0.05). We find no difference in Black-White disparities between TM and MA. Hispanic enrollees have worse access to care relative to White enrollees in TM but similar access relative to White enrollees in MA. Hispanic-White disparities in not delaying care due to cost and not reporting problems paying medical bills are narrower in MA relative to TM by about 4 pp (significant at the p < 0.05 level) each. We find no consistent evidence that Black-White or Hispanic-White differences in the use of preventive services differ between TM and MA. CONCLUSIONS: Across the measures of access and use studied here, racial and ethnic disparities in MA are not substantially narrower than in TM for Black and Hispanic enrollees relative to White enrollees. For Black enrollees, this study suggests that system-wide reforms are required to reduce existing disparities. For Hispanic enrollees, MA does narrow some disparities in access to care relative to White enrollees but, in part, because White enrollees do not do as well in MA as they do in TM.

COVID-19 Provider Relief Fund Payments Were Appropriately Targeted And Did Not Boost Selected Hospitals' Profits.

To help mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic's financial effects on health care providers, Congress allocated $178 billion to the Provider Relief Fund (PRF) beginning in 2020. Using monthly data from January 2018 through June 2022 from a nationally representative sample of US hospitals, we used a difference-in-differences approach to examine whether hospitals receiving medium and high PRF support intensity had higher average monthly operating margins (measured separately with and without accounting for PRF payments) than those that received low PRF support intensity. We also assessed the impact of PRF payments by hospitals' prepandemic financial vulnerability status, measured by whether their average operating margins in 2018 and 2019 were above or below the national median. Our findings indicate that PRF distributions to hospitals were appropriately targeted and did not make some hospitals significantly more profitable than others; rather, PRF payments helped offset financial losses associated with the pandemic. The effects of PRF support intensity were concentrated among hospitals that were financially vulnerable before the pandemic and thus in need of support to remain financially viable during the crisis.