Assessing the Value of Huddle Implementation in the Perioperative Setting.

Communication is essential for safe, effective patient care. In perioperative services, where interdisciplinary teamwork is crucial, communication breakdowns may lead to increased errors, decreased staff member satisfaction, and poor team performance. This process improvement project focused on instituting perioperative huddles for two months and measuring the effect that they had on staff members' satisfaction, engagement, and communication effectiveness. We used validated, Likert-style survey tools to gauge participants' satisfaction, level of engagement, communication practices, and opinions about the value of huddles before and after implementation, in addition to an open-ended descriptive question in the postsurvey. Sixty-one participants completed the presurvey and 24 participants completed the postsurvey. Scores across all categories increased post huddle implementation. Benefits of the huddles noted by participants included timely and consistent messaging, sharing essential information, and increased feelings of connection between perioperative leaders and staff members.

The Role of Marketplace Policy on Welcome Mat Effects for Children Eligible for Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) required coordination between Marketplaces, Medicaid, and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) in an effort to streamline application processes and improve enrollment. We use 2013-2018 data from the American Community Survey and difference-in-difference models to estimate the relationship between Marketplace policy and increases in Medicaid/CHIP coverage observed among pre-ACA eligible children after the implementation of the ACA ("welcome mat effects"). Our sample includes non-disabled, citizen children (0-18) at 139-250% FPL who were Medicaid-/CHIP-eligible before (and after) the implementation of the ACA. Marketplace policies studied include state-based versus federally-facilitated, and whether the Marketplace had authority to directly enroll Medicaid-/CHIP-eligible applicants into public coverage. Models also control for ACA adult Medicaid expansion policy and provide the first estimates in this literature for non-expansion states. Welcome mat effects were present among all Marketplace and expansion policy categories. However, public coverage increased more in states that empowered their Marketplace to enroll publicly-eligible applicants directly into Medicaid/CHIP and these results were driven by enrollment policy, not by choice of state-based versus federal based Marketplaces. Welcome mat effects were largest in expansion states (for most years) and among children whose parents did not hold employer-sponsored insurance coverage. Ranging from 9 to 13 percentage points, these estimates are larger than those found among other subgroups of children in the welcome mat literature. Although there is evidence of lagged effects for both welcome mat effects and the role of Marketplace policy in non-expansion states, by 2018 we find no differences in these measures by expansion policy.

Medicaid Expansion For Adults Had Measurable 'Welcome Mat' Effects On Their Children.

Before the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), most children in low-income families were already eligible for public insurance through Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program. Increased coverage observed for these children since the ACA's implementation suggest that the legislation potentially had important spillover or "welcome mat" effects on the number of eligible children enrolled. This study used data from the 2013-15 American Community Survey to provide the first national-level (analytical) estimates of welcome-mat effects on children's coverage post ACA. We estimated that 710,000 low-income children gained coverage through these effects. The study was also the first to show a link between parents' eligibility for Medicaid and welcome-mat effects for their children under the ACA. Welcome-mat effects were largest among children whose parents gained Medicaid eligibility under the ACA expansion to adults. Public coverage for these children increased by 5.7 percentage points-more than double the 2.7-percentage-point increase observed among children whose parents were ineligible for Medicaid both pre and post ACA. Finally, we estimated that if all states had adopted the Medicaid expansion, an additional 200,000 low-income children would have gained coverage.

Coverage and care consequences for families in which children have mixed eligibility for public insurance.

Public health insurance for low-income children in the United States is primarily available through Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Mixed eligibility occurs when there is a mix of either "Medicaid- and CHIP-eligible" children or a mix of "eligible (for public insurance) and ineligible (for public insurance)" children in the family. We used data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) Household Component for 2001-12 to examine insurance coverage, access to care, and health care use for eligible children in families with mixed-eligible siblings compared to those in families where all siblings were eligible for one program. We found that mixed eligibility has a significant dampening effect for eligible children in families with a mix of eligible and ineligible siblings. These children were more likely to be uninsured and less likely to have a usual source of care, less likely to have any preventive dental or well-child visits during the year, and less likely to fully adhere to recommended preventive dental and well-child visits than eligible children with all-Medicaid- or all-CHIP-eligible siblings. We found no significant impact for eligible children living in Medicaid-CHIP-mixed families.

If rollbacks go forward, up to 14 million children could become ineligible for public or subsidized coverage by 2019.

In spring 2015 Congress passed legislation to extend funding for the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) through the end of fiscal year 2017. This two-year extension pushes to 2017 the question of whether CHIP funding will end, allowing states to end their separate state CHIP programs. Also, when the Affordable Care Act's maintenance-of-effort requirements expire after 2019, states will be allowed to roll back Medicaid- and CHIP-eligibility thresholds to minimum levels allowed by federal law. This study investigated the potential health insurance options available to low-income children if these events happen. If all states roll back coverage to federal statutory minimums, then, among children in families with incomes up to 400 percent of the federal poverty guidelines, the share ineligible for public coverage or subsidized Marketplace coverage would increase from 22 percent in 2014 (12.5 million children) to 46 percent after 2019 (26.5 million children). While not all states are likely to reduce eligibility to federal statutory minimums, these estimates highlight the fact that many children who do lose public eligibility will not become eligible for subsidized Marketplace coverage.

Adults in the income range for the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion are healthier than pre-ACA enrollees.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has dramatically increased the number of low-income nonelderly adults eligible for Medicaid. Starting in 2014, states can elect to cover individuals and families with modified adjusted gross incomes below a threshold of 133 percent of federal poverty guidelines, with a 5 percent income disregard. We used simulation methods and data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to compare nondisabled adults enrolled in Medicaid prior to the ACA with two other groups: adults who were eligible for Medicaid but not enrolled in it, and adults who were in the income range for the ACA's Medicaid expansion and thus newly eligible for coverage. Although differences in health across the groups were not large, both the newly eligible and those eligible before the ACA but not enrolled were healthier on several measures than pre-ACA enrollees. Twenty-five states have opted not to use the ACA to expand Medicaid eligibility. If these states reverse their decisions, their Medicaid programs might not enroll a population that is sicker than their pre-ACA enrollees. By expanding Medicaid eligibility, states could provide coverage to millions of healthier adults as well as to millions who have chronic conditions and who need care.

Families with mixed eligibility for public coverage: navigating Medicaid, CHIP, and uninsurance.

In the midst of health care reform, eligible but uninsured children remain a cause for concern. Children in the same family often have differing eligibility status for public coverage. Mixed eligibility is associated with higher uninsurance rates, even when all children in a family are eligible. Medicaid policies play an important role in creating mixed-eligibility families via age-related eligibility thresholds and limited benefits for immigrants; states running separate Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) programs have higher uninsurance rates among eligible children. Recent policies to simplify enrollment have not lowered uninsurance among these children. States may improve take-up rates by focusing on eligible children in mixed-eligibility families.

Explaining racial and ethnic differences in children's use of stimulant medications.

OBJECTIVES: To document and explain racial/ethnic differences in the use of stimulant drugs among US children. DATA AND METHODS: We use a nationally representative sample of children ages 5-17 years old from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) for the years 2000-2002. We estimate race-specific means and regressions to highlight differences across groups in individual/family characteristics that may affect stimulant use and differences in responses to these characteristics. Then, we use Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition methods to quantify the portion of differential use explained by differences in individual/family characteristics. Finally, we use pooled regressions with race/ethnicity interactions to formally test the hypothesis that responses to perceived mental health and behavioral problems vary across groups. RESULTS: White children are about twice as likely to use stimulants as either Hispanic or Black children. Differences in individual/family characteristics account for about 25% of the difference between whites and Hispanics, but for none of the difference between whites and blacks. Pooled regressions show that racial/ethnic gaps in stimulant use persist among children with otherwise similar reported mental health conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Our finding that the majority of racial/ethnic differences in children's stimulant use is explained by differences in responses to individual/family characteristics highlights the importance of further research to examine the reasons for these differences. It is striking that children with otherwise similar reports of mental health problems have such different outcomes in terms of stimulant use. Potential explanations range from discrimination to cultural differences by race/ethnicity or community.

Children's eligibility and coverage: recent trends and a look ahead.

We used data from the 1996-2005 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to track changes in children's public insurance eligibility and coverage. During the 2001-2005 "postexpansion" period, eligibility was approximately constant, while public enrollment increased rapidly and uninsurance declined. Nevertheless, as of 2005, 62 percent of all uninsured children (5.5 million) continued to be eligible but not enrolled. We present detailed estimates of their characteristics by age, income, race/ethnicity, health status, and nativity/citizenship. We also examine the impact of potential changes in SCHIP income thresholds--both an expansion and a rollback--and estimate the number and characteristics of the children potentially affected.

Access to care and utilization among children: estimating the effects of public and private coverage.

OBJECTIVES: We examine the relationship between health insurance coverage and children's access to and utilization of medical care. Access measures we study are having a usual source of care (USC) and lacking a USC for financial or insurance reasons. We also examine indicators for ambulatory visits, well-child visits, dental visits, emergency room use, and inpatient hospital stays. METHODS: We pool data from the first 7 years of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), 1996 to 2002. Pooling yields a large sample of children, enabling us to analyze access and utilization using simple descriptive statistics, multivariate analysis, and instrumental variables estimation (IV). IV estimation is of particular interest given the possibility of bias caused by confounding factors (such as child health or parent attitudes) and measurement error in insurance coverage. We also compare estimates from IV linear probability models to estimates from IV probit with residual inclusion. RESULTS: As previous studies have found, public and private coverage are both associated with large increases in access and utilization. Simple mean comparisons suggest that private coverage has a larger effect than does public coverage. Differences between public and private coverage are reduced (and often reversed) when we control for other characteristics of children and their families. IV coverage effect estimates from both linear probability and residual inclusion probit models are substantially greater than conventional estimates across a wide range of access and utilization measures. CONCLUSIONS: Despite concerns that conventional estimates overstate the impact of coverage on access and use, our results suggest that the reverse may be true. One explanation may be that conventional estimates are biased toward zero due to error in the reporting of insurance coverage. The magnitude of the coverage effects we find highlights the importance of reducing uninsurance among children.

The impact of SCHIP on insurance coverage of children.

In this paper we use the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey between 1996 and 2002 to investigate the impact of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) on insurance coverage for children. We explore a range of alternative estimation strategies, including instrumental variables and difference-in-trends models. We find that SCHIP had a significant impact in decreasing uninsurance and increasing public insurance for both children targeted by SCHIP and those eligible for Medicaid. With respect to changes in private coverage our results are less conclusive: some specifications resulted in no significant effect of SCHIP on private insurance coverage, while others showed significant decreases in private insurance. Associated estimates of SCHIP crowd-out had wide confidence intervals and were sensitive to estimation strategy.

How much can really be saved by rolling back SCHIP? The net cost of public health insurance for children.

A growing body of research demonstrates the many benefits of expanded public coverage for children. Expansions in Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) have helped to increase insurance coverage, increase access to care, and reduce the financial burdens facing low-income families. Less attention has been focused on the cost of expanding public coverage. We argue that budgetary data may exaggerate the net costs of these expansions because many of the highest-cost children would have received publicly funded care even if the expansions had not taken place. Using data from the 2000 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we simulate the net cost of SCHIP, finding that the true cost of this program-both to states and to the federal government-is substantially less than average spending per enrollee would suggest. Our results strengthen the benefit-cost argument against implementing rollbacks in SCHIP.

Tracking changes in eligibility and coverage among children, 1996-2002.

Data from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) reveal that 4.7 million children were eligible for Medicaid but were uninsured. Numerous changes have occurred in the landscape for children's health insurance since then, including welfare reform and implementation of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). We use data from the 1996-2002 MEPS to track changes in the eligibility and coverage of children. As of 2002, uninsurance among children remained as much a problem of participation as one of eligibility. Nevertheless, we find evidence of dramatic improvements in program participation, reflecting the success of efforts to improve outreach, simplify enrollment, and increase retention.