Association of the Affordable Care Act with access to highest-volume centers for patients with thyroid cancer.

BACKGROUND: Disparities exist in access to high-volume surgeons, who have better outcomes after thyroidectomy. The association of the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion with access to high-volume thyroid cancer surgery centers remains unclear. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for all adult thyroid cancer patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2016. Hospital quartiles (Q1-4) defined by operative volume were generated. Clinicodemographics and adjusted odds ratios for treatment per quartile were analyzed by insurance status. An adjusted difference-in-differences analysis examined the association between implementation of the Affordable Care Act and changes in payer mix by hospital quartile. RESULTS: In total, 241,448 patients were included. Medicaid patients were most commonly treated at Q3-Q4 hospitals (Q3 odds ratios 1.05, P = .020, Q4 1.11, P < .001), whereas uninsured patients were most often treated at Q2-Q4 hospitals (Q2 odds ratios 2.82, Q3 2.34, Q4 2.07, P < .001). After expansion, Medicaid patients had lower odds of surgery at Q3-Q4 compared with Q1 hospitals (odds ratios Q3 0.82, P < .001 Q4 0.85, P = .002) in expansion states, but higher odds of treatment at Q3-Q4 hospitals in nonexpansion states (odds ratios Q3 2.23, Q4 1.86, P < .001). Affordable Care Act implementation was associated with increased proportions of Medicaid patients within each quartile in expansion compared with nonexpansion states (Q1 adjusted difference-in-differences 5.36%, Q2 5.29%, Q3 3.68%, Q4 3.26%, P < .001), and a decrease in uninsured patients treated at Q4 hospitals (adjusted difference-in-differences -1.06%, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansion was associated with an increased proportion of Medicaid patients undergoing thyroidectomy for thyroid cancer in all quartiles, with increased Medicaid access to high-volume centers in expansion compared with nonexpansion states.

Carving Out Financial Success: The Power of Insurance Carve-Outs in a Private Plastic Surgery Practice.

BACKGROUND: Since the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law, there has been a push away from fee-for-service payment models. The rise of bundled payments has drastically impacted plastic surgeons' incomes, especially nonsalaried surgeons in private practice. As a result, physicians must now attempt to optimize contractual reimbursement agreements (carve-outs) with insurance providers. The aim of this article is to explain the economics behind negotiating carve-outs and to offer a how-to guide for plastic surgeons to use in such negotiations. METHODS: Based on work relative value units, Medicare reimbursement, overhead expenses, physician workload, and desired income, the authors present an approach that allows surgeons to evaluate the reimbursement they receive for various procedures. The authors then review factors that influence whether a carve-out can be pursued. Finally, the authors consider relevant nuances of negotiating with insurance companies. RESULTS: Using tissue expander insertion (CPT 19357) as an example, the authors review the mathematics, thought process required, and necessary steps in determining whether a carve-out should be pursued. Strategies for negotiation with insurance companies were identified. The presented approach can be used to potentially negotiate a carve-out for any reconstructive procedure that meets appropriate financial criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding practice costs will allow plastic surgeons to evaluate the true value of insurance reimbursements and determine whether a carve-out is worth pursuing. Plastic surgeons must be prepared to negotiate adequate reimbursement carve-outs whenever possible. Ultimately, by aligning the best quality patient care with insurance companies' financial motivations, plastic surgeons have the opportunity to improve reimbursement for some reconstructive procedures.

Associations of Medicaid Expansion With Insurance Coverage, Stage at Diagnosis, and Treatment Among Patients With Genitourinary Malignant Neoplasms.

Importance: Health insurance coverage is associated with improved outcomes in patients with cancer. However, it is unknown whether Medicaid expansion through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was associated with improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with genitourinary cancer. Objective: To assess the association of Medicaid expansion with health insurance status, stage at diagnosis, and receipt of treatment among nonelderly patients with newly diagnosed kidney, bladder, or prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case-control study included adults aged 18 to 64 years with a new primary diagnosis of kidney, bladder, or prostate cancer, selected from the National Cancer Database from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2016. Patients in states that expanded Medicaid were the case group, and patients in nonexpansion states were the control group. Data were analyzed from January 2020 to March 2021. Exposures: State Medicaid expansion status. Main Outcomes and Measures: Insurance status, stage at diagnosis, and receipt of cancer and stage-specific treatments. Cases and controls were compared with difference-in-difference analyses. Results: Among a total of 340 552 patients with newly diagnosed genitourinary cancers, 94 033 (27.6%) had kidney cancer, 25 770 (7.6%) had bladder cancer, and 220 749 (64.8%) had prostate cancer. Medicaid expansion was associated with a net decrease in uninsured rate of 1.1 (95% CI, -1.4 to -0.8) percentage points across all incomes and a net decrease in the low-income population of 4.4 (95% CI, -5.7 to -3.0) percentage points compared with nonexpansion states. Expansion was also associated with a significant shift toward early-stage diagnosis in kidney cancer across all income levels (difference-in-difference, 1.4 [95% CI, 0.1 to 2.6] percentage points) and among individuals with low income (difference-in-difference, 4.6 [95% CI, 0.3 to 9.0] percentage points) and in prostate cancer among individuals with low income (difference-in-difference, 3.0 [95% CI, 0.3 to 5.7] percentage points). Additionally, there was a net increase associated with expansion compared with nonexpansion in receipt of active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer of 4.1 (95% CI, 2.9 to 5.3) percentage points across incomes and 4.5 (95% CI, 0 to 9.0) percentage points among patients in low-income areas. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that Medicaid expansion was associated with decreases in uninsured status, increases in the proportion of kidney and prostate cancer diagnosed in an early stage, and higher rates of active surveillance in the appropriate, low-risk prostate cancer population. Associations were concentrated in population residing in low-income areas and reinforce the importance of improving access to care to all patients with cancer.

The Affordable Care Act at 10 Years: Evaluating the Evidence and Navigating an Uncertain Future.

The year 2020 marks the 10th anniversary of the signing of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Perhaps the greatest overhaul of the US health care system in the past 50 y, the ACA sought to expand access to care, improve quality, and reduce health care costs. Over the past decade, there have been a number of challenges and changes to the law, which remains in evolution. While the ACA's policies were not intended to specifically target surgical care, surgical patients, surgeons, and the health systems within which they function have all been greatly affected. This article aims to provide a brief overview of the impact of the ACA on surgical patients in reference to its tripartite aim of improving access, improving quality, and reducing costs.

Association of the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion with the diagnosis and treatment of clinically localized melanoma: A National Cancer Database study.

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion is associated with earlier diagnosis and improved care among lower socioeconomic status populations with cancer, but its impact on melanoma is undefined. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of Medicaid expansion with stage of diagnosis and use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in nonelderly adult patients with newly diagnosed clinically localized melanoma. METHODS: Quasi-experimental, difference-in-differences retrospective cohort analysis using data from the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2017. Patients from expansion versus nonexpansion states and diagnosed before (2010-2013) versus after (2014-2017) expansion were identified. RESULTS: Of 83,322 patients, 46.6% were female, and the median age was 55 years (interquartile range, 49-60). After risk adjustment, Medicaid expansion was associated with a decrease in the diagnosis of T1b stage or higher melanoma (odds ratio [OR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-0.98; P = .011) and decrease in uninsured status (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.52-0.72; P < .001) but was not associated with a difference in sentinel lymph node biopsy performance when indicated (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.95-1.20; P = .29). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study using a national database. CONCLUSION: In this study of patients with clinically localized melanoma, Medicaid expansion was associated with a decrease in the diagnosis of later T-stage tumors.

The Affordable Care Act and Its Impact on Plastic and Gender-Affirmation Surgery.

SUMMARY: The Affordable Care Act's provisions have affected and will continue to affect plastic surgeons and their patients, and an understanding of its influence on the current American health care system is essential. The law's impact on pediatric plastic surgery, craniofacial surgery, and breast reconstruction is well documented. In addition, gender-affirmation surgery has seen exponential growth, largely because of expanded insurance coverage through the protections afforded to transgender individuals by the Affordable Care Act. As gender-affirming surgery continues to grow, plastic surgeons have the opportunity to adapt and diversify their practices.

Impact of the Affordable Care Act Insurance Marketplaces on Out-of-Pocket Spending Among Surgical Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between the introduction of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Health Insurance Marketplaces ("Marketplaces") and financial protection for patients undergoing surgery. BACKGROUND: The ACA established Marketplaces through which individuals could purchase subsidized insurance coverage. However, the effect of these Marketplaces on surgical patients' healthcare spending remains largely unknown. METHODS: We analyzed a nationally representative sample of adults aged 19-64 who underwent surgery in 2010-2017, using the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Low-income patients eligible for cost-sharing and premium subsidies in the Marketplaces [income 139%-250% federal poverty level (FPL)] and middle-income patients eligible only for premium subsidies (251%-400% FPL) were compared to high-income controls ineligible for subsidies (>400% FPL) using a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences approach. We evaluated 3 main outcomes: (1) out-of-pocket spending, (2) premium contributions, and (3) likelihood of experiencing catastrophic expenditures, defined as out-of-pocket plus premium spending exceeding 19.5% of family income. RESULTS: Our sample included 5450 patients undergoing surgery, representing approximately 69 million US adults. Among low-income patients, Marketplace implementation was associated with $601 lower [95% confidence interval (CI): -$1169 to -$33; P = 0.04) out-of-pocket spending; $968 lower (95% CI: -$1652 to -$285; P = 0.006) premium spending; and 34.6% lower probability (absolute change: -8.3 percentage points; 95% CI: -14.9 to -1.7; P = 0.01) of catastrophic expenditures. We found no evidence that health expenditures changed for middle-income surgical patients. CONCLUSIONS: The ACA's insurance Marketplaces were associated with improved financial protection among low-income surgical patients eligible for both cost-sharing and premium subsidies, but not in middle-income patients eligible for only premium subsidies.

National Trends in Pediatric Facial Fractures: The Impact of Health Care Policy.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic injuries are significant sources of morbidity and mortality in the pediatric population. Using a national database, this study aims to characterize pediatric facial fracture management and the effect of health care policy changes on populations receiving treatment. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Kids' Inpatient Database databases from 2000 to 2016. Pediatric patients admitted with a facial fracture diagnosis were included. Clinical outcomes include mortality, reduction of fracture during hospital stay, and open fracture reduction. The impact of the Affordable Care Act on patient demographics and management was assessed. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2016, 82,414 patients were managed for facial fractures, 8.3 percent of whom were managed after implementation of the Affordable Care Act (n = 6841). Mean age was 15.2 years, and the male-to-female ratio was 2.9:1. Significant racial disparities were identified before the Affordable Care Act: African American and Native American patients had decreased odds of having facial fracture reduction during the initial hospital stay (OR, 0.84 and 0.86, respectively), and identifying as either Hispanic or Native American was associated with higher odds of mortality (OR, 1.4 or 2.4, respectively). Race was not contributory to patient mortality after the Affordable Care Act. Before Affordable Care Act implementation, patients receiving care with no charge (including charity care/charity research) had lower odds of having an open reduction or any reduction; insurance status was not contributory to management after the Affordable Care Act. CONCLUSION: Although the Affordable Care Act may have increased access to care for certain populations, race- and sex-associated differences in mortality rate and fracture management should be further investigated to ensure a national standard of equitable patient care.

The impact of funding for federally qualified health centers on utilization and emergency department visits in Massachusetts.

IMPORTANCE: Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) receive federal funding to serve medically underserved areas and provide a range of services including comprehensive primary care, enabling services, and behavioral health care. Greater funding for FQHCs could increase the local availability of clinic-based care and help reduce more costly resource use, such as emergency department visits (ED). OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of funding increases for FQHCs after the ACA on the use of FQHCs and EDs. METHODS: Retrospective study using the Massachusetts All Payer Claims Database (APCD) 2010-2013 that included APCD enrollees in 559 Massachusetts ZIP codes (N = 6,173,563 in 2010). We calculated shift-share predictions of changes in FQHC funding at the ZIP code-level for FQHCs that received Community Health Center funds in any year, 2010-13 (N = 31). Outcomes were the number of ZIP code enrollees with visits to FQHCs and EDs, overall and for emergent and non-emergent diagnoses. RESULTS: In 2010, 4% of study subjects visited a FQHC, and they were more likely to be younger, have Medicaid, and live in low-income areas. We found that a standard deviation increase in prior year FQHC funding (+31 percentage point (pp)) at the ZIP code level was associated with a 2.3pp (95% CI 0.7pp to 3.8pp) increase in enrollees with FQHC visits and a 1.3pp (95% CI -2.3pp to -0.3pp) decrease in enrollees with non-emergent ED visits, but no significant change in emergent ED visits (0.3pp, 95% CI -0.8pp to 1.4pp). CONCLUSIONS: We found that areas exposed to greater FQHC funding increases had more growth in the number of enrollees seen by FQHCs and greater reductions in ED visits for non-emergent conditions. Investment in FQHCs could be a promising approach to increase access to care for underserved populations and reduce costly ED visits, especially for primary care treatable or non-emergent conditions.

Association of State-Level Medicaid Expansion With Treatment of Patients With Higher-Risk Prostate Cancer.

Importance: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act broadened insurance coverage, partially through voluntary state-based Medicaid expansion. Objective: To determine whether patients with higher-risk prostate cancer residing in Medicaid expansion states were more likely to receive treatment after expansion compared with patients in states electing not to pursue Medicaid expansion. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study included 15 332 patients diagnosed with higher-risk prostate cancer (ie, grade group >2; grade group 2 with prostate-specific antigen levels >10 ng/mL; or grade group 1 with prostate-specific antigen levels >20 ng/mL) from January 2010 to December 2016 aged 50 to 64 years who were candidates for definitive treatment. Patients residing in states that partially expanded Medicaid coverage before 2010 (ie, California and Connecticut) and those with diagnosis not confirmed by histology were excluded. Data were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Data were analyzed between August and December 2019. Exposure: State-level Medicaid expansion status. Main Outcomes and Measures: Insurance status before and after expansion, treatment with prostatectomy or radiation therapy (including brachytherapy), treatment trends over time. Results: Of 15 332 patients, 7811 (50.9%) lived in expansion states (mean [SD] age, 59.1 [3.8] years; 5532 [71.9%] non-Hispanic White), and 7521 (49.1%) lived in nonexpansion states (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [3.9] years; 3912 [52.1%] non-Hispanic White). Residence in an expansion state was associated with higher pre-expansion levels of Medicaid coverage (292 [8.1%] vs 161 [3.8%]; odds ratio [OR], 2.12; 95% CI, 1.78 to 2.53) and lower likelihood of being uninsured (136 [3.2%] vs 38 [1.1%]; OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.54). After expansion, there was no difference in trends in treatment receipt between expansion and nonexpansion states (change, -0.39%; 95% CI, -0.11% to 0.28%; P = .25). Patients with private or Medicare coverage were more likely to receive treatment vs those with Medicaid or no coverage across racial/ethnic groups (eg, Black patients with coverage: OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.68 to 3.10; Black patients with no coverage: OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.09 to 2.00; P < .001). Medicaid patients were not more likely to be treated compared with those without insurance (737 [78.8%] vs 435 [79.5%]; OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.25). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, state-level expansion of Medicaid was associated with increased Medicaid coverage for men with higher-risk prostate tumors but did not appear to affect treatment patterns at a population level. This may be related to the finding that Medicaid coverage was not associated with increased treatment rates compared with those without insurance.

Use of cervical cancer preventive services among US women aged 21-29: an assessment of the 2010 Affordable Care Act rollout through 2018.

PURPOSE: The 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA) provided millions of people with health insurance coverage and facilitated routine cancer screening by requiring insurers to cover preventive services without cost-sharing. Despite greater access to affordable cancer screening, Pap testing has declined over time. The aim of this study is to assess participation in Pap test and HPV vaccination, and adherence to guidelines as outlined by the American Cancer Society (ACS) from the 2010 ACA provision eliminating cost-sharing for preventive services. METHODS: Using multi-year responses from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we examined the association between the ACA and participation in and adherence to Pap testing and HPV vaccination behaviors as set by the ACS. The sample included women aged 21-29 who completed the survey between 2008 and 2018 (every other year) and who live in 24 US States (N = 37,893). RESULTS: Results showed significant decreases in Pap testing rates but increases in the uptake of the HPV vaccine series for all age groups and across all demographics. Post-ACA year significantly predicted increases in HPV + Pap co-testing participation and adherence. Women with health insurance coverage were more likely to engage in both behaviors. CONCLUSION: Findings raise concerns around declines in the proportion of women receiving and adhering to Pap testing guidelines. A need exists for research to examine the role of increases in HPV vaccination uptake on decreases in Pap testing. Moreover, effective strategies should target increases in cervical cancer screening uptake among women vaccinated against HPV.

The Affordable Care Act's Medicaid Expansion and Impact Along the Cancer-Care Continuum: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Health reform and the merits of Medicaid expansion remain at the top of the legislative agenda, with growing evidence suggesting an impact on cancer care and outcomes. A systematic review was undertaken to assess the association between Medicaid expansion and the goals of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in the context of cancer care. The purpose of this article is to summarize the currently published literature and to determine the effects of Medicaid expansion on outcomes during points along the cancer care continuum. METHODS: A systematic search for relevant studies was performed in the PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Three independent observers used an abstraction form to code outcomes and perform a quality and risk of bias assessment using predefined criteria. RESULTS: A total of 48 studies were identified. The most common outcomes assessed were the impact of Medicaid expansion on insurance coverage (23.4% of studies), followed by evaluation of racial and/or socioeconomic disparities (17.4%) and access to screening (14.5%). Medicaid expansion was associated with increases in coverage for cancer patients and survivors as well as reduced racial- and income-related disparities. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansion has led to improved access to insurance coverage among cancer patients and survivors, particularly among low-income and minority populations. This review highlights important gaps in the existing oncology literature, including a lack of studies evaluating changes in treatment and access to end-of-life care following implementation of expansion.

Association of the Affordable Care Act With Ovarian Cancer Care.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate how implementation of the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA) might be associated with stage at diagnosis and time to treatment for women with ovarian cancer. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using difference-in-differences analysis comparing stage at diagnosis and time to treatment before and after implementation of the ACA among women with ovarian cancer aged 21-64 years (exposure group) compared with women aged 65 years or older (control group). Using 2004-2015 data from the National Cancer Database, outcomes were analyzed overall and by insurance type and race, adjusting for urban-rural, income and education level, comorbidities, distance traveled for care, region, and care at an academic center. RESULTS: A total of 39,999 ovarian cancer cases prereform and 36,564 postreform were identified for women aged 21-64 years compared with 31,290 cases prereform and 29,807 postreform for women aged 65 years or older. The ACA was associated with increased early-stage diagnosis detection for women aged 21-64 years compared with women 65 and older (difference-in-differences 1.4%, 95% CI 0.4-2.4). The ACA was associated with more women receiving treatment within 30 days of ovarian cancer diagnosis (2.3%, 95% CI 1.7-3.0). Among women with public insurance, the ACA was associated with a significant improvement in early-stage diagnosis and receipt of treatment within 30 days of diagnosis (difference-in-differences 2.7%, 95% CI 1.0-4.5, difference-in-differences 2.5%, 95% CI 1.2-3.8). Improvements in time to treatment were seen across race and income groups. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the ACA was associated with earlier ovarian cancer stage at detection and treatment within 30 days of diagnosis.

The potential impact of the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid expansion on reducing colorectal cancer screening disparities in African American males.

Few investigations have explored the potential impact of the Affordable Care Act on health disparity outcomes in states that chose to forgo Medicaid expansion. Filling this evidence gap is pressing as Congress grapples with controversial healthcare legislation that could phase out Medicaid expansion. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a commonly diagnosed, preventable cancer in the US that disproportionately burdens African American men and has substantial potential to be impacted by improved healthcare insurance coverage. Our objective was to estimate the impact of the Affordable Care Act (increasing insurance through health exchanges alone or with Medicaid expansion) on colorectal cancer outcomes and economic costs among African American and White males in North Carolina (NC), a state that did not expand Medicaid. We used an individual-based simulation model to estimate the impact of ACA (increasing insurance through health exchanges alone or with Medicaid expansion) on three CRC outcomes (screening, stage-specific incidence, and deaths) and economic costs among African American and White males in NC who were age-eligible for screening (between ages 50 and 75) during the study period, years of 2013-2023. Health exchanges and Medicaid expansion improved simulated CRC outcomes overall, though the impact was more substantial among AAs. Relative to health exchanges alone, Medicaid expansion would prevent between 7.1 to 25.5 CRC cases and 4.1 to 16.4 per 100,000 CRC cases among AA and White males, respectively. Our findings suggest policies that expanding affordable, quality healthcare coverage could have a demonstrable, cost-saving impact while reducing cancer disparities.

The Affordable Care Act and Ethnic Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening.

INTRODUCTION: Cost sharing can deter the use of health services and act as a potential contributor to racial/ethnic disparities in cancer. The Affordable Care Act required most health plans to cover, without cost sharing, preventive services, including colorectal cancer screening. Population-based data were used to estimate the impact of the Affordable Care Act's cost-sharing provision (together with other Affordable Care Act provisions targeting preventive care) on ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening, comparing Hispanics with non-Hispanics. METHODS: An interrupted time series quasi-experimental analysis was used to examine ethnic differences in colorectal cancer screening pre- and post-implementation of the Affordable Care Act (analysis performed in 2018). The study cohort included insured individuals aged 50-64 years who participated in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from 2007 through 2015 (n=44,343). RESULTS: During the pre-Affordable Care Act period, screening rates decreased annually for non-Hispanics by -0.38 per 100 adults per year (95% CI= -0.55, -0.22) but remained level for Hispanics (annual trend per 100 adults: 0.01, 95% CI= -0.34, 0.35). After cost sharing was eliminated in 2011, colorectal cancer screening rates increased for both Hispanics (by 1.29 per 100 adults, 95% CI=0.69, 1.89) and non-Hispanics (by 0.58 per 100 adults, 95% CI=0.18, 0.99). The difference in trend increases between Hispanics and non-Hispanics was not statistically significant (0.70%, 95% CI= -0.24, 1.64). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that Affordable Care Act implementation resulted in increased colorectal cancer screening; however, the effect of the law was not significantly different between Hispanics and non-Hispanics. These results provide indications that more needs to be done to reduce racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening.