Composition of buprenorphine prescribing networks in Medicaid and association with quality of care.

INTRODUCTION: Despite Medicaid's outsized role in delivering and financing medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), little is known about the extent to which buprenorphine prescriber networks vary across Medicaid health plans, and whether network characteristics affect quality of treatment received. In this observational cross-sectional study, we used 2018-2019 Medicaid claims in Oregon to assess network variation in the numbers and types of buprenorphine prescribers, as well as the association of prescriber and network characteristics with quality of care. METHODS: We describe prescribers (MD/DOs and advanced practice providers) of OUD-approved buprenorphine formulations to patients with an OUD diagnosis, across networks. For each patient who initiated buprenorphine treatment during 2018, we assigned a "usual prescriber" and assessed four measures of quality in the 180d following initiation: 1) continuous receipt of buprenorphine; 2) receipt of any behavioral health counseling services; 3) receipt of any urine drug screen; and 4) receipt of any prescription for a benzodiazepine. We used multivariable linear regressions to examine the association of prescriber and network characteristics with quality of buprenorphine care following initiation. RESULTS: We identified 645 providers who prescribed buprenorphine to 20,739 eligible Medicaid enrollees with an OUD diagnosis. The composition of buprenorphine prescriber networks varied in terms of licensing type, specialty, and panel size, with the majority of prescribers providing buprenorphine to small panels of patients. In the 180 days following initiation, a third of patients were maintained on buprenorphine; 69.9 % received behavioral health counseling; 88.4 % had a urine drug screen; and 11.3 % received a benzodiazepine prescription. In regression analyses, while no single network characteristic was associated with higher quality across all examined measures, each one unit increase in prescriber-to-enrollee ratio was associated with a 1.18 p.p. increase in the probability of continuous buprenorphine maintenance during the 180 days following initiation (95 % confidence interval = [0.21, 2.15], p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid plans may be able to leverage their networks to provide higher quality care. Our findings, which should be interpreted as descriptive only, suggest that higher prescriber-to-enrollee ratio is associated with increased buprenorphine maintenance. Future research should focus on isolating the causal relationships between MOUD prescribing network design and patient outcomes.

Georgia's Reinsurance Waiver Associated With Decreased Premium Affordability And Enrollment.

Sixteen states have used Section 1332 waivers to implement reinsurance programs that aim to reduce premiums and increase enrollment in the Affordable Care Act's health insurance Marketplaces. Although reinsurance programs have successfully reduced premiums for unsubsidized enrollees, little is known about how reinsurance affects Marketplace premiums, minimum cost of coverage, and enrollment for the large majority of Marketplace enrollees who receive premium subsidies. Using a difference-in-differences analysis of matched counties straddling Georgia's borders to examine Georgia's 2022 implementation of its reinsurance program, we found that reinsurance increased the minimum cost of enrolling in subsidized Marketplace coverage by approximately 30 percent and decreased enrollment by roughly a third for Marketplace enrollees with incomes of 251-400 percent of the federal poverty level. Marketplace reinsurance programs may have the unintended consequences of increasing the minimum cost of subsidized coverage and reducing enrollment. These outcomes are especially relevant in the present policy context of enhanced subsidies, which have substantially reduced the number of unsubsidized enrollees who would benefit most from reinsurance.

Rural and frontier access to mental health prescribers and nonprescribers: A geospatial analysis in Oregon Medicaid.

OBJECTIVE: Medicaid enrollees in rural and frontier areas face inadequate access to mental health services, but the extent to which access varies for different provider types is unknown. We assessed access to Medicaid-participating prescribing and nonprescribing mental health clinicians, focusing on Oregon, which has a substantial rural population. METHODS: Using 2018 Medicaid claims data, we identified enrollees aged 18-64 with psychiatric diagnoses and specialty mental health providers who billed Medicaid at least once during the study period. We measured both 30- and 60-minute drive time to a mental health provider, and a spatial access score derived from the enhanced 2-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) approach at the level of Zip Code Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs). Results were stratified for prescribers and nonprescribers, across urban, rural, and frontier areas. RESULTS: Overall, a majority of ZCTAs (68.6%) had at least 1 mental health prescriber and nonprescriber within a 30-minute drive. E2SFCA measures demonstrated that while frontier ZCTAs had the lowest access to prescribers (84.3% in the lowest quintile of access) compared to other regions, some frontier ZCTAs had relatively high access to nonprescribers (34.3% in the third and fourth quartiles of access). CONCLUSIONS: Some frontier areas with relatively poor access to Medicaid-participating mental health prescribers demonstrated relatively high access to nonprescribers, suggesting reliance on nonprescribing clinicians for mental health care delivery amid rural workforce constraints. Efforts to monitor network adequacy should consider differential access to different provider types, and incorporate methods, such as E2SFCA, to better account for service demand and supply.

Comparison of primary payer in cancer registry and discharge data.

OBJECTIVES: To determine agreement between variables capturing the primary payer at cancer diagnosis across the Pennsylvania Cancer Registry (PCR) and statewide facility discharge records (Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council [PHC4]) for adults younger than 65 years, and to specifically examine factors associated with misclassification of Medicaid status in the registry given the role of managed care. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of the primary cancer cases among adults aged 21 to 64 years in the PCR from 2010 to 2016 linked to the PHC4 facility visit records. METHODS: We assessed agreement of payer at diagnosis (Medicare, Medicaid, private, other, uninsured, unknown) across data sources, including positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity, using the PHC4 records as the gold standard. The probability of misclassifying Medicaid in registry was estimated using multivariate logit models. RESULTS: Agreement of payers was high for private insurance (PPV, 89.7%; sensitivity, 83.6%), but there was misclassification and/or underreporting of Medicaid in the registry (PPV, 80%; sensitivity, 58%). Among cases with "other" and "unknown" insurance, 73.8% and 62.1%, respectively, had private insurance according to the PHC4 records. Medicaid managed care was associated with a statistically significant increase of 12.6 percentage points (95% CI, 9.4-15.8) in the probability of misclassifying Medicaid enrollment as private insurance in the registry. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest caution in conducting and interpreting research using insurance variables in cancer registries.

Psychiatrist Networks In Medicare Advantage Plans Are Substantially Narrower Than In Medicaid And ACA Markets.

Medicare Advantage now covers twenty-eight million older adults, many of whom have mental health needs. Enrollees are often restricted to providers who participate in a health plan's network, which may present a barrier to care. We used a novel data set linking network service areas, plans, and providers to compare psychiatrist network breadth-the percentage of providers in a given area that are considered "in network" for a plan-across Medicare Advantage, Medicaid managed care, and Affordable Care Act plan markets. We found that nearly two-thirds of psychiatrist networks in Medicare Advantage were narrow (that is, they contained fewer than 25 percent of providers in a network's service area) compared with approximately 40 percent in Medicaid managed care and Affordable Care Act plan markets. We did not observe similar differences in network breadth for primary care physicians or other physician specialists across markets. Amid efforts to strengthen network adequacy, our findings suggest that psychiatrist networks in Medicare Advantage are particularly narrow, which may disadvantage enrollees as they attempt to obtain mental health services.

State Policy and the Breadth of Buprenorphine-Prescriber Networks in Medicaid Managed Care.

Provider networks in Medicaid Managed Care (MMC) play a crucial role in ensuring access to buprenorphine, a highly effective treatment for opioid use disorder. Using a difference-in-differences approach that compares network breadth across provider specialties and market segments within the same state, we investigated the association between three Medicaid policies and the breadth of MMC networks for buprenorphine prescribers: Medicaid expansion, substance use disorder (SUD) network adequacy criteria, and SUD carveouts. We found that both Medicaid expansion and SUD network adequacy criteria were associated with substantially increased breadth in buprenorphine-prescriber networks in MMC. In both cases, we found that the associations were largely driven by increases in the network breadth of primary care physician prescribers. Our findings suggest that Medicaid expansion and SUD network adequacy criteria may be effective strategies at states' disposal to improve access to buprenorphine.

Financial transaction costs reduce benefit take-up evidence from zero-premium health insurance plans in Colorado.

With the passage of the American Recovery Plan Act of 2021, roughly 12 million Americans are eligible to purchase zero-premium Health Insurance Marketplace plans. Millions more are eligible for generously subsidized health plans with small, positive premiums. What difference does a premium of zero make, relative to a slightly positive premium? Using a regression discontinuity design and administrative data from Colorado, we find that zero-premium plans increase coverage, primarily by helping low-income households begin coverage sooner. The main mechanism is eliminating the transaction costs of having to make on-time payments to begin coverage. Transaction costs may be a meaningful barrier to subsidized insurance coverage take-up, particularly for low-income families.

Medicaid Managed Care: Access To Primary Care Providers Who Prescribe Buprenorphine.

Medicaid managed care insurers play a crucial role in facilitating access to buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder. Using a novel set of provider directory and prescription claims data, we examined variation in access to in-network buprenorphine-prescribing primary care providers among Medicaid managed care enrollees. Approximately 32.2 percent of enrollees had fewer than one in-network buprenorphine prescriber per 100,000 county residents. On average, there were a greater number of in-network buprenorphine-prescribing primary care providers in states with higher compared with lower overdose death rates. However, most enrollees lived in areas with a shortage of these providers. We found that a 25 percent higher network participation rate by prescribers compared with nonprescribers could improve the probability that enrollees see a prescriber by approximately 25 percent. Policies to improve access within Medicaid managed care include using primary care provider assignment algorithms to match patients with buprenorphine prescribers and requiring that networks include a minimum number of buprenorphine prescribers.

Association Between Provider-Sponsored Health Plan Ownership and Health Insurance Marketplace Plan Quality.

BACKGROUND: Over 15.3 million Americans relied on the individual health insurance market for health coverage in 2021. Yet, little is known about the relationships between the organizational characteristics of individual market health insurers and quality of coverage, particularly with respect to clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine variation in marketplace insurers' quality performance and investigate how performance varies by insurer organizational characteristics. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: 381 insurer products, representing 184 unique insurers in 50 states in 2019 and 2020. MAIN MEASURES: Marketplace plan clinical quality measures reported in the 2019-2020 CMS Plan Quality Rating System dataset and insurer-product organizational attributes identified from several data sources, including non-profit ownership, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association membership, Medicaid focus and whether or not the insurer product is vertically integrated with a provider organization. KEY RESULTS: Among the 381 insurer products in this study, 35% are part of a provider-sponsored health plan (PSHP) and 70% of these entities received four stars or above for overall quality performance. Overall, PSHPs exhibited higher quality than non-PSHPs for both clinical quality management (0.36 increased on a 5-point scale; 95% CI = 0.11 to 0.62; P = 0.005) and enrollee experience (0.27; 95% CI = 0.03 to 0.50; P = 0.03) summary indicators. Medicaid focused insurers were associated with lower performance on enrollee experience, plan administration, and various outcomes related to clinical quality. CONCLUSIONS: Provider-sponsored health plans in the health insurance marketplaces are associated with higher-quality care, as measured by CMS clinical quality measures.

Comparison of oral anticoagulation use and adherence among Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in stand-alone prescription drug plans vs Medicare Advantage prescription drug plans.

BACKGROUND: For atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, oral anticoagulants (OACs) can reduce the risk of stroke by 60%; however, nearly 50% of patients recommended to receive OACs do not receive therapy. Integrated insurers that cover pharmacy and medical benefits may be incentivized to improve OAC use and adherence because they benefit from offsets in medical costs associated with prevented strokes. OBJECTIVE: To compare OAC use and adherence between AF patients enrolled in Medicare stand-alone prescription drug plans (PDPs), which only cover pharmacy benefits, and those enrolled in Medicare Advantage prescription drug (MAPD) plans, which cover medical and pharmacy benefits. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study, conducted using 2014-2016 Medicare claims data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and a large regional health plan in Pennsylvania. Primary outcomes included OAC use and OAC adherence. OAC use was measured as filling at least 1 prescription for an OAC after AF diagnosis. OAC adherence was defined as having greater than or equal to 80% of days covered with an OAC. We constructed conditional logistic regression models in propensity score-matched samples to test the association between enrollment in PDPs or MAPD plans and outcomes. RESULTS: There were 2,551 AF patients enrolled in PDPs and 4,502 in MAPD plans before propensity score matching. The propensity score-matched sample included 2,537 patients in each group. OAC use was higher among MAPD beneficiaries (74%-76%) compared with PDP beneficiaries (70%; P < 0.001), and 41%-42% of MAPD beneficiaries were adherent to OACs, compared with 34% of PDP beneficiaries (P < 0.001). In adjusted analyses among propensity score-matched samples, PDP enrollment was associated with lower odds of OAC use (OR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.56-0.81) and adherence (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.59-0.78) compared with MAPD enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: AF patients enrolled in MAPD plans were more likely to use and adhere to OACs compared with PDP enrollees. These results may reflect the financial incentives of MAPD plans to improve guideline-recommended OAC use, since MAPD insurers bear the risk of pharmacy and medical costs and thus may benefit from cost savings associated with averted stroke events. As efforts to improve use and adherence of OACs in AF patients increase, focus should be given to how insurance benefit designs can affect medication use. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. Hernandez has received personal fees from BMS and Pfizer, unrelated to this study. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Provider and Patient-panel Characteristics Associated With Initial Adoption and Sustained Prescribing of Medication for Opioid Use Disorder.

OBJECTIVES: Limited information is available regarding provider- and patient panel-level factors associated with primary care provider (PCP) adoption/prescribing of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). METHODS: We assessed a retrospective cohort from 2015 to 2018 within the Pennsylvania Medicaid Program. Participants included PCPs who were Medicaid providers, with no history of MOUD provision, and who treated ≥10 Medicaid enrollees annually. We assessed initial MOUD adoption, defined as an index buprenorphine/buprenorphine-naloxone or oral/extended release naltrexone fill and sustained prescribing, defined as ≥1 MOUD prescription(s) for 3 consecutive quarters from the PCP. Independent variables included provider- and patient panel-level characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 113 rural and 782 urban PCPs who engaged in initial adoption and 36 rural and 288 urban PCPs who engaged in sustained prescribing. Rural/urban PCPs who issued increasingly larger numbers of antidepressant and antipsychotic medication prescriptions had greater odds of initial adoption and sustained prescribing (P < 0.05) compared to those that did not prescribe these medications. Further, each additional patient out of 100 with opioid use disorder diagnosed before MOUD adoption increased the adjusted odds for initial adoption 2% to 4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01-1.08) and sustained prescribing by 4% to 7% (95% CI = 1.01-1.08). New Medicaid providers in rural areas were 2.52 (95% CI = 1.04-6.11) and in urban areas were 2.66 (95% CI = 1.94, 3.64) more likely to engage in initial MOUD adoption compared to established PCPs. CONCLUSIONS: MOUD prescribing adoption was concentrated among PCPs prescribing mental health medications, caring for those with OUD, and new Medicaid providers. These results should be leveraged to test/implement interventions targeting MOUD adoption among PCPs.

Patterns of clinic switching and continuity of medication for opioid use disorder in a Medicaid-enrolled population.

BACKGROUND: Many persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) initiate medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with one clinic and switch to another clinic during their course of treatment. These switches may occur for referrals or for unplanned reasons. It is unknown, however, what effect switching MOUD clinics has on continuity of MOUD treatment or on overdoses. OBJECTIVE: To examine patterns of switching MOUD clinics and its association with the proportion of days covered (PDC) by MOUD, and opioid-related overdose. DESIGN: Cross-sectional retrospective analysis of Pennsylvania Medicaid claims data. MAIN MEASURES: MOUD clinic switches (i.e., filling a MOUD prescription from a prescriber located in a different clinic than the previous prescriber), PDC, and opioid-related overdose. RESULTS: Among 14,107 enrollees, 43.2 % switched clinics for MOUD at least once during the 270 day period. In multivariate regression results, enrollees who were Non-Hispanic black (IRR = 1.43; 95 % CI = 1.24-1.65; p < 0.001), had previous methadone use (IRR = 1.32; 95 % CI = 1.13-1.55; p < 0.001), and a higher total number of office visits (IRR = 1.01; CI = 1.01-1.01; p < 0.001) had more switches. The number of clinic switches was positively associated with PDC (OR = 1.12; 95 % CI = 1.10-1.13). In secondary analyses, we found that switches for only one MOUD fill were associated with lower PDC (OR = 0.97; 95 % CI = 0.95-0.99), while switches for more than one MOUD fill were associated with higher PDC (OR = 1.40; 95 % CI = 1.36-1.44). We did not observe a relationship between opioid-related overdose and clinic switches. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of prescriber continuity for receiving MOUD may not be problematic as it is for other conditions, insofar as it is related to overdose and PDC.

Estimated Plan Enrollment Outcomes After Changes to US Health Insurance Marketplace Automatic Renewal Rules.

Importance: The American Rescue Plan increases premium subsidies for health insurance marketplace enrollees, potentially leading to situations in which enrollees could switch to other health care plans with lower premiums and less cost sharing (ie, deductibles and copayments). Current policy defaults enrollees to their current health care plan if they automatically renew their coverage, which may cause them to stay in health care plans that, because of the American Rescue Plan, are now dominated in that they have higher premiums and cost sharing than other options. Objective: To estimate the extent to which a smart default policy could reduce US health insurance marketplace enrollees' cost sharing and premiums. Design Setting and Participants: Using 2018 individual enrollment data and 2021 premium data from California's marketplace and the American Rescue Plan premium tax credit subsidy schedule, this economic analysis estimated the characteristics of enrollees' default health care plans if they defaulted into 2021 health care plans under current and smart default policies. The analysis was conducted from March 20 to April 8, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Characteristics of enrollees' default health care plans under current and smart default policies, including net premiums, plan levels, and cost sharing. Results: The analytic sample consisted of 748 087 Covered California enrollees from 2018 (mean [SD] age, 44.80 [13.72] years; 408 410 [54.6%] women). Under current policy with the enhanced subsidies implemented under the American Rescue Plan, 5.8% of sample enrollees would default into dominated health plans. Of these enrollees, 98.0% would have incomes below 250% of the federal poverty level. A smart default policy would lead to a mean $102.47 decrease in monthly premiums (95% CI, $103.84-$101.10), a mean $1960 reduction in individual annual medical deductibles (95% CI, $1991-$1928), and a $49.56 reduction in specialty prescription copays (95% CI, $49.77-$49.34). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this economic analysis suggest that a smart default policy could avoid defaulting lower-income marketplace enrollees to objectively inferior health care insurance plans and may lead to large reductions in lower-income enrollees' deductibles, copayments, and maximum out-of-pocket amounts. Implementation of a smart default policy could enable marketplace administrators to reduce the prevalence of underinsurance among lower-income marketplace enrollees.

Behavioral Health Care Quality Among Marketplace Insurers in 2019.

OBJECTIVE: Using 2019 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data, the authors analyzed performance on behavioral health care quality measures among 168 marketplace insurers offering 185 products and investigated whether performance differed by insurer attributes. METHODS: The authors considered four quality measures: antidepressant medication management, follow-up care for children prescribed attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder medication, follow-up care within 7 days after hospitalization for mental illness, and initiation and engagement of alcohol and other drug dependence treatment. Multivariate regression was used to determine whether performance varied by insurers' nonprofit ownership, Blue Cross-Blue Shield affiliation, Medicaid-managed care participation, and preferred provider organization status. RESULTS: Performance levels were highest for management with antidepressant medication and lowest for initiation and engagement of drug dependence treatment. Systematic differ-ences were observed by ownership status and Medicaid-managed care plan status. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the transparency of health plan quality information is important for aiding enrollee decision making and encouraging quality improvement among providers and insurers.

Early- and Late-Stage Cancer Diagnosis Under 3 Years of Medicaid Expansion.

INTRODUCTION: Health insurance expansions may increase early detection of cancer and reduce late-stage cancer incidence. The study assesses the effects of the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansions on rates of early- and late-stage cancer diagnosis up to 3 years after implementation. METHODS: Population-based quasi-experimental analysis of nonelderly adults was conducted in 732 counties from the 2010-2016 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program cancer registry data. Multivariate event study regressions were estimated to compare annual changes in county-level rates of cancer diagnoses in states that expanded Medicaid with those that did not. Data analysis was performed from May to October 2019. RESULTS: Medicaid expansion was associated with an increase in early-stage cancer diagnoses of 21.3 per 100,000 population (95% CI=2.9, 35.2) or 9.14% of population in its first year; estimates for Years 2 and 3 were also positive but smaller and not statistically significant. There was a marginally significant reduction in late-stage diagnoses of 8.7 per 100,000 population (95% CI= -25.0, 3.4) or 5.7% of population relative to baseline, 3 years after Medicaid expansion. There was no detectable effect of expansion on total diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansions increased early-stage cancer diagnosis in the first year of expansion, but effects dissipated in subsequent years, suggesting a response to pent-up patient demand for screening and diagnostic services immediately after expansion. There was also suggestive evidence of reductions in late-stage diagnosis in the third year of Medicaid expansion, highlighting the potential role of public health insurance in improving cancer outcomes among nonelderly adults.

Same Game, Different Names: Cream-Skimming in the Post-ACA Individual Health Insurance Market.

One of the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) signature reforms was creating centralized Health Insurance Marketplaces to offer comprehensive coverage in the form of comprehensive insurance complying with the ACA's coverage standards. Yet, even after the ACA's implementation, millions of people were covered through noncompliant plans, primarily in the form of continued enrollment in "grandmothered" and "grandfathered" plans that predated ACA's full implementation and were allowed under federal and state regulations. Newly proposed and enacted federal legislation may grow the noncompliant segment in future years, and the employment losses of 2020 may grow reliance on individual market coverage further. These factors make it important to understand how the noncompliant segment affects the compliant segment, including the Marketplaces. We show, first, that the noncompliant segment of the individual insurance market substantially outperformed the compliant segment, charging lower premiums but with vastly lower costs, suggesting that insurers have a strong incentive to enter the noncompliant segment. We show, next, that state's decisions to allow grandmothered plans is associated with stronger financial performance of the noncompliant market, but weaker performance of the compliant segment, as noncompliant plans attract lower-cost enrollees. This finding indicates important linkages between the noncompliant and compliant segments and highlights the role state policy can play in the individual insurance market. Taken together, our results point to substantial cream-skimming, with noncompliant plans enrolling the healthiest enrollees, resulting in higher average claims cost in the compliant segment.

Terminating Cost-Sharing Reduction Subsidy Payments: The Impact Of Marketplace Zero-Dollar Premium Plans On Enrollment.

The termination of cost-sharing reduction subsidy payments to insurers in 2017 by the administration of President Donald Trump resulted in a proliferation of Marketplace plans having zero-dollar premiums in 2018 and 2019. While it is known that lower premiums increase Marketplace enrollment, it is not clear whether a zero-price effect exists in which enrollment spikes when health insurance is free. We examined whether such an effect exists and found that increased availability of zero-dollar premium plans would have caused a 14.1 percent enrollment increase among lower-income Marketplace enrollees in 2019. If zero-dollar premium plans had not been available in 2019, our simulation results suggest that enrollment in the federally facilitated Marketplace would have decreased by roughly 200,000 enrollees. When we accounted for this zero-price effect, we found that variation in premiums above zero dollars was not associated with enrollment changes. These results suggest that efforts to insure lower-income populations should focus on making health insurance free to potential enrollees, instead of simply reducing premiums. However, increased enrollment in zero-dollar premium plans could result in increased cost sharing among Marketplace enrollees and increased federal outlays for Advance Premium Tax Credits.

Rural-Urban Differences In Individual-Market Health Plan Affordability After Subsidy Payment Cuts.

This article investigates changes in the affordability of individual health plans (Marketplace plans) that were compliant with the Affordable Care Act following the termination of cost-sharing reduction subsidy payments in 2017. We examined how states' and insurers' responses to these cuts affected enrollees differently depending on whether they lived in rural or urban geographic areas and were or were not eligible for Advance Premium Tax Credits. Using data for 2014-19 from the Health Insurance Exchange Compare database and other sources, we found that subsidy-eligible enrollees in rural markets gained access to Marketplace plans that were more affordable than those available to their urban counterparts, after the cuts affected premiums in 2018. Average minimum net monthly premiums for subsidized enrollees in majority-rural geographic rating areas decreased from $288 in 2017 to $162 in 2019, while those of their urban counterparts decreased from $275 to $180. In contrast, rural enrollees without subsidies faced the least affordable premiums for Marketplace plans.