Cancer diagnosis and treatment in working-age adults: Implications for employment, health insurance coverage, and financial hardship in the United States.

The rising costs of cancer care and subsequent medical financial hardship for cancer survivors and families are well documented in the United States. Less attention has been paid to employment disruptions and loss of household income after a cancer diagnosis and during treatment, potentially resulting in lasting financial hardship, particularly for working-age adults not yet age-eligible for Medicare coverage and their families. In this article, the authors use a composite patient case to illustrate the adverse consequences of cancer diagnosis and treatment for employment, health insurance coverage, household income, and other aspects of financial hardship. They summarize existing research and provide nationally representative estimates of multiple aspects of financial hardship and health insurance coverage, benefit design, and employee benefits, such as paid sick leave, among working-age adults with a history of cancer and compare them with estimates among working-age adults without a history of cancer from the most recently available years of the National Health Interview Survey (2019-2021). Then, the authors identify opportunities for addressing employment and health insurance coverage challenges at multiple levels, including federal, state, and local policies; employers; cancer care delivery organizations; and nonprofit organizations. These efforts, when informed by research to identify best practices, can potentially help mitigate the financial hardship associated with cancer.

Did Medicaid Reimbursements Shape the Effects of Medicaid Expansion on Access to Health Care Among the Low-Income Population?

BACKGROUND: Whether variation in Medicaid reimbursement fees influenced the impacts of the Medicaid expansions is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: We examine whether changes in health care access associated with Medicaid expansion are different in states with comparatively high Medicaid reimbursement rates compared against expanding in states with lower Medicaid reimbursement rates. DESIGN: Using a difference-in-difference-in-difference (DDD or triple-difference) regression approach, we compare relative differences in Medicaid expansion effects between lower and higher reimbursement states. PARTICIPANTS: 512,744 low-income adults aged 20-64 in the 2011-2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. MAIN MEASURES: Health insurance coverage status, unmet medical needs due to cost, regular source for health care, and a regular/scheduled checkup within the past year. KEY RESULTS: Medicaid expansion has significant and positive impacts on health coverage and access in both high- and low-fee states. In states with fee levels above the median Medicare-to-Medicaid ratios, expanding Medicaid eligibility reduced uninsurance rate by 15.2 percentage point (ppt, p < 0.01), shrank the cost-associated unmet medical need by 10.3 ppt (p < 0.01), improved access to usual source of care by 1.9 ppt (p < 0.1), and increased regular checkup by 14.4 ppt (p < 0.01), while such effects in low-fee states were 11.7 ppt (p < 0.01), 8.3 ppt (p < 0.01), 3.1 ppt (p < 0.1), and 12.3 ppt (p < 0.01), respectively. Our results suggest that Medicaid expansion effect on unmet medical need due to cost in higher-reimbursing states was 2.98 ppt (p < 0.05) larger than in lower-reimbursing states. Evidence suggests modest increases in health care access were more strongly associated with expansions in higher-fee states. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid's fee structure should be considered as a factor influencing large-scale coverage expansions.

The impact of the expanded health insurance coverage policy on healthcare spending: evidence from Korea.

BACKGROUND: South Korea's National Health Insurance (NHI) system pursues universal health coverage, but it has not been able to alleviate patients' financial burden owing to limited coverage and a high proportion of out-of-pocket expenses. In 2017, the government announced a plan to strengthen universality by providing coverage for all unincluded services, expanding coverage, and alleviating household financial burden. We aimed to evaluate the effect of "Moon Care" with a focus on changes in health expenditures following policy implementation, and to provide empirical evidence for future policies to strengthen the NHI system's universality. METHODS: Using data from the 2016 and 2018 Korea Health Panel (KHP), we established a treatment group affected by the policy and an unaffected control group; we ensured homogeneity between the groups using propensity score matching (PSM). Subsequently, we examined changes in NHI payments, non-payments, and out-of-pocket payments (OOP); we performed difference-in-differences (DID) analysis to evaluate the policy's effect. RESULTS: Following policy implementation, the control group had a higher increase than the treatment group in all categories of health expenditures, including NHI payments, non-payments, and OOP. We noted significant decreases in all three categories of health expenditures when comparing the differences before and after policy implementation, as well as between the treatment and control groups. However, we witnessed a significant decrease in the interaction term, which confirms the policy's effect, but only for non-payments. CONCLUSIONS: We observed the policy's intervention effect over time as a decrease in non-payments, on the effectivity of remunerating covered medical services. However, the policy did not work for NHI payments and OOP, suggesting that it failed to control the creation of new non-covered services as noncovered services were converted into covered ones. Thus, it is crucial to discuss the financial spending of health insurance regarding the inclusion of non-covered services in the NHI benefits package.

Joint effects of Medicaid eligibility and fees on recession-linked declines in healthcare access and health status.

Whether Medicaid can function as a safety net to offset health risks created by health insurance coverage losses due to job loss is conditional on (1) the eligibility guidelines shaping the pathway for households to access the program for temporary relief, and (2) Medicaid reimbursement policies affecting the value of the program for both the newly and previously enrolled. We find states with more expansive eligibility guidelines lowered the healthcare access and health risk of coverage loss associated with rising unemployment during the 2007-2009 Great Recession. Rises in cost-related barriers to care associated with unemployment were smallest in states with expansive eligibility guidelines and higher Medicaid-to-Medicare fee ratios. Similarly, states whose Medicaid programs had expansive eligibility guidelines and higher fees saw the smallest recession-linked declines in self-reported good health. Medicaid can work to stabilize access to health care during periods of joblessness. Our findings yield important insights into the alignment of at least two Medicaid policies (i.e., eligibility and payment) shaping Medicaid's viability as a safety net.

The value of microvascular breast reconstruction: Cost equivalence of TRAM and DIEP flaps implications in the era of CMS reforms.

BACKGROUND: Recent CMS billing changes have raised concerns about insurance coverage for deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction. This study compared the costs and utilization of transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM), DIEP, and latissimus dorsi (LD) flaps in breast reconstruction. METHOD: The study utilized the National Inpatient Sample database to identify female patients who underwent DIEP, TRAM, and LD flap procedures from 2016 to 2019. Key data such as patient demographics, length of stay, complications, and costs (adjusted to 2021 USD) were analyzed, focusing on differences across the flap types. RESULTS: A total of 17,770 weighted patient encounters were identified, with the median age being 51. The majority underwent DIEP flaps (73.5%), followed by TRAM (14.2%) and LD (12.1%) flaps. The findings revealed that DIEP and TRAM flaps had a similar length of stay (LOS), while LD flaps typically had a shorter LOS. The total hospital charges to costs using cost-to-charge ratio were also comparable between DIEP and TRAM flaps, whereas LD flaps were significantly less expensive. Factors such as income quartile, primary payer of hospitalization, and geographic region significantly influenced flap choice. CONCLUSION: The study's results appear to contradict the prevailing notion that TRAM flaps are more cost-effective than DIEP flaps. The total hospital charges to costs using cost-to-charge ratio and hospital stays associated with TRAM and DIEP flaps were found to be similar. These findings suggest that changes in the insurance landscape, which may limit the use of DIEP flaps, could undermine patient autonomy while not necessarily reducing healthcare costs. Such policy shifts could favor less costly options like the LD flap, potentially altering the landscape of microvascular breast reconstruction.

Understanding the role of access in Hispanic cancer screening disparities.

BACKGROUND: Hispanic populations in the United States experience numerous barriers to care access. It is unclear how cancer screening disparities between Hispanic and non-Hispanic White individuals are explained by access to care, including having a usual source of care and health insurance coverage. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the 2019 National Health Interview Survey was conducted and included respondents who were sex- and age-eligible for cervical (n = 8316), breast (n = 6025), or colorectal cancer screening (n = 11,313). The proportion of ever screened and up to date for each screening type was compared.  Regression models evaluated whether controlling for reporting a usual source of care and type of health insurance (public, private, none) attenuated disparities between Hispanics and non-Hispanic White individuals. RESULTS: Hispanic individuals were less likely than non-Hispanic White individuals to be up to date with cervical cancer screening (71.6% vs. 74.6%) and colorectal cancer screening (52.9% vs. 70.3%), but up-to-date screening was similar for breast cancer (78.8% vs. 76.3%). Hispanic individuals (vs. non-Hispanic White) were less likely to have a usual source of care (77.9% vs. 86.0%) and more likely to be uninsured (23.6% vs. 7.1%). In regressions, insurance fully attenuated cervical cancer disparities. Controlling for both usual source of care and insurance type explained approximately half of the colorectal cancer screening disparities (adjusted risk difference: -8.3 [-11.2 to -4.8]). CONCLUSION: Addressing the high rate of uninsurance among Hispanic individuals could mitigate cancer screening disparities. Future research should build on the relative successes of breast cancer screening and investigate additional barriers for colorectal cancer screening. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This study uses data from a national survey to compare cancer screening use those who identify as Hispanic with those who identify as non-Hispanic White. Those who identify as Hispanic are much less likely to be up to date with colorectal cancer screening than those who identify as non-Hispanic White, slightly less likely to be up to date on cervical cancer screening, and similarly likely to receive breast cancer screening. Improving insurance coverage is important for health equity, as is further exploring what drives higher use of breast cancer screening and lower use of colorectal cancer screening.

Randomized trial shows healthcare payment reform has equal-sized spillover effects on patients not targeted by reform.

Changes in the way health insurers pay healthcare providers may not only directly affect the insurer's patients but may also affect patients covered by other insurers. We provide evidence of such spillovers in the context of a nationwide Medicare bundled payment reform that was implemented in some areas of the country but not in others, via random assignment. We estimate that the payment reform-which targeted traditional Medicare patients-had effects of similar magnitude on the healthcare experience of nontargeted, privately insured Medicare Advantage patients. We discuss the implications of these findings for estimates of the impact of healthcare payment reforms and more generally for the design of healthcare policy.

Association Between California's State Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act and Utilization of Gender-Affirming Surgery.

Importance: Gender-affirming surgery is often beneficial for gender-diverse or -dysphoric patients. Access to gender-affirming surgery is often limited through restrictive legislation and insurance policies. Objective: To investigate the association between California's 2013 implementation of the Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act, which prohibits insurers and health plans from limiting benefits based on a patient's sex, gender, gender identity, or gender expression, and utilization of gender-affirming surgery among California residents. Design, Setting, and Participants: Population epidemiology study of transgender and gender-diverse patients undergoing gender-affirming surgery (facial, chest, and genital surgery) between 2005 and 2019. Utilization of gender-affirming surgery in California before and after implementation of the Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act in July 2013 was compared with utilization in Washington and Arizona, control states chosen because of geographic similarity and because they expanded Medicaid on the same date as California-January 1, 2014. The date of last follow-up was December 31, 2019. Exposures: California's Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act, implemented on July 9, 2013. Main Outcomes and Measures: Receipt of gender-affirming surgery, defined as undergoing at least 1 facial, chest, or genital procedure. Results: A total of 25 252 patients (California: n = 17 934 [71%]; control: n = 7328 [29%]) had a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Median ages were 34.0 years in California (with or without gender-affirming surgery), 39 years (IQR, 28-49 years) among those undergoing gender-affirming surgery in control states, and 36 years (IQR, 22-56 years) among those not undergoing gender-affirming surgery in control states. Patients underwent at least 1 gender-affirming surgery within the study period in 2918 (11.6%) admissions-2715 (15.1%) in California vs 203 (2.8%) in control states. There was a statistically significant increase in gender-affirming surgery in the third quarter of July 2013 in California vs control states, coinciding with the timing of the Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act (P < .001). Implementation of the policy was associated with an absolute 12.1% (95% CI, 10.3%-13.9%; P < .001) increase in the probability of undergoing gender-affirming surgery in California vs control states observed in the subset of insured patients (13.4% [95% CI, 11.5%-15.4%]; P < .001) but not self-pay patients (-22.6% [95% CI, -32.8% to -12.5%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Implementation in California of its Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act was associated with a significant increase in utilization of gender-affirming surgery in California compared with the control states Washington and Arizona. These data might inform state legislative efforts to craft policies preventing discrimination in health coverage for state residents, including transgender and gender-diverse patients.

Legitimacy of Cost Concern for Health Insurance Coverage of Gender-Affirming Surgeries: Comparison of the Interest in Keeping Insurance Cost Down versus the Cost-Effectiveness of Including Gender-Affirming Surgeries in Employer Health Insurance Plans.

This RCD discusses the recent development in Lange v Houston County. In this case, the United States District Court for The Middle District Of Georgia Macon Division found that an Exclusion Policy, prohibiting health insurance coverage of gender-affirming surgery for an employee, Anna Lange, violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. On appeal, the Defendants argued that the District Court erred in its decision and relied on the cost burden of gender-affirming surgery as one of their defenses. This RCD highlights that cost is a common defense tactic used by defendants in these cases. However, the author argues that these concerns are unfounded and meritless given the cost-effectiveness of including gender-affirming surgeries in health insurance plans, as highlighted in the RCD.

The Impact of Medicare Coverage on Downstream Financial Outcomes for Adults Who Undergo Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of gaining access to Medicare on key financial outcomes for surgical patients. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Surgical care poses a significant financial burden, especially among patients with insufficient financial risk protection. Medicare may mitigate the risk of these adverse circumstances, but the impact of Medicare eligibility on surgical patients remains poorly understood. METHODS: Regression discontinuity analysis of national, cross-sectional survey and cost data from the 2008 to 2018 National Health Interview Survey and Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Patients were between the ages of 57 to 72 with surgery in the past 12 months. The primary outcomes were the presence of medical debt, delay/deferment of care due to cost, total annual out-of-pocket costs, and experiencing catastrophic health expenditures. RESULTS: Among 45,982,243 National Health Interview Survey patients, Medicare eligibility was associated with a 6.6 percentage-point decrease (95% confidence interval [CI]: -9.0% to -4.3) in being uninsured (>99% relative reduction), 7.6 percentage-point decrease (24% relative reduction) in having medical debt (95%CI: -14.1% to -1.1%), and 4.9 percentage-point decrease (95%CI: -9.4% to -0.4%) in deferrals/delays in medical care due to cost (28% relative reduction). Among 33,084,967 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey patients, annual out-of-pocket spending decreased by $1199 per patient (95%CI: -$1633 to -$765), a 33% relative reduction, and catastrophic health expenditures decreased by 7.3 percentage points (95%CI: -13.6% to -0.1%), a 55% relative reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare may reduce the economic burden of healthcare spending and delays in care for older adult surgical patients. These findings have important implications for policy discussions regarding changing insurance eligibility thresholds for the older adult population.

The Impact of Medicare Health Insurance Coverage on Lung Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: Annual lung cancer screening via low-dose computed tomography can reduce lung cancer mortality among high-risk adults by 20%; however, screening take-up remains low. Inadequate insurance coverage or access to care may be a barrier to screening. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the effect of nearly universal access to Medicare coverage on annual lung cancer screening. RESEARCH DESIGN: A regression discontinuity design was used to estimate the causal effect of nearly universal access to Medicare at age 65. Data come from the 2017 to 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 28 states that adopted the optional module on lung cancer screening and lung cancer risk. SUBJECTS: A total of 11,163 individuals at high risk for lung cancer just above and below age 65. MEASURE: Self-reported use of low-dose computed tomography to screen for lung cancer in the past 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 10,951 people at high lung cancer risk (45.7% women, response rate=98.1%) reported lung cancer screening information. Nearly universal access to Medicare increased lung cancer screening by 16.2 percentage points among men (95% confidence interval: 2.4%-30.0%, P=0.02), compared with a baseline screening rate of 11.1% just younger than age 65. Women had a baseline screening rate of 18.2% and experienced no statistically significant change in screening (1.6 percentage point increase, 95% confidence interval: -19.8% to 23.0%, P=0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Gaining Medicare coverage at age 65 increased lung cancer screening take-up among men at high lung cancer risk. Lack of insurance or inadequate access to care hinders screening.

The US Medicaid Program: Coverage, Financing, Reforms, and Implications for Health Equity.

Importance: Medicaid is the largest health insurance program by enrollment in the US and has an important role in financing care for eligible low-income adults, children, pregnant persons, older adults, people with disabilities, and people from racial and ethnic minority groups. Medicaid has evolved with policy reform and expansion under the Affordable Care Act and is at a crossroads in balancing its role in addressing health disparities and health inequities against fiscal and political pressures to limit spending. Objective: To describe Medicaid eligibility, enrollment, and spending and to examine areas of Medicaid policy, including managed care, payment, and delivery system reforms; Medicaid expansion; racial and ethnic health disparities; and the potential to achieve health equity. Evidence Review: Analyses of publicly available data reported from 2010 to 2022 on Medicaid enrollment and program expenditures were performed to describe the structure and financing of Medicaid and characteristics of Medicaid enrollees. A search of PubMed for peer-reviewed literature and online reports from nonprofit and government organizations was conducted between August 1, 2021, and February 1, 2022, to review evidence on Medicaid managed care, delivery system reforms, expansion, and health disparities. Peer-reviewed articles and reports published between January 2003 and February 2022 were included. Findings: Medicaid covered approximately 80.6 million people (mean per month) in 2022 (24.2% of the US population) and accounted for an estimated $671.2 billion in health spending in 2020, representing 16.3% of US health spending. Medicaid accounted for an estimated 27.2% of total state spending and 7.6% of total federal expenditures in 2021. States enrolled 69.5% of Medicaid beneficiaries in managed care plans in 2019 and adopted 139 delivery system reforms from 2003 to 2019. The 38 states (and Washington, DC) that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act experienced gains in coverage, increased federal revenues, and improvements in health care access and some health outcomes. Approximately 56.4% of Medicaid beneficiaries were from racial and ethnic minority groups in 2019, and disparities in access, quality, and outcomes are common among these groups within Medicaid. Expanding Medicaid, addressing disparities within Medicaid, and having an explicit focus on equity in managed care and delivery system reforms may represent opportunities for Medicaid to advance health equity. Conclusions and Relevance: Medicaid insures a substantial portion of the US population, accounts for a significant amount of total health spending and state expenditures, and has evolved with delivery system reforms, increased managed care enrollment, and state expansions. Additional Medicaid policy reforms are needed to reduce health disparities by race and ethnicity and to help achieve equity in access, quality, and outcomes.

Financial toxicity in cancer care in India: a systematic review.

Although financial toxicity is widely acknowledged to be a potential consequence of costly cancer treatment, little is known about its prevalence and outcome among the Indian population. In this study, we systematically reviewed the prevalence, determinants, and consequences of financial toxicity among patients with cancer in India. 22 studies were included in the systematic review. The determinants of financial toxicity include household income, type of health-care facility used, stage of disease, area of residence, age at the time of diagnosis, recurrent cancer, educational status, insurance coverage, and treatment modality. Financial toxicity was associated with poor quality of life, accumulation of debts, premature entry into the labour market, and non-compliance with therapy. Our findings emphasise the need for urgent strategies to mitigate financial toxicity among patients with cancer in India, especially in the most deprived sections of society. The qualitative evidence synthesised in this systematic review could provide a basis for the development of such interventions to reduce financial toxicity among patients with cancer.

Public health insurance and cancer-specific mortality risk among patients with breast cancer: A prospective cohort study in China.

Little is known about how health insurance policies, particularly in developing countries, influence breast cancer prognosis. Here, we examined the association between individual health insurance and breast cancer-specific mortality in China. We included 7436 women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 2009 and 2016, at West China Hospital, Sichuan University. The health insurance plan of patient was classified as either urban or rural schemes and was also categorized as reimbursement rate (ie, the covered/total charge) below or above the median. Breast cancer-specific mortality was the primary outcome. Using Cox proportional hazards models, we calculated hazard ratios (HRs) for cancer-specific mortality, contrasting rates among patients with a rural insurance scheme or low reimbursement rate to that of those with an urban insurance scheme or high reimbursement rate, respectively. During a median follow-up of 3.1 years, we identified 326 deaths due to breast cancer. Compared to patients covered by urban insurance schemes, patients covered by rural insurance schemes had a 29% increased cancer-specific mortality (95% CI 0%-65%) after adjusting for demographics, tumor characteristics and treatment modes. Reimbursement rate below the median was associated with a 42% increased rate of cancer-specific mortality (95% CI 11%-82%). Every 10% increase in the reimbursement rate is associated with a 7% (95% CI 2%-12%) reduction in cancer-specific mortality risk, particularly in patients covered by rural insurance schemes (26%, 95% CI 9%-39%). Our findings suggest that underinsured patients face a higher risk of breast cancer-specific mortality in developing countries.

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.