Developing an Adjunct Services Approach to Identify the Use of Procedures Not Covered by Health Insurance: The Case of In Vitro Fertilization.

BACKGROUND: Health care claims have an inherent limitation in that noncovered services are unreported. This limitation is particularly problematic when researchers wish to study the effects of changes in the insurance coverage of a service. In prior work, we studied the change in the use of in vitro fertilization (IVF) after an employer added coverage. To estimate IVF use before coverage began, we developed and tested an Adjunct Services Approach that identified patterns of covered services cooccurring with IVF. METHODS: Based on clinical expertise and guidelines, we developed a list of candidate adjunct services and used claims data after IVF coverage began to assess associations of those codes with known IVF cycles and whether any additional codes were also strongly associated with IVF. The algorithm was validated by primary chart review and was then used to infer IVF in the precoverage period. RESULTS: The selected algorithm included pelvic ultrasounds and either menotropin or ganirelix, yielding a sensitivity of 93.0% and specificity of >99.9%. DISCUSSION: The Adjunct Services Approach effectively assessed the change in IVF use postinsurance coverage. Our approach can be adapted to study IVF in other settings or to study other medical services experiencing coverage changes (eg, fertility preservation, bariatric surgery, and sex confirmation surgery). Overall, we find that an Adjunct Services Approach can be useful when (1) clinical pathways exist to define services delivered adjunct to the noncovered service, (2) those pathways are followed for most patients receiving the service, and (3) similar patterns of adjunct services occur infrequently with other procedures.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Lifetime Prevalence of Homelessness in the United States.

Homelessness in the United States is often examined using cross-sectional, point-in-time samples. Any experience of homelessness is a risk factor for adverse outcomes, so it is also useful to understand the incidence of homelessness over longer periods. We estimate the lifetime prevalence of homelessness among members of the Baby Boom cohort (n = 6,545) using the 2012 and 2014 waves of the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), a nationally representative survey of older Americans. Our analysis indicates that 6.2 % of respondents had a period of homelessness at some point in their lives. We also identify dramatic disparities in lifetime incidence of homelessness by racial and ethnic subgroups. Rates of homelessness were higher for non-Hispanic blacks (16.8 %) or Hispanics of any race (8.1 %) than for non-Hispanic whites (4.8 %; all differences significant with p < .05). The black-white gap, but not the Hispanic-white gap, remained significant after adjustment for covariates such as education, veteran status, and geographic region.

Effect of the Affordable Care Act on Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Insurance Coverage.

OBJECTIVES: To document how health insurance coverage changed for White, Black, and Hispanic adults after the Affordable Care Act (ACA) went into effect. METHODS: We used data from the American Community Survey from 2008 to 2014 to examine changes in the percentage of nonelderly adults who were uninsured, covered by Medicaid, or covered by private health insurance. In addition to presenting overall trends by race/ethnicity, we stratified the analysis by income group and state Medicaid expansion status. RESULTS: In 2013, 40.5% of Hispanics and 25.8% of Blacks were uninsured, compared with 14.8% of Whites. We found a larger gap in private insurance, which was partially offset by higher rates of public coverage among Blacks and Hispanics. After the main ACA provisions went into effect in 2014, coverage disparities declined slightly as the percentage of adults who were uninsured decreased by 7.1 percentage points for Hispanics, 5.1 percentage points for Blacks, and 3 percentage points for Whites. Coverage gains were greater in states that expanded Medicaid programs. CONCLUSIONS: The ACA has reduced racial/ethnic disparities in coverage, although substantial disparities remain. Further increases in coverage will require Medicaid expansion by more states and improved program take-up in states that have already done so.

THE IMPACT OF ELIGIBILITY FOR MEDICAID VERSUS SUBSIDIZED PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE ON MEDICAL SPENDING, SELF-REPORTED HEALTH, AND PUBLIC PROGRAM PARTICIPATION.

We use a regression discontinuity design to understand the impact of a sharp change in eligibility for Medicaid versus subsidized marketplace insurance at 138 percent of the federal poverty line on coverage, medical spending, health status, and other public program participation. We find a 5.5 percentage point shift from Medicaid to private insurance, with no net change in coverage. The shift increases individual health spending by $341 or 2 percent of income, with larger increases at higher points in the spending distribution. Two-thirds of the increase is from premiums and one-thirdfrom out-of-pocket medical spending. Self-rated health and other public program participation appear unchanged. We find no evidence of bunching below the eligibility threshold, which suggests either that individuals are willing to pay more for private insurance or that optimization frictions are high.

Changes in Health Care Access and Utilization for Low-SES Adults Aged 51-64 Years After Medicaid Expansion.

OBJECTIVES: Whether the Affordable Care Act (ACA) insurance expansions improved access to care and health for adults aged 51-64 years has not been closely examined. This study examined longitudinal changes in access, utilization, and health for low-socioeconomic status adults aged 51-64 years before and after the ACA Medicaid expansion. METHODS: Longitudinal difference-in-differences (DID) study before (2010-2014) and after (2016) Medicaid expansion, including N = 2,088 noninstitutionalized low-education adults aged 51-64 years (n = 633 in Medicaid expansion states, n = 1,455 in nonexpansion states) from the nationally representative biennial Health and Retirement Study. Outcomes included coverage (any, Medicaid, and private), access (usual source of care, difficulty finding a physician, foregone care, cost-related medication nonadherence, and out-of-pocket costs), utilization (outpatient visit and hospitalization), and health status. RESULTS: Low-education adults aged 51-64 years had increased rates of Medicaid coverage (+10.6 percentage points [pp] in expansion states, +3.2 pp in nonexpansion states, DID +7.4 pp, p = .001) and increased likelihood of hospitalizations (+9.2 pp in expansion states, -1.1 pp in nonexpansion states, DID +10.4 pp, p = .003) in Medicaid expansion compared with nonexpansion states after 2014. Those in expansion states also had a smaller increase in limitations in paid work/housework over time, compared to those in nonexpansion states (+3.6 pp in expansion states, +11.0 pp in nonexpansion states, DID -7.5 pp, p = .006). There were no other significant differences in access, utilization, or health trends between expansion and nonexpansion states. DISCUSSION: After Medicaid expansion, low-education status adults aged 51-64 years were more likely to be hospitalized, suggesting poor baseline access to chronic disease management and pent-up demand for hospital services.

The ACA's Impact On Racial And Ethnic Disparities In Health Insurance Coverage And Access To Care.

Large disparities in health insurance coverage and access to health services have long persisted in the US health care system. We considered how the insurance coverage expansions of the Affordable Care Act have affected disparities related to race and ethnicity. In the years since the law went into effect, insurance coverage has increased significantly for all racial/ethnic groups. Because coverage increased more for non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics than for non-Hispanic whites, disparities in coverage have decreased. Despite these improvements, a large number of adults remain uninsured, and the uninsurance rate among blacks and Hispanics is substantially higher than the rate among whites.

Does Home Equity Affect Decisions on Long-Term Care Insurance Purchases? Evidence From the United States.

The low uptake of private long-term care insurance (LTCI) by the elderly in the United States, despite visible risks, has left economists puzzled. Prior studies have hypothesized that home equity can be a substitute for LTCI and hence may partly explain the low uptake. We test this hypothesis empirically. We utilize exogenous variation in house prices at the level of the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) as an instrument for home equity for individuals residing in that MSA and data from the Health and Retirement Study. In the most robust specifications, we find no evidence that the elderly change their decision on LTCI based on variation in their home equity, and even specifications requiring stronger identification assumptions imply only small effect magnitudes. Home equity as a substitute for LTCI does not appear to be a major contributing factor to low LTCI take up.

Tobacco Regulation and Cost-Benefit Analysis: How Should We Value Foregone Consumer Surplus?

Recent tobacco regulations proposed by the Food and Drug Administration have raised a thorny question: how should the cost-benefit analysis accompanying such policies value foregone consumer surplus associated with regulation-induced reductions in smoking? In a model with rational and fully informed consumers, this question is straightforward. There is disagreement, however, about whether consumers are rational and fully informed, and the literature offers little practical guidance about what approach the FDA should use if they are not. In this paper, we outline the history of the FDA's recent attempts to regulate cigarettes and other tobacco products and how they have valued foregone consumer surplus in cost-benefit analyses. We advocate replacing the approach used in most of this literature, which first calculates health gains associated with regulation and then "offsets" them by some factor reflecting consumer surplus losses, with a more general behavioral public finance framework for welfare analysis. This framework applies standard tools of welfare analysis to consumer demand that may be "biased" (that is, not necessarily rational and fully informed) without requiring specific assumptions about the reason for the bias. This framework would require estimates of both biased and unbiased consumer demand; we sketch an agenda to help develop these in the context of smoking. The use of this framework would substantially reduce the confusion currently surrounding welfare analysis of tobacco regulation.

How Did Medicare Part D Affect Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Drug Coverage?

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of Medicare Part D on racial/ethnic disparities in having any drug coverage and in sources of payment for drug expenditure. METHODS: We used nationally representative data on whites, African-Americans, and Hispanics aged 55 and older from the 2002-2009 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to analyze disparities in having any drug coverage and in sources of coverage for individuals aged 65 and older as compared with those for adults aged 55-63 without Medicare. RESULTS: There was no disparity in the probability of drug coverage for African-American or Hispanic compared to white Medicare beneficiaries, before or after 2006. There were, however, differences in the sources of coverage. African-Americans and Hispanics over the age of 65 had lower rates of private coverage than whites. This disparity in private coverage was completely offset by minorities' higher rates of drug coverage through Medicaid before 2006 and through Part D since 2006. In contrast, among individuals aged 55-63, there are large and persistent disparities in the probability of having drug coverage throughout the period. DISCUSSION: Pronounced racial/ethnic disparities in drug coverage in the years just before Medicare eligibility are eliminated by access to public coverage at age 65. This was true even before the introduction of Part D.

Does Medicare Managed Care reduce racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes preventive care and healthcare expenditures?

OBJECTIVES: Large and persistent racial/ethnic disparities exist in diabetes care. Considering the rapid rate of growth of Medicare Managed Care (MMC) plans among minority populations, our aim was to investigate whether disparities in diabetes management and healthcare expenditures are smaller in MMC versus Medicare fee-for-service (MFFS) plans. We hypothesized that racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes care and in health expenditures would be less pronounced in MMC compared with MFFS plans. STUDY DESIGN: Nationally representative data from the 2006 to 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey on white, African American, and Hispanic seniors with diabetes were analyzed. METHODS: We examined 4 measures of diabetes care-regular foot check, eye exam, cholesterol check, and flu vaccine-and total and out-of-pocket (OOP) healthcare expenditures. We implemented the Institute of Medicine's definition of disparity, applied propensity score weighting to adjust for potential differential selection, and used a difference-in-differences generalized linear framework to estimate outcome measures. RESULTS: For African Americans, MMC was associated with a $1183 (P <.036) reduction and a $547 (P <.001) increase in disparities in total and OOP healthcare expenditures, respectively. For Hispanics, disparities in foot exam, flu shot, and cholesterol check decreased by 5, 10, and 7 percentage points (P <.001); additionally, disparities in total and OOP healthcare expenditures were reduced by $3588 and $276 (P <.001), respectively. MMC plans spend less on everyone, including whites. CONCLUSIONS: Hispanic/white disparities in diabetes management and healthcare expenditures were smaller in MMC than in MFFS plans. African American/white disparities were not consistently larger in 1 setting than the other.

New evidence on the persistence of health spending.

Surprisingly little is known about long-term spending patterns in the under-65 population. Such information could inform efforts to improve coverage and control costs. Using the MarketScan claims database, we characterize the persistence of health care spending in the privately insured, under-65 population. Over a 6-year period, 69.8% of enrollees never had annual spending in the top 10% of the distribution and the bottom 50% of spenders accounted for less than 10% of spending. Those in the top 10% in 2003 were almost as likely (34.4%) to be in the top 10% five years later as one year later (43.4%). Many comorbid conditions retained much of their predictive power even 5 years later. The persistence at both ends of the spending distribution indicates the potential for adverse selection and cream skimming and supports the use of disease management, particularly for those with the conditions that remained strong predictors of high spending throughout the follow-up period.

Will employers drop health insurance coverage because of the Affordable Care Act?

Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, there has been much speculation about how many employers will stop offering health insurance once the act's major coverage provisions take effect. Some observers predict little aggregate effect, but others believe that 2014 will mark the beginning of the end for our current system of employer-sponsored insurance. We use theoretical and empirical evidence to address the question, "How will employers' offerings of health insurance change under health reform?" First, we describe the economic reasons why employers offer insurance. Second, we recap the relevant provisions of health reform and use our economic framework to consider how they may affect employers' offerings. Third, we review the various predictions that have been made about those offerings under health reform. Finally, we offer some observations on interpreting early data from 2014.