Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 309
Filter
3.
J Surg Res ; 263: 102-109, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33640844

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/statistics & numerical data , Quality Improvement/statistics & numerical data , Surgical Procedures, Operative/statistics & numerical data , Health Care Costs/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Care Costs/trends , Health Services Accessibility/history , Health Services Accessibility/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Services Accessibility/trends , History, 21st Century , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Quality Improvement/economics , Quality Improvement/legislation & jurisprudence , Quality Improvement/trends , Surgical Procedures, Operative/economics , Uncertainty , United States
4.
J Am Board Fam Med ; 34(Suppl): S247-S249, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33622847

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Short- and long-term effects of COVID-19 will likely be designated pre-existing conditions. We describe the prevalence of pre-existing conditions among community health center patients overall and those with COVID-19 by race/ethnicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study used electronic health record data from OCHIN, a network of 396 community health centers across 14 states. RESULTS: Among all patients with COVID-19, 33% did not have a pre-existing condition before the pandemic. Up to half of COVID-19-positive non-Hispanic Asians (51%), Hispanic (36%), and non-Hispanic black (28%) patients did not have a pre-existing condition before the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The future of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is uncertain, and the long-term health effects of COVID-19 are largely unknown; therefore, ensuring people with pre-existing conditions can acquire health insurance is essential to achieving health equity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Community Health Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Comorbidity , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Equity/standards , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Preexisting Condition Coverage/trends , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Young Adult
5.
JAMA Intern Med ; 181(5): 590-597, 2021 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33587092

ABSTRACT

Importance: Safety-net hospitals (SNHs) operate under limited financial resources and have had challenges providing high-quality care. Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act led to improvements in hospital finances, but whether this was associated with better hospital quality, particularly among SNHs given their baseline financial constraints, remains unknown. Objective: To compare changes in quality from 2012 to 2018 between SNHs in states that expanded Medicaid vs those in states that did not. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using a difference-in-differences analysis in a cohort study, performance on quality measures was compared between SNHs, defined as those in the highest quartile of uncompensated care in the pre-Medicaid expansion period, in expansion vs nonexpansion states, before and after the implementation of Medicaid expansion. A total of 811 SNHs were included in the analysis, with 316 in nonexpansion states and 495 in expansion states. The study was conducted from January to November 2020. Exposures: Time-varying indicators for Medicaid expansion status. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was hospital quality measured by patient-reported experience (Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Survey), health care-associated infections (central line-associated bloodstream infections, catheter-associated urinary tract infections, and surgical site infections following colon surgery) and patient outcomes (30-day mortality and readmission rates for acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia). Secondary outcomes included hospital financial measures (uncompensated care and operating margins), adoption of electronic health records, provision of safety-net services (enabling, linguistic/translation, and transportation services), or safety-net service lines (trauma, burn, obstetrics, neonatal intensive, and psychiatric care). Results: In this difference-in-differences analysis of a cohort of 811 SNHs, no differential changes in patient-reported experience, health care-associated infections, readmissions, or mortality were noted, regardless of Medicaid expansion status after the Affordable Care Act. There were modest differential increases between 2012 and 2016 in the adoption of electronic health records (mean [SD]: nonexpansion states, 99.4 [7.4] vs 99.9 [3.8]; expansion states, 94.6 [22.6] vs 100.0 [2.2]; 1.7 percentage points; P = .02) and between 2012 and 2018 in the number of inpatient psychiatric beds (mean [SD]: nonexpansion states, 24.7 [36.0] vs 23.6 [39.0]; expansion states: 29.3 [42.8] vs 31.4 [44.3]; 1.4 beds; P = .02) among SNHs in expansion states, although they were not statistically significant at a threshold adjusted for multiple comparisons. In subgroup analyses comparing SNHs with higher vs lower baseline operating margins, an isolated differential improvement was noted in heart failure readmissions among SNHs with lower baseline operating margins in expansion states (mean [SD], 22.8 [2.1]; -0.53 percentage points; P = .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This difference-in-differences cohort study found that despite reductions in uncompensated care and improvements in operating margins, there appears to be little evidence of quality improvement among SNHs in states that expanded Medicaid compared with those in states that did not.


Subject(s)
Medicaid/standards , Safety-net Providers/standards , Cohort Studies , Humans , Medicaid/trends , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/standards , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Patient Satisfaction , Safety-net Providers/trends , United States
7.
J Gen Intern Med ; 36(3): 775-778, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32901439

ABSTRACT

In the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak, health care reform has again taken a major role in the 2020 election, with Democrats weighing Medicare for All against extensions of the Affordable Care Act, while Republicans quietly seem to favor proposals that would eliminate much of the ACA and cut Medicaid. Although states play a major role in health care funding and administration, public and scholarly debates over these proposals have generally not addressed the potential disruption that reform proposals might create for the current state role in health care. We examine how potential reforms influence state-federal relations, and how outside factors like partisanship and exogenous shocks like the COVID-19 pandemic interact with underlying preferences of each level of government. All else equal, reforms that expand the ACA within its current framework would provide the least disruption for current arrangements and allow for smoother transitions for providers and patients, rather than the more radical restructuring proposed by Medicare for All or the cuts embodied in Republican plans.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Care Reform/legislation & jurisprudence , National Health Insurance, United States/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Medicaid/legislation & jurisprudence , Medicare/legislation & jurisprudence , National Health Insurance, United States/trends , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , United States , Universal Health Insurance/legislation & jurisprudence
8.
Burns ; 47(1): 35-41, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33246670

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We aimed to analyze the impact of the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid Expansion on clinical outcomes and patient disposition after burn injury. We hypothesized that increased insurance coverage results in improved outcomes and higher rates of discharge to inpatient rehabilitation. METHODS: We reviewed the University of Washington Regional Burn Center registry data for patients admitted from 2011 to 2018. Patients were grouped into two categories: before (2011-2013) and after (2015-2018) Medicaid expansion; we excluded 2014 data to serve as a washout period. Outcomes assessed included length of hospital stay, patient disposition, and mortality. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models with covariates for sex, age, burn size, ethnicity ethnicity, distance from burn center, etiology of burn, and presence of inhalation injury were used to determine the impact of Medicaid expansion on outcomes. RESULTS: Rates of uninsured patients decreased while Medicaid coverage increased. Despite increased median burn size after Medicaid expansion, inpatient mortality rates did not change, but average acute care length of stay increased. More patients were discharged to rehabilitation centers. CONCLUSIONS: Our study corroborates prior findings of increased insurance coverage since Medicaid expansion. Increased insurance coverage is associated with higher rates of discharge to inpatient rehabilitation programs after burn injury.


Subject(s)
Burns/economics , Medicaid/standards , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/standards , Adolescent , Adult , Burns/complications , Burns/epidemiology , Child , Female , Humans , Insurance Coverage/economics , Insurance Coverage/standards , Insurance Coverage/trends , Logistic Models , Male , Medicaid/economics , Medicaid/trends , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Registries/statistics & numerical data , United States , Washington/epidemiology
9.
Plast Reconstr Surg ; 147(2): 432-441, 2021 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33235039

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Facial Bones/injuries , Health Policy , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Skull Fractures/surgery , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Databases, Factual/statistics & numerical data , Facial Bones/surgery , Female , Healthcare Disparities/economics , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/trends , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Length of Stay/trends , Male , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Retrospective Studies , Skull Fractures/economics , Skull Fractures/mortality , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
10.
J Stud Alcohol Drugs ; 81(6): 750-759, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33308404

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to measure changes in the payer mix and incidence of emergency department (ED) opioid-related overdose encounters after an April 2014 expansion of Medicaid to childless adults led to a 43% increase in Medicaid coverage for men and 8% for women statewide. METHOD: We explored two competing hypotheses using data visualization and comparative interrupted time-series analysis (CITS): (a) expanded eligibility for Medicaid is associated with a change in payer mix only and (b) sociodemographic groups that gained Medicaid eligibility were more likely to use ED services for opioid overdose. Data included encounters at all Wisconsin nonfederal hospitals over 23 quarters from 2010 to 2015 and American Community Survey estimates of pre- and post-policy Medicaid eligibility by sex and age. RESULTS: We found an increase in the share of opioid-related ED visits covered by Medicaid for men and women ages 19-29 and for men ages 30-49 following the expansion. The number of visits increased substantially in April 2014 for men ages 30-49, with Medicaid-covered visits driving this result. We found little evidence of an increase in overall visits for other age groups for either men or women. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between Medicaid expansion and opioid ED use is complex. Changes in case mix and increased access to care likely both play a role in the overall increase in these ED visits. Being uninsured may be an important barrier to seeking emergency care for opioid-related overdoses.


Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital/trends , Medicaid/trends , Opiate Overdose/epidemiology , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Poverty/trends , Adult , Emergency Service, Hospital/economics , Female , Humans , Interrupted Time Series Analysis/economics , Interrupted Time Series Analysis/trends , Male , Medicaid/economics , Medically Uninsured , Middle Aged , Opiate Overdose/economics , Opiate Overdose/therapy , Opioid-Related Disorders/economics , Opioid-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Opioid-Related Disorders/therapy , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Poverty/economics , United States/epidemiology , Wisconsin/epidemiology , Young Adult
11.
PLoS One ; 15(12): e0243279, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33270778

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Health Facilities/economics , National Health Programs/economics , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Ambulatory Care Facilities/economics , Ambulatory Care Facilities/trends , Community Health Centers/economics , Community Health Centers/trends , Health Facilities/trends , Health Services Accessibility/economics , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Massachusetts , Medically Underserved Area , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Primary Health Care/economics , Primary Health Care/trends , Retrospective Studies , United States , Vulnerable Populations
13.
JAMA Pediatr ; 174(11): 1032-1040, 2020 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32986093

ABSTRACT

Importance: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) sought to improve access and affordability of health insurance. Although most ACA policies targeted childless adults, the extent to which these policies also impacted families with children remains unclear. Objective: To examine changes in health care-related financial burden for US families with children before and after the ACA was implemented based on income eligibility for ACA policies. Design, Setting, and Participants: Data used for this cohort study were obtained from the 2000-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a nationally representative, population-based survey. Multivariable regression with a difference-in-differences estimator was used to examine changes in family financial burden before and after ACA implementation according to income-based ACA eligibility groups (≤138% [lowest-income], 139%-250% [low-income], 251%-400% [middle-income], and >400% [high-income] federal poverty level). The cohort included 92 165 families with 1 or more children (age ≤18 years) and 1 or more adult parents/guardians. Exposures: Income-based eligibility groups during post-ACA years (calendar years 2014-2017) vs pre-ACA years (calendar years 2000-2013). Main Outcomes and Measures: Family annual out-of-pocket (OOP) health care and premium cost burden relative to income. High OOP burden was determined based on a previously validated algorithm with relative cost thresholds that vary across incomes, and extreme OOP burden was defined as costs exceeding 10% of income. Premiums exceeding 9.5% of income were classified as burdensome and premiums relative to median household income defined an unaffordability index. Results: Compared with high-income families who experienced a lesser change post-ACA implementation (high OOP burden, 1.1% pre-ACA vs 0.9% post-ACA), the lowest-income families saw the greatest reduction in high OOP burden (35.6% pre-ACA vs 23.7% post-ACA; difference-in-differences: -11.4%; 95% CI, -13.2% to -9.5%) followed by low-income families (24.6% pre-ACA vs 17.3% post-ACA, difference-in-differences: -6.8%; 95% CI, -8.7% to -4.9%) and middle-income families (6.1% pre-ACA vs 4.6% post-ACA, difference-in-differences: -1.2%; 95% CI, -2.3% to -0.01%). Although premiums rose for all groups, premium unaffordability was the least exacerbated for the lowest-, low-, and middle-income families compared with higher-income families. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that low- and middle-income families with children who were eligible for ACA Medicaid expansions and Marketplace subsidies experienced greater reductions in health care-related financial burden after the ACA was implemented compared with families with higher incomes. However, despite ACA policies, many low- and middle-income families with children appear to continue to face considerable financial burden from premiums and OOP costs.


Subject(s)
Financial Stress , Health Care Costs/standards , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Adolescent , Boston , Child , Health Care Costs/trends , Humans , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/standards , United States
15.
Med Care ; 58(8): 734-743, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32692140

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Under the Affordable Care Act, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has greatly expanded inpatient fee-for-value programs including the Hospital Value-based Purchasing (HVBP) program. Existing evidence from the HVBP program is mixed. There is a need for a systematic review of the HVBP program to inform discussions on how to improve the program's effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: To review and summarize studies that evaluated the HVBP program's impact on clinical processes, patient satisfaction, costs and outcomes, or assessed hospital characteristics associated with performance on the program. DESIGN: We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest database for literature published between January 2013 and July 2019 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. RESULTS: Of 988 studies reviewed, 33 studies that met the selection criteria were included. A small group of studies (n=7) evaluated the impact of the HVBP program, and no impact on processes or patient outcomes was reported. None of the included studies evaluated the effect of HVBP program on health care costs. Other studies (n=28) evaluated the hospital characteristics associated with HVBP performance, suggesting that safety-net hospitals reportedly performed worse on several quality and cost measures. Other hospital characteristics' associations with performance were unclear. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the current HVBP does not lead to meaningful improvements in quality of care or patient outcomes and may negatively affect safety-net hospitals. More rigorous and comprehensive adjustment is needed for more valid hospital comparisons.


Subject(s)
Medicare/economics , Value-Based Purchasing/standards , Humans , Medicare/standards , Medicare/trends , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/standards , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Program Evaluation , United States , Value-Based Purchasing/trends
16.
Med Care ; 58(8): 749-755, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32692142

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Low-income adults in the United States have historically had poor access to dental services largely due to limited dental coverage. OBJECTIVE: We examined the effects of recent Medicaid income-eligibility expansions under the Affordable Care Act on dental visits separately for preventive care and treatments. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used restricted data from the 2011 to 2016 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey with state geocodes. The main analytical sample included nearly 21,000 individuals who were newly eligible for Medicaid. We employed a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences design to identify the impact of the state Medicaid expansions effective in 2014 on dental services use by the level of state Medicaid dental benefit for the newly eligible. RESULTS: Expanding Medicaid in 2014 with extensive or limited dental coverage increased preventive dental visits and use of major dental treatments by over 5 percentage-points in 2014 and 2015. The increase in preventive visits continued in 2016 in expanding states with extensive coverage, while increase in major dental treatments continued in 2016 in expanding states with limited coverage. There is some but less consistent evidence of an increase in dental treatment with emergency-only coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansions with dental coverage beyond emergency-only services have increased access of the newly eligible low-income adults to dental treatments and preventive services, with extensive coverage showing continuing increase in preventive services use 3 years after the expansion. With limited coverage, there is some evidence of individuals needing to stretch treatments over a longer period. Providing comprehensive dental coverage can address unmet dental needs and improve oral health among low-income adults.


Subject(s)
Dental Care/economics , Medicaid/trends , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Adult , Dental Care/methods , Dental Care/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Male , Medicaid/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States
17.
Drug Alcohol Depend ; 212: 108069, 2020 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32474361

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To assess the association between the implementation of Medicare Part D and the use of outpatient prescription opioids. METHODS: Nationally representative data on community-dwelling adults aged 60-69 came from the 2000-2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) (N = 26,545). A difference-in-differences approach was used to compare opioid use between Medicare eligible (ages 66-69) and Medicare ineligible (ages 60-64) adults before and after the introduction of Part D in 2006, while controlling for socio-demographic characteristics, risk factors for opioid use, and secular trends. RESULTS: Medicare Part D was associated with a small and statistically non-significant increase in the number of outpatient prescription opioids filled in a year (coefficient, 0.03; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.13), in the amount of morphine milligrams equivalents (coefficient, 113.23; 95% CI, -25.47 to 251.93), and in the odds of using any prescription opioid (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.26). There was no evidence for a heterogeneous effect of Part D across subgroups. The results were robust to the impacts of the 2007-2009 recession, the spillover effect of the Affordable Care Act, and the anticipation effect of Part D. DISCUSSION: Although policymakers suggested that gaining access to medical care as a result of insurance expansion might have fueled the opioid epidemic, this paper found limited evidence to support this claim. While Part D took effect more than a decade ago, its long-term implication for opioid use is still relevant for the recent opioid epidemic and future health insurance expansions such as the proposed Medicare-for-all initiative.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Medicare Part D/trends , Opioid-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Aged , Analgesics, Opioid/adverse effects , Female , Health Expenditures/trends , Humans , Male , Medicare Part D/economics , Middle Aged , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Opioid-Related Disorders/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , United States/epidemiology
18.
Pediatrics ; 145(5)2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32295817

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Medicaid plays a critical role during the perinatal period, but pregnancy-related Medicaid eligibility only extends for 60 days post partum. In 2014, the Affordable Care Act's (ACA's) Medicaid expansions increased adult Medicaid eligibility to 138% of the federal poverty level in participating states, allowing eligible new mothers to remain covered after pregnancy-related coverage expires. We investigate the impact of ACA Medicaid expansions on insurance coverage among new mothers living in poverty. METHODS: We define new mothers living in poverty as women ages 19 to 44 with incomes below the federal poverty level who report giving birth in the past 12 months. We use 2010-2017 American Community Survey data and a difference-in-differences approach using parental Medicaid-eligibility thresholds to estimate the effect of ACA Medicaid expansions on insurance coverage among poor new mothers. RESULTS: A 100-percentage-point increase in parental Medicaid-eligibility is associated with an 8.8-percentage-point decrease (P < .001) in uninsurance, a 13.2-percentage-point increase (P < .001) in Medicaid coverage, and a 4.4-percentage-point decrease in private or other coverage (P = .001) among poor new mothers. The average increase in Medicaid eligibility is associated with a 28% decrease in uninsurance, a 13% increase in Medicaid coverage, and an 18% decline in private or other insurance among poor new mothers in expansion states. However, in 2017, there were ∼142 000 remaining uninsured, poor new mothers. CONCLUSIONS: ACA Medicaid expansions are associated with increased Medicaid coverage and reduced uninsurance among poor new mothers. Opportunities remain for expansion and nonexpansion states to increase insurance coverage among new mothers living in poverty.


Subject(s)
Health Services Accessibility/economics , Insurance Coverage/economics , Medicaid/economics , Mothers , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Poverty/economics , Adult , Female , Health Services Accessibility/trends , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Insurance Coverage/trends , Medicaid/trends , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Poverty/trends , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
19.
Circ Heart Fail ; 13(4): e006544, 2020 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32233662

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been associated with increased heart transplant listings among blacks, who are disproportionately uninsured. It is unclear whether the ACA is also associated with increased ventricular assist device implantation in blacks. METHODS: Using Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Data State Inpatient Databases from 19 states and Washington DC, we analyzed 1157 patients from early-adopter states (ACA Medicaid expansion by January 2014) and 785 patients from nonadopter states (no implementation from 2013 to 2014). Piecewise Poisson regression with a discontinuity was used to estimate change in census-adjusted rates of ventricular assist device implants by race and ACA adopter status 1 year before and after January 2014. RESULTS: Following the ACA Medicaid expansion, the proportional change in rate increased significantly among blacks from early adopter (1.40 [95% CI, 1.12-1.75], pre 0.57/100 000 to post-ACA 0.80/100 000) but not nonadopter states (1.25 [95% CI, 0.98-1.58], pre 0.40/100 000 to post-ACA 0.50/100 000). However, the early and nonadopter changes in implantation rates were not statistically different from each other (P=0.50). There were no immediate changes in whites in either state group following the ACA Medicaid expansion (early adopter, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.98-1.29], pre 0.27/100 000 to post-ACA 0.30/100 000; nonadopter, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.82-1.16], pre 0.27/100 000 to post-ACA 0.26/100 000). CONCLUSIONS: Among eligible states participating in Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Data State Inpatient Databases, the ACA was not associated with immediate changes in ventricular assist device implantation rates by race. Although a significant increase in implantation rate was observed among blacks from early-adopter states, the change was not statistically different from the change seen in nonadopter states.


Subject(s)
Black or African American , Healthcare Disparities/trends , Heart Failure/therapy , Heart-Assist Devices/trends , Medicaid/trends , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Prosthesis Implantation/trends , White People , Adult , Aged , Databases, Factual , Eligibility Determination/trends , Female , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Prosthesis Implantation/instrumentation , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology , Ventricular Function , Young Adult
20.
Nurs Forum ; 55(3): 362-368, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32080857

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: American health care is facing unprecedented challenges due to population aging, chronic disease prevalence, and financial restructuring. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is transforming the primary care landscape from a reactive, episodic, fee-for-service system to a proactive, preventive, value-based system. A proactive, preventive, and value-based primary care model requires Registered Nurses (RNs) prepared to lead integrated, team-based, coordinated, and proactively managed care. The Health Resources and Service Administration (HRSA) forecasted an inadequate supply of RNs prepared to meet future primary care demands and highlighted the lack of education as a key problem. The primary care RN workforce shortage requires immediate attention by academic, political, and research stakeholders. HRSA has responded with academic funding to increase primary care RN education. PROCEDURES: This article describes key barriers and resolutions one HRSA-funded academic institution experienced while implementing a primary care RN education program, along with research implications for the future of primary care nursing. RESULTS: This article describes the project's stakeholder, faculty, and student engagement methods. This article also describes the clinic RN preceptor development program, and depicts the Primary Care RN Education Program Student Clinical Experience Preceptorship Model. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing education must align with transforming healthcare models while anticipating potential barriers and resolutions to enhancing curriculum with primary care nursing education and clinical experiences. This article provides insight for other academic institutions interested in developing primary care curriculum and academic-clinic partnership models to foster community-based primary care clinical experiences.


Subject(s)
Education, Nursing, Continuing/methods , Nurses/trends , Clinical Competence/standards , Clinical Competence/statistics & numerical data , Education, Nursing, Continuing/standards , Education, Nursing, Continuing/trends , Humans , Nurse's Role , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/trends , Primary Health Care/methods , Primary Health Care/trends , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...