Assessment of Immigrants' Premium and Tax Payments for Health Care and the Costs of Their Care.

Importance: Some worry that immigrants burden the US economy and particularly the health care system. However, no analyses to date have assessed whether immigrants' payments for premiums and taxes that fund health care programs exceed third-party payers' expenditures on their behalf. Objective: To assess immigrants' net financial contributions to US health care programs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis used 2017 data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) and the Current Population Survey (CPS) and 2014 to 2018 data from the American Community Survey. The main analyses used data from the calendar year 2017. Data from the calendar years 2012 to 2016 were also reported. Data were analyzed from June 15, 2020, to August 14, 2022. Participants comprised 210 669 community-dwelling respondents to the MEPS and CPS (main analysis) and nursing home residents who were included in the American Community Survey (additional analysis). Exposures: Citizenship and immigration status. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total and per capita payments for premiums and taxes that fund health care as well as third-party payers' expenditures for health care in 2018 US dollars. Results: Among 210 669 participants, 51.0% were female, 18.3% were Hispanic, 12.3% were non-Hispanic Black, 60.3% were non-Hispanic White, and 9.2% were of other races and/or ethnicities. A total of 180 084 participants were respondents to the 2018 CPS, and 30 585 were respondents to the 2017 MEPS. Among the 180 084 CPS respondents, immigrants accounted for 14.1% (weighted to be nationally representative), with the subgroup of citizen immigrants accounting for 6.8%, documented noncitizen immigrants accounting for 3.7%, and undocumented immigrants accounting for 3.6%; US-born citizens constituted 85.9% of the population. Relative to US-born citizens, immigrants were more often age 18 to 64 years (79.6% vs 58.3%), of Hispanic ethnicity (45.0% vs 14.0%), and uninsured (16.8% vs 7.4%); similar percentages (51.4% vs 50.9%) were female. US-born citizens vs immigrants paid similar amounts in premiums and taxes ($6269 per capita [95% CI, $6185-$6353 per capita] vs $6345 per capita [95% CI, $6220-$6470 per capita]). However, third-party expenditures for immigrants' health care ($5061 per capita; 95% CI, $4673-$5448 per capita) were lower than their expenditures for the care of US-born citizens ($6511 per capita; 95% CI, $6275-$6747 per capita). Immigrants, in general, paid significantly more per person (net contribution, $1284; 95% CI, $876-$1691) than was paid on their behalf. Most of this surplus was accounted for by undocumented immigrants, whose contributions exceeded their expenditures by $4418 per person (95% CI, $4047-$4789 per person). US-born citizens collectively paid $67.2 billion (95% CI, -$2.3 to $136.3 billion) less in premiums and taxes than third-party payers paid for their care. This deficit was mostly offset by the $58.3 billion (95% CI, $39.8-$76.8 billion) net surplus of payments from immigrants, 89% of which ($51.9 billion; 95% CI, $47.5-$56.3 billion) was attributable to undocumented immigrants. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, immigrants appeared to subsidize the health care of other US residents, suggesting that concerns that immigrants deplete health care resources may be unfounded.

Impact of United States 2017 Immigration Policy changes on missed appointments at two Massachusetts Safety-Net Hospitals.

INTRODUCTION: Studies have shown mixed findings regarding the impact of immigration policy changes on immigrants' utilization of primary care. METHODS: We used a difference-in-differences analysis to compare changes in missed primary care appointments over time across two groups: patients who received care in Spanish, Portuguese, or Haitian Creole, and non-Hispanic, white patients who received care in English. RESULTS: After adjustment for age, sex, race, insurance, hospital system, and presence of chronic conditions, immigration policy changes were associated with an absolute increase in the missed appointment prevalence of 0.74 percentage points (95% confidence interval: 0.34, 1.15) among Spanish, Portuguese and Haitian-Creole speakers. We estimated that missed appointments due to immigration policy changes resulted in lost revenue of over $185,000. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that immigration policy changes were associated with a significant increase in missed appointments among patients who receive medical care in languages other than English.

The financial advantages of medical scribes extend beyond increased visits.

Employing medical scribes can boost revenue for a practice, the authors show, well beyond being an opportunity to expand patient volume.

Immigrant Essential Workers Likely Avoided Medicaid And SNAP Because Of A Change To The Public Charge Rule.

During the COVID-19 pandemic in the US, essential workers have provided health care, food, and other necessities, often incurring considerable risk. At the pandemic's start, the federal government was in the process of tightening the "public charge" rule by adding nutrition and health benefits to the cash benefits that, if drawn, could subject immigrants to sanctions (for example, green card denial). Census Bureau data indicate that immigrants accounted for 13.6 percent of the population but 17.8 percent of essential workers in 2019. About 20.0 million immigrants held essential jobs, and more than one-third of these immigrants resided in US states bordering Mexico. Nationwide, 12.3 million essential workers and 18.9 million of their household members were at risk because of the new sanctions. The rule change (which was subsequently revoked) likely caused 2.1 million essential workers and household members to forgo Medicaid and 1.3 million to forgo Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program assistance on the eve of the pandemic, highlighting the potential of immigration policy changes to exacerbate health risks.

Do Medical Scribes Help Primary Care Providers Respond More Quickly to Out-of-Visit Tasks?

PURPOSE: Medical scribes are charged with decreasing documentation burden associated with patient visits. Reducing time spent on documentation may afford providers the opportunity to respond to out-of-visit inbox tasks faster. METHODS: We compare changes in the time taken to address patient portal messages, prescription requests, and test results from before to after scribe implementation among scribed primary care providers (PCPs), compared with nonscribed PCPs during the same time period. We used generalized estimating equations with robust standard errors to account for repeated measures and the hierarchical nature of the data, and adjusted for provider and patient characteristics. RESULTS: We examined 472,411 tasks, including 27,645 tasks for 5 scribed PCPs and 444,766 tasks of 74 nonscribed PCPs. In unadjusted analyses, we found no change in time to completion for prescription refill requests, results and patient portal messages; the change in time to completion from pre to post intervention among scribed PCPs was 1.02 times that of nonscribed providers (P = .585) for prescription refill requests, 1.06 times that of nonscribed providers (P = .516) for patient portal messages, and 1.02 times that of nonscribed providers (P = .787) for results. Adjustment for provider and patient characteristics did not change these findings. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that scribes are not associated with improved time to completion of inbox messages for PCPs. While scribes seem to have many benefits, our study suggests they may not improve time to completion of out-of-visit tasks. Reducing the time to completion for these tasks likely requires other interventions targeted to achieve those outcomes.

Creating a culture of respect and interprofessional teamwork on a labor and birth unit: a multifaceted quality improvement project.

Interprofessional teamwork is essential to high-quality healthcare, however disrespect and incivility amongst team members is a challenge to creating and sustaining effective teams. We describe and assess the impact of a multifaceted improvement project with the primary intervention being a Compassionate Communication (CC) training on a Labor and Birth unit. Our hypothesis was this improvement project would increase staff members' capacity for perspective-taking and self-reflection, which would in turn correlate with positive interpersonal interactions, respect and teamwork. Secondly, we hypothesized that enhanced respect and teamwork would correlate with enhanced affective commitment to the organization. Staff was surveyed midway through the project and 6 months after the CC training. A total of 74 (57%) staff completed the initial pre-training surveys and 50 (38%) staff completed post-training surveys. At 6 months post-CC training we saw changes in self-reflection and an awakening of self-awareness. There were no significant changes in perspective-taking. However, we did see changes in staffs' perceptions of respect and teamwork. Team members' affective commitment to the organization increased. In this Labor and Birth setting, a multifaceted improvement project with the primary intervention being CC training was beneficial in improving a culture of respect and interprofessional teamwork.

Impact of a community-delivered parenting curriculum on perceived parenting stress and parent-reported outcomes in a low-income diverse population.

INTRODUCTION: There is a need for effective, strengths-based parenting supports for diverse parent populations. We conducted a quasi-experimental study to investigate whether a 12-week parenting program delivered in the community decreases perceived parenting stress and improves parent-reported outcomes. METHOD: Parents in the intervention group participated in Parenting Journey, a curriculum designed to increase resilience and support nurturing family relationships. Parents who were eligible for Parenting Journey but did not enroll were included in the concurrent comparison group. Participants completed the Parenting Stress Index and the Parenting Journey Survey at baseline and follow-up. We conducted bivariate and multivariate analyses to evaluate differences between groups. RESULTS: We enrolled 244 parents, 123 in the intervention group and 121 in the comparison group. The majority of participants in the intervention and comparison groups were female, identified as Black or Latino, and reported an annual household income of less than $20,000. At baseline, intervention participants reported higher total parenting stress than comparison participants (mean percentile 70.7 vs. 55.8, p = .002). At follow-up, intervention participants' mean total parenting stress score decreased by 14.1 points, while comparison participants' score increased by 3.0 points (difference-in-difference p < .0001). Intervention participants were significantly more likely to demonstrate improvement in 4 or more of the 7 constructs measured by the Parenting Journey Survey (adjusted OR = 2.2, 95% CI [1.2, 4.1], p = .01). DISCUSSION: Participation in Parenting Journey is associated with decreased perceived parenting stress and improvement in parent-reported outcomes. Future work should evaluate the longitudinal impact on parental mental health and child socioemotional development. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Incorporating patient input into the design of a disease management program for COPD.

In the era of value-based payment contracts, there is increasing emphasis on disease management as a strategy for improving care quality and reducing costs. To design effective disease management programs, healthcare systems should understand the day-to-day experience of living with particular health conditions, and ensure that evidence-based services and interventions are adapted to align with the realities of patients' lives and their priorities. For healthcare systems operating with limited resources, there is a need for practical and small-scale approaches for collecting and using patient input as part of program design and operations. This case study describes a targeted interview process that Cambridge Health Alliance (CHA) used to gather patient input during the design of a disease management program for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The patient perspectives gathered through the interviews influenced several aspects of the program design. The key lessons from CHA's experience are: 1) A small-scale approach with cycles of 5-10 interviews can produce valuable insights for program design; 2) Short patient vignettes can be used to summarize patient data in a simple and compelling format; and 3) Clinicians' perspectives are critical for interpreting patient input and extracting information that is most likely to be useful for program design. CHA's approach provides an example of a systematic and practical process for gathering patient input that other healthcare systems can adapt to their local contexts.

Implications of Changing Public Charge Immigration Rules for Children Who Need Medical Care.

IMPORTANCE: In October 2018, the Trump administration published a proposed rule change that would increase the chance of an immigrant being deemed a "public charge" and thereby denied legal permanent residency or entry to the United States. The proposed changes are expected to cause many immigrant parents to disenroll their families from safety-net programs, in large part because of fear and confusion about the rule, even among families to whom the rule does not technically apply. OBJECTIVE: To simulate the potential harms of the rule change by estimating the number, medical conditions, and care needs of children who are at risk of losing their current benefits, including Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional study used nationally representative data from 4007 children 17 years of age or younger who participated in the 2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to assess their potential risk of losing benefits because they live with a noncitizen adult. Statistical analysis was conducted from January 3 to April 8, 2019. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The number of children at risk of losing benefits; the number of children with medical need, defined as having a potentially serious medical diagnosis; being disabled (or functionally limited); or having received any specific treatment in the past year. The numbers of children who would be disenrolled under likely disenrollment scenarios drawn from research on immigrants before and after the 1996 welfare reform were estimated. RESULTS: A total of 8.3 million children who are currently enrolled in Medicaid and CHIP or receiving SNAP benefits are potentially at risk of disenrollment, of whom 5.5 million have specific medical needs, including 615 842 children with asthma, 53 728 children with epilepsy, 3658 children with cancer, and 583 700 children with disabilities or functional limitations. Nonetheless, among the population potentially at risk of disenrollment, medical need was less common than among other children receiving Medicaid and CHIP or SNAP (64.5%; 95% CI, 61.5%-67.4%; vs 76.0%; 95% CI, 73.9%-78.4%; P < .001). The proposed rule is likely to cause parents to disenroll between 0.8 million and 1.9 million children with specific medical needs from health and nutrition benefits. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The proposed public charge rule would likely cause millions of children to lose health and nutrition benefits, including many with specific medical needs that, if left untreated, may contribute to child deaths and future disability.

Care For America's Elderly And Disabled People Relies On Immigrant Labor.

As the US wrestles with immigration policy and caring for an aging population, data on immigrants' role as health care and long-term care workers can inform both debates. Previous studies have examined immigrants' role as health care and direct care workers (nursing, home health, and personal care aides) but not that of immigrants hired by private households or nonmedical facilities such as senior housing to assist elderly and disabled people or unauthorized immigrants' role in providing these services. Using nationally representative data, we found that in 2017 immigrants accounted for 18.2 percent of health care workers and 23.5 percent of formal and nonformal long-term care sector workers. More than one-quarter (27.5 percent) of direct care workers and 30.3 percent of nursing home housekeeping and maintenance workers were immigrants. Although legal noncitizen immigrants accounted for 5.2 percent of the US population, they made up 9.0 percent of direct care workers. Naturalized citizens, 6.8 percent of the US population, accounted for 13.9 percent of direct care workers. In light of the current and projected shortage of health care and direct care workers, our finding that immigrants fill a disproportionate share of such jobs suggests that policies curtailing immigration will likely compromise the availability of care for elderly and disabled Americans.

Facilitators and Barriers to Successful Engagement in a Complex Care Management Program: Patient and Care Manager Perspectives.

Complex care management (CCM) interventions have been developed across the United States to address the challenges of high-need, high-cost patients. Though their heterogeneity makes it challenging to determine their general effectiveness, there are calls in the literature to continue to implement and evaluate them. This article presents CCM patient and care manager perspectives on facilitators and barriers to success in such a program in a safety-net hospital. Our findings suggest that motivated patients, team-based care, and the ability to form trusting, supportive relationships are important contributors to success in a CCM program while patients' own mental health and socioeconomic challenges impede success. Given the relatively short-term nature of most CCM programs and the complicated challenges faced by many CCM patients, this work poses larger questions to consider around the general alignment of the program model to the patient population and the definition of success for CCM programs.

Immigrants Pay More In Private Insurance Premiums Than They Receive In Benefits.

As US policy makers tackle immigration reform, knowing whether immigrants are a burden on the nation's health care system can inform the debate. Previous studies have indicated that immigrants contribute more to Medicare than they receive in benefits but have not examined whether the roughly 50 percent of immigrants with private coverage provide a similar subsidy or even drain health care resources. Using nationally representative data, we found that immigrants accounted for 12.6 percent of premiums paid to private insurers in 2014, but only 9.1 percent of insurer expenditures. Immigrants' annual premiums exceeded their care expenditures by $1,123 per enrollee (for a total of $24.7 billion), which offsets a deficit of $163 per US-born enrollee. Their net subsidy persisted even after ten years of US residence. In 2008-14, the surplus premiums of immigrants totaled $174.4 billion. These findings suggest that policies curtailing immigration could reduce the numbers of "actuarially desirable" people with private insurance, thereby weakening the risk pool.

Long-Term Impact of a Postdischarge Community Health Worker Intervention on Health Care Costs in a Safety-Net System.

OBJECTIVE: Patient navigators (PNs) may represent a cost-effective strategy to improve transitional care and reduce hospital readmissions. We evaluated the impact of a PN intervention on health system costs in the 180 days after discharge for high-risk patients in a safety-net system. DATA SOURCE/SETTING: Primary and secondary data from an academic safety-net health system. STUDY DESIGN: We compared per-patient utilization and costs, overall and by age, for high-risk, medical service patients randomized to the PN intervention relative to usual care between October 2011 and April 2013. Intervention patients received hospital visits and telephone outreach from PNs for 30 days after every qualifying discharge. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We used administrative and electronic encounter data, and a survey of nurses; costs were imputed from the Medicare fee schedule. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Total costs per patient over the 180 days postindex discharge for those aged ≥60 years were significantly lower for PN patients compared to controls ($5,676 vs. $7,640, p = .03); differences for patients aged <60 ($9,942 vs. $9,046, p = .58) or for the entire cohort ($7,092 vs. $7,953, p = .27) were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Patient navigator interventions may be useful strategies for specific groups of patients in safety-net systems to improve transitional care while containing costs.