Improvements in Air Quality and Health Outcomes Among California Medicaid Enrollees Due to Goods Movement Actions.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In 2006, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and local air quality management districts implemented an Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement program (referred to hereinafter as GM policy actions) (CARB 2006). The GM policy actions comprise approximately 200 actions with an estimated investment value of $6 to $10 billion. These actions targeted the major sources and polluters related to goods movements, such as highways; ports and railyard trucks; ship fuel and shore power; cargo equipment; and locomotives. These actions aimed to reduce total statewide domestic GM emissions to 2001 levels or lower by the year 2010; to reduce the statewide diesel particulate matter (DPM) health risk from GM by 85% by the year 2020; and to reduce the nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from international GM in the South Coast Air Basin by 30% from projected 2015 levels and 50% from projected 2020 levels. The years 2006 and 2007 marked an important milestone in starting to regulate GM polluters and adopting stricter standards for traffic-related air pollution.This project aimed to examine the impact of the GM policy actions on reductions in ambient air pollution and subsequent improvements in health outcomes of Medi-Cal fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries with chronic conditions in 10 counties in California. Specifically, we examined whether the GM policy actions reduced air pollution near GMC corridors more than in control areas. We subsequently assessed whether there were greater decreases in emergency room (ER) visits and hospitalizations for enrollees with chronic conditions who lived in the GM corridors (GMCs) than for those who lived in other areas. METHODS: The study used a quasi-experimental design. We defined areas within 500 m of truck-permitted freeways and ports as GMCs. We further defined non-goods movement corridors (NGMCs) as locations within 500 m of truck-prohibited freeways or 300 m of a connecting roadway, and areas out of GMCs and NGMCs as controls (CTRLs). We defined years 2004-2007 as the pre-policy period and years 2008-2010 as the post-policy period. We developed linear mixed-effects land use regression models and created annual air pollution surfaces for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and ozone (O3) across California for years 2004-2010 at a spatial resolution of 30 m, then assigned them to enrollees' home addresses.We used a retrospective cohort of 23,000 California Medicaid (Medi-Cal) FFS adult beneficiaries living in 10 California counties with six years of data (September 1, 2004, to August 31, 2010). Cohort beneficiaries had at least one of four chronic conditions, including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, and heart disease.We used a difference-in-differences (DiD) model to assess whether air pollutant concentration and health care utilization (ER visits and hospitalizations) for cohort beneficiaries declined more for those living in intervention corridors (GMCs, NGMCs) than those living in CTRLs. All the models controlled for age, sex, language spoken, race/ethnicity, number of comorbidities in baseline years, county, time-varying health indicator variables, and several neighborhood variables.To facilitate interpretation, we calculated the DiD estimates in each of the three years after the policy intervention. The DiD was used to assess the causal impact of regulatory policy on reductions of air pollution, as well as for the improvements in health outcomes.We explored whether improvements in health outcomes were due to the air pollution reduction by using a multi- level mediation model, in which the effect of GM actions on health outcomes was mediated through the effect of actual air pollution reductions in the post-policy years. We used the Generalized Structural Equation Models for the estimation and combined the effects of NO2 and PM2.5 in the model. To further verify the causal inferences of the GM actions on reductions of exposures and improvements in health outcomes, we performed sensitivity analyses with propensity score weighting. RESULTS: We observed statistically significant reductions in pollutant NO2 and PM2.5 concentrations for enrollees in all 10 counties. The enrollees in GMCs experienced greater reductions in NO2 and PM2.5 from the pre- to the post-policy periods than those in CTRLs. Greater reductions were also observed among beneficiaries living in NGMCs versus those in CTRLs, but those reductions were smaller than among beneficiaries living in GMCs. For O3 concentrations, an opposite trend was observed.Furthermore, we observed significantly greater reductions in ER visits for patients with asthma and COPD living in GMCs than those in CTRLS in the post-policy years. For example, we saw in the DiD modeling results there were 170 fewer ER visits for 1,000 beneficiaries with asthma per year in GMCs if the regionwide trend in the CTRL group was considered not related to the GM policy. Similarly, among the beneficiaries with COPD, there were 180 fewer ER visits per 1,000 patients estimated in the GMCs for the third year after the implementation of the policy.We also observed greater reductions in ER visits among those with asthma, when comparing NGMCs with CTRLs, but reductions were smaller than comparisons between GMCs and CTRLs. The ER visits for those with COPD, diabetes, and the total sample in NGMCs also had downward trends in the post-policy year in comparison with those in CTRLs but the differences were not statistically significant; similar phenomena were also observed for the ER visits among those with diabetes and heart diseases and in the total sample when GMCs versus CTRLs and GMCs versus NGMCs were compared. Although hospitalizations also decreased more in GMCs than in NGMCs and more in NGMCs than in CTRLs in the post-policy period, results were not statistically significant.Using the mediation models, we observed 0.129 more reductions in the expected number of ER visits among individuals with asthma for a composite reduction in one unit NO2 and one unit PM2.5 (DiD = -0.129, P < 0.05) from the pre-policy years to the post-policy years. The reductions in NO2 and PM2.5 due to policy change estimated by the mediation model are essentially the same as shown in the respective DiD models. Mediation analyses suggested that the effects of GM policy interventions on health improvements were largely due to exposure reductions. Finally, sensitivity analyses with propensity scores produced similar DiD results. CONCLUSIONS: This project has produced empirical evidence that air pollution control actions reduced pollution exposures among disadvantaged and susceptible populations. More importantly, our findings suggest that the reductions in air pollution led to health outcome improvements among low-income people with chronic conditions. Our investigation also contributed to scientific methods for assessing the health effects of long-term, large-scale, and complex regulatory actions with routinely collected pollutants and medical claims data. Therefore, the results strongly support both short-term and long-term efforts to improve air quality for all members of society and future studies on the impact of air pollution control policies.