Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Position Statement: Extending Medicaid coverage for 12 months postpartum.

Position: The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine supports federal and state policies that expand Medicaid eligibility and extend Medicaid coverage through 12 months postpartum to address the maternal morbidity and mortality crisis and improve health equity. Access to coverage is essential to optimize maternal health following pregnancy and childbirth and avoid preventable causes of maternal morbidity and mortality that extend throughout the first year postpartum. The Society opposes policies such as work requirements or limitations on coverage for undocumented individuals that unnecessarily impose restrictions on Medicaid eligibility.

State Public Insurance Coverage Policies and Postpartum Care Among Immigrants.

Importance: Professional medical organizations recommend that adults receive routine postpartum care. Yet, some states restrict public insurance coverage for undocumented immigrants and recently documented immigrants (those who received legal documentation status within the past 5 years). Objective: To examine the association between public insurance coverage and postpartum care among low-income immigrants and the difference in receipt of postpartum care among immigrants relative to nonimmigrants. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pooled, cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System for 19 states and New York City including low-income adults with a live birth between 2012 and 2019. Exposure: Giving birth in a state that offered public insurance coverage for postpartum care to recently documented or undocumented immigrants. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported receipt of postpartum care by the category of coverage offered (full coverage: states that offered publicly funded postpartum care regardless of immigration status; moderate coverage: states that offered publicly funded postpartum care to lawfully residing immigrants without a 5-year waiting period, but did not offer postpartum care to undocumented immigrants; no coverage: states that did not offer publicly funded postpartum care to lawfully present immigrants before 5 years of legal residence or to undocumented immigrants). Results: The study included 72 981 low-income adults (20 971 immigrants [29%] and 52 010 nonimmigrants [71%]). Of the 19 included states and New York City, 6 offered full coverage, 9 offered moderate coverage, and 4 offered no coverage; 1 state (Oregon) switched from offering moderate coverage to offering full coverage. Compared with the states that offered full coverage, receipt of postpartum care among immigrants was 7.0-percentage-points lower (95% CI, -10.6 to -3.4 percentage points) in the states that offered moderate coverage and 11.3-percentage-points lower (95% CI, -13.9 to -8.8 percentage points) in the states that offered no coverage. The differences in the receipt of postpartum care among immigrants relative to nonimmigrants were also associated with the coverage categories. Compared with the states that offered full coverage, there was a 3.3-percentage-point larger difference (95% CI, -5.3 to -1.4 percentage points) in the states that offered moderate coverage and a 7.7-percentage-point larger difference (95% CI, -10.3 to -5.0 percentage points) in the states that offered no coverage. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with states without insurance restrictions, immigrants living in states with public insurance restrictions were less likely to receive postpartum care. Restricting public insurance coverage may be an important policy-driven barrier to receipt of recommended pregnancy care and improved maternal health among immigrants.

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.

Medicaid Expansion and Incidence of Kidney Failure among Nonelderly Adults.

BACKGROUND: Low-income individuals without health insurance have limited access to health care. Medicaid expansions may reduce kidney failure incidence by improving access to chronic disease care. METHODS: Using a difference-in-differences analysis, we examined the association between Medicaid expansion status under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the kidney failure incidence rate among all nonelderly adults, aged 19-64 years, in the United States, from 2012 through 2018. We compared changes in kidney failure incidence in states that implemented Medicaid expansions with concurrent changes in nonexpansion states during pre-expansion, early postexpansion (years 2 and 3 postexpansion), and later postexpansion (years 4 and 5 postexpansion). RESULTS: The unadjusted kidney failure incidence rate increased in the early years of the study period in both expansion and nonexpansion states before stabilizing. After adjustment for population sociodemographic characteristics, Medicaid expansion status was associated with 2.20 fewer incident cases of kidney failure per million adults per quarter in the early postexpansion period (95% CI, -3.89 to -0.51) compared with nonexpansion status, a 3.07% relative reduction (95% CI, -5.43% to -0.72%). In the later postexpansion period, Medicaid expansion status was not associated with a statistically significant change in kidney failure incidence (-0.56 cases per million per quarter; 95% CI, -2.71 to 1.58) compared with nonexpansion status and the pre-expansion time period. CONCLUSIONS: The ACA Medicaid expansion was associated with an initial reduction in kidney failure incidence among the entire, nonelderly, adult population in the United States; but the changes did not persist in the later postexpansion period. Further study is needed to determine the long-term association between Medicaid expansion and changes in kidney failure incidence.

Association Between Medicaid Expansion and Suicide Mortality Among Nonelderly US Adults.

In 2014, the Affordable Care Act gave states the option to expand Medicaid coverage to nonelderly adults (persons aged 18-64 years) with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level. To our knowledge, the association of Medicaid expansion with suicide, a leading cause of death in the United States, has not been examined. We used 2005-2017 data from the National Violent Death Reporting System to analyze suicide mortality in 8 Medicaid expansion states and 7 nonexpansion states. Using a difference-in-differences approach, we examined the association between Medicaid expansion and the rate of suicide death (number of deaths per 100,000 population) among nonelderly adults. After adjustment for state-level confounders, Medicaid expansion states had 1.2 fewer suicide deaths (ß = -1.2, 95% confidence interval: -2.5, 0.1) per 100,000 population per year during the postexpansion period than would have been expected if they had followed the same trend in suicide rates as nonexpansion states. Medicaid expansion was associated with reductions in suicide rates among women, men, persons aged 30-44 years, non-Hispanic White individuals, and persons without a college degree. Medicaid expansion was not associated with a change in suicide rates among persons aged 18-29 or 45-64 years or among non-White or Hispanic individuals. Overall, Medicaid expansion was associated with reductions in rates of suicide death among nonelderly adults. Further research on inequities in Medicaid expansion benefits is needed.

Long-Term Implications of Post-ACA Health Reform on State Health Care Policy.

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.

Medicaid Waivers and Tenancy Supports for Individuals Experiencing Homelessness: Implementation Challenges in Four States.

Policy Points Medicaid policymakers have a growing interest in addressing homelessness as a social determinant of health and driver of the potentially avoidable use of expensive medical services. Drawing on extensive document reviews and in-depth interviews in four early-adopter states, we examined the implementation of Medicaid's Section 1115 demonstration waivers to test strategies to finance tenancy support services for persons experiencing or at risk of homelessness. CONTEXT: The Affordable Care Act extended Medicaid eligibility to large numbers of individuals experiencing or at risk of homelessness. This legislative development and the growing recognition of homelessness as a significant social determinant of health have encouraged advocates and policymakers to seek new ways to use Medicaid to provide housing supports. METHODS: We conducted 28 semistructured interviews with 36 stakeholders in four states. The stakeholders were government administrators, health care providers, nonprofit housing staff, and consultants. We supplemented these interviews with extensive reviews of public documents, media accounts, think-tank reports, and published literature. We also conducted a systematic inductive qualitative analysis. FINDINGS: We identified seven challenges to the successful implementation of tenancy support demonstration projects: resolving the housing supply and NIMBY, removing silos between health care and homeless services providers, enrolling and retaining the target populations in Medicaid, contracting with and paying tenancy support providers, recruiting and retaining key workers, ensuring Medicaid's waiver durability, and reducing administrative crowd-out and waiver burden. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding these challenges, three of the four states have made significant progress in launching their initiatives. At this point, the fourth state has delayed its start-up to consider alternatives to a Medicaid demonstration waiver to provide tenancy supports. The experience of the four states suggests lessons for Medicaid officials in other jurisdictions that are interested in pursuing tenancy support initiatives. Nevertheless, the limitations of tenancy support waiver programs suggest that federal policymakers should consider allowing states to more directly subsidize housing costs for those experiencing or at risk of homelessness as an optional Medicaid benefit.

Engaging Consumers in Medicaid Program Design: Strategies from the States.

Policy Points As Medicaid programs grow in scale and complexity, greater consumer input may guide successful program design, but little is known about the extent to which state agencies are engaging consumers in the design and implementation of programs and policies. Through 50 semistructured interviews with Medicaid leaders in 14 states, we found significant variation in consumer engagement approaches, with many common facilitators, including leadership commitment, flexible strategies for recruiting and supporting consumer participation, and robust community partnerships. We provide early evidence on how state Medicaid agencies are integrating consumers' experiences and perspectives into their program design and governance. CONTEXT: Consumer engagement early in the process of health care policymaking may improve the effectiveness of program planning and implementation, promote patient-centric care, enhance beneficiary protections, and offer opportunities to improve service delivery. As Medicaid programs grow in scale and complexity, greater consumer input may guide successful program design, but little is known about the extent to which state agencies are currently engaging consumers in the design and implementation of programs and policies, and how this is being done. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 50 Medicaid program leaders across 14 states, employing a stratified purposive sampling method to select state Medicaid programs based on US census region, rurality, Medicaid enrollment size, total population, ACA expansion status, and Medicaid managed care penetration. Interview data were audio-recorded, professionally transcribed, and underwent iterative coding with content and thematic analyses. FINDINGS: First, we found variation in consumer engagement approaches, ranging from limited and largely symbolic interactions to longer-term deliberative bodies, with some states tailoring their federally mandated standing committees to engage consumers. Second, most states were motivated by pragmatic considerations, such as identifying and overcoming implementation challenges for agency programs. Third, states reported several common facilitators of successful consumer engagement efforts, including leadership commitment, flexible strategies for recruiting and supporting consumers' participation, and robust community partnerships. All states faced barriers to authentic and sustained engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Sharing best practices across states could help strengthen programs' engagement efforts, identify opportunities for program improvement reflecting community needs, and increase participation among a population that has traditionally lacked a political voice.

Impact of Medicaid expansion on women with gynecologic cancer: a difference-in-difference analysis.

BACKGROUND: Women with gynecologic cancer face socioeconomic disparities in care that affect survival outcomes. The Affordable Care Act offered states the option to expand Medicaid enrollment eligibility criteria as a means of improving timely and affordable access to care for the most vulnerable. The variable uptake of expansion by states created a natural experiment, allowing for quasi-experimental methods that offer more unbiased estimates of treatment effects from retrospective data than the traditional regression adjustment. OBJECTIVE: To use a quasi-experimental, difference-in-difference framework to create unbiased estimates of impact of Medicaid expansion on women with gynecologic cancer. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a quasi-experimental retrospective cohort study from the National Cancer Database files for women with invasive cancers of the uterus, ovary and fallopian tube, cervix, vagina, and vulva diagnosed from 2008 to 2016. Using a marker for state Medicaid expansion status, we created difference-in-difference models to assess the impact of Medicaid expansion on the outcomes of access to and timeliness of care. We excluded women aged <40 years owing to the suppression of the state Medicaid expansions status in the data and women aged ≥65 years owing to the universal Medicare coverage availability. Our primary outcome was the rate of uninsurance at diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included Medicaid coverage, early-stage diagnosis, treatment at an academic facility, and any treatment or surgery within 30 days of diagnosis. Models were run within multiple subgroups and on a propensity-matched cohort to assess the robustness of the treatment estimates. The assumption of parallel trends was assessed with event study time plots. RESULTS: Our sample included 335,063 women. Among this cohort, 121,449 were from nonexpansion states and 213,614 were from expansion states, with 79,886 posttreatment cases diagnosed after the expansion took full effect in expansion states. The groups had minor differences in demographics, and we found occasional preperiod event study coefficients diverging from the mean, but the outcome trends were generally similar between the expansion and nonexpansion states in the preperiod, satisfying the necessary assumption for the difference-in-difference analysis. In a basic difference-in-difference model, the Medicaid expansion in January 2014 was associated with significant increases in insurance at diagnosis, treatment at an academic facility, and treatment within 30 days of diagnosis (P<.001 for all). In an adjusted model including all states and accounting for variable expansion implementation time, there was a significant treatment effect of Medicaid expansion on the reduction in uninsurance at diagnosis (-2.00%; 95% confidence interval, -2.3 to -1.7; P<.001), increases in early-stage diagnosis (0.80%; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.4; P=.02), treatment at an academic facility (0.83%; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-1.5; P=.02), treatment within 30 days (1.62%; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-2.3; P<.001), and surgery within 30 days (1.54%; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-2.3; P<.001). In particular, large gains were estimated for women living in low-income zip codes, Hispanic women, and women with cervical cancer. Estimates from the subgroup and propensity-matched cohorts were generally consistent for all outcomes besides early-stage diagnosis and treatment within 30 days. CONCLUSION: Medicaid expansion was significantly associated with gains in the access and timeliness of treatment for nonelderly women with gynecologic cancer. The implementation of Medicaid expansion could greatly benefit women in nonexpansion states. Gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists should advocate for Medicaid expansion as a means of improving outcomes and reducing socioeconomic and racial disparities.

The Three-Year Effect of Medicaid Expansion on Emergency Department Visits and Admissions.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We examine the effect of the Medicaid expansion in 2014 under in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on emergency department (ED) utilization and ED admission rates (fraction of ED visits that lead to hospital admission) during the first 3 postexpansion years (2014 to 2016). METHODS: We compared ED utilization and ED admission rates in 151 EDs in 14 expansion states with those in 376 EDs in 14 nonexpansion states, using difference-in-differences methods with data from 3 national emergency medicine groups from 2013 to 2016. RESULTS: In expansion states, the volume of Medicaid-paid ED visits increased 49% (95% confidence interval 34% to 65%), and the volume of uninsured visits decreased 44% (95% confidence interval -52% to -34%) relative to that of nonexpansion states. Both effects on payer mix leveled off during 2015. There was no significant relative change in overall ED utilization or overall ED admission rates in expansion versus nonexpansion states during the study. However, relative ED admission rates for uninsured patients declined 8% (95% confidence interval -18% to -2%) in expansion states. CONCLUSION: Large changes in payer mix in expansion versus nonexpansion states were observed but leveled off during 2015, with more Medicaid-paid visits and fewer uninsured visits in expansion states. Despite these large changes, during this 3-year period, there was no evidence that expansion affected either overall ED visit volume or ED admission rates. The relative decline in ED admission rates in expansion states among the uninsured may reflect a selection effect in which, among newly Medicaid-eligible persons, sicker persons were more likely to enroll than healthier ones.

The Future of the Indispensable Insurer: The Biden Administration and Medicaid.

Medicaid presents both legislative and regulatory challenges and opportunities. As it moves a legislative agenda forward, the Biden administration also will confront a series of immediate regulatory matters, some of which have been made urgent because of pending judicial action. Chief among these pressing matters are ending Medicaid work requirements and block grant experiments, rescinding the public charge rule, ensuring optimal use of Medicaid's enrollment and renewal simplification tools, rescinding the Title X family planning rule (which has enormous implications for Medicaid beneficiaries), and, when the time comes, preparing states to wind down the "Families First" Medicaid maintenance of effort protection while avoiding erroneous beneficiary disenrollment. The administration could consider encouraging remaining nonexpansion states to pursue §1115 Medicaid expansion experiments; additionally, the administration could pursue Medicaid pandemic recovery demonstrations to support health system recovery during the long period that lies ahead. Thus, while certain advances must await legislation, the administration can move Medicaid forward through executive action.

Extending Postpartum Medicaid: State and Federal Policy Options during and after COVID-19.

The United States is facing a maternal health crisis with rising rates of maternal mortality and morbidity and stark disparities in maternal outcomes by race and socioeconomic status. Among the efforts to address this issue, one policy proposal is gaining particular traction: extending the period of Medicaid eligibility for pregnant women beyond 60 days after childbirth. The authors examine the legislative and regulatory pathways most readily available for extending postpartum Medicaid, including their relative political, economic, and public health trade-offs. They also review the state and federal policy activity to date and discuss the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the prospects for policy change.

Stabilizing and Strengthening the Affordable Care Act: Opportunities for a New Administration.

For the past decade, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has successfully reduced uninsurance and improved access to and affordability of health care services for millions of Americans. But the law was weakened when the Trump administration shortened the open enrollment period in the federal Marketplace, reduced outreach and enrollment funding, and revised the public charge rule, among other actions. The Biden administration will have the chance to reverse some of these changes and further strengthen the law to improve health care access and affordability. In this article, the author explores options for expanding access to affordable coverage and care for those who do not qualify for Medicaid or marketplace financial assistance and further discusses opportunities for increasing enrollment among those who are already eligible. The author also examines opportunities for expanding access to specific services, including reproductive health care, among those with insurance. Any attempts to modify or build on the ACA will likely be complicated by the ongoing coronavirus pandemic as well as slim Democratic majorities in the House and Senate, but regulatory solutions will likely be easier to achieve than those that require changes to federal law or state policy.

Federal requirements for nursing homes to include certified nursing assistants in resident care planning and interdisciplinary teams: A policy analysis.

Starting in 2016, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services implemented the first phase of a 3-year multi-phase plan revising the manner in which nursing homes are regulated. In this revision, attention was placed on the importance of certified nursing assistants (CNAs) to resident care and the need to empower these frontline workers. Phase II mandates that CNAs be included as members of the nursing home interdisciplinary team that develops care plans for the resident that are person-centered and comprehensive and reviews and revises these care plans after each resident assessment. While these efforts are laudable, there are no direct guidelines for how to integrate CNAs in the interdisciplinary team. We recommend the inclusion of direct guidelines, in which this policy revision clarifies the expected contributions from CNAs, their responsibilities, their role as members of the interdisciplinary team, and the expected patterns of communication between CNAs and other members of the interdisciplinary team.

Achieving Access Parity for Inpatient Psychiatric Care Requires Repealing the Medicaid Institutions for Mental Disease Exclusion Rule.

Approximately 3.4% of Americans have a mental health condition and suicide is the 10th leading cause of death. While the rate of mental health conditions has slightly increased for adult populations, America's youth has experienced a significant rise in depression. From 2008 to 2017, occurrence of depression in the adolescent population increased from 8.3% to 13.3%. As adolescents mature into adults; it is likely the rate of mental health conditions for the adult population will rise as well as it is the common thread that binds the diseases of despair: drug abuse, alcoholism, and suicide. Arising out of the deinstitutionalization movement of the 1960s, the Medicaid Institutions for Mental Disease (IMD) Exclusion Rule (§1905(a)(B) of the Social Security Act) prohibits reimbursement for Medicaid recipients ages 21 to 64 years receiving inpatient care at a psychiatric hospital with 16 or more beds. Consequently, the rule limits payment for psychiatric treatment to general hospitals and smaller, nonspecialized centers, which blocks patients from receiving inpatient care and transfers the financial burden of care onto psychiatric hospitals. The IMD Rule is approaching its 55th anniversary. It requires reevaluation. Although a state waiver process is available, use of this option has the potential to increase the incidence of racial and ethnic disparities across states. Full repeal of the IMD Exclusion Rule could help provide immediate access to inpatient care that is consistent nationwide and be a vital step toward creating financial, treatment and ethical parity for mental health services.

Challenges for immigrant health in the USA-the road to crisis.

The USA is home to more immigrants than any other country-about 46 million, just less than a fifth of the world's immigrants. Immigrant health and access to health care in the USA varies widely by ethnicity, citizenship, and legal status. In recent decades, several policy and regulatory changes have worsened health-care quality and access for immigrant populations. These changes include restrictions on access to public health insurance programmes, rhetoric discouraging the use of social services, aggressive immigration enforcement activities, intimidation within health-care settings, decreased caps on the number of admitted refugees, and rescission of protections from deportation. A receding of ethical norms has created an environment favourable for moral and public health crises, as evident in the separation of children from their parents at the southern US border. Given the polarising immigration rhetoric at the national level, individual states rather than the country as a whole might be better positioned to address the barriers to improved health and health care for immigrants in the USA.