Association of Medicaid Expansion Under the Affordable Care Act With Perinatal Care Access and Utilization Among Low-Income Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize the empirical research evidence about the association between Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and increasing perinatal care access and utilization among low-income women. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE through PubMed (1966-present), EMBASE (Ovid), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (1982-present), PAIS Index (ProQuest), Web of Science (1900-present), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Our review focuses on the association between Medicaid expansion under the ACA and perinatal care access and utilization, which cannot be subjected to randomized controlled trials, therefore ClinicalTrials.gov was not included in our search. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: A comprehensive search of the research literature was performed using Covidence. Studies were eligible if they were based on population data and research designs ensuring that the exposure (ie, Medicaid expansion under the ACA) preceded the perinatal care access or utilization outcome, had an appropriate comparison group, presented quantitative data, and examined pregnant or postpartum women. The search in six bibliographic databases returned 1,243 records, with 855 abstracts reviewed, 34 full-text articles screened for eligibility, and nine eligible studies included in the systematic review. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Stata 16 software was used to generate summary estimates, forest plots, funnel plots, and heterogeneity statistics. Random effects modeling based on pooled data revealed that Medicaid expansion was associated with a 6.1% increase in Medicaid enrollment for pregnant women (95% CI 1.3-10.9%) and a 3.3% increase in perinatal care utilization (95% CI 0.2-6.3%). CONCLUSION: Medicaid expansion under the ACA is associated with a modest and statistically significant increase in perinatal care access and utilization among low-income women.

Anesthesiologists' and Intensive Care Providers' Exposure to COVID-19 Infection in a New York City Academic Center: A Prospective Cohort Study Assessing Symptoms and COVID-19 Antibody Testing.

BACKGROUND: Protecting first-line health care providers against work-related coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection at the onset of the pandemic has been a crucial challenge in the United States. Anesthesiologists in particular are considered at risk, since aerosol-generating procedures, such as intubation and extubation, have been shown to significantly increase the odds for respiratory infections during severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreaks. This study assessed the incidence of COVID-19-like symptoms and the presence of COVID-19 antibodies after work-related COVID-19 exposures, among physicians working in a large academic hospital in New York City (NYC). METHODS: An e-mail survey was addressed to anesthesiologists and affiliated intensive care providers at Columbia University Irving Medical Center on April 15, 2020. The survey assessed 4 domains: (1) demographics and medical history, (2) community exposure to COVID-19 (eg, use of NYC subway), (3) work-related exposure to COVID-19, and (4) development of COVID-19-like symptoms after work exposure. The first 100 survey responders were invited to undergo a blood test to assess antibody status (presence of immunoglobulin M [IgM]/immunoglobulin G [IgG] specific to COVID-19). Work-related exposure was defined as any episode where the provider was not wearing adequate personal protective equipment (airborne or droplet/contact protection depending on the exposure type). Based on the clinical scenario, work exposure was categorized as high risk (eg, exposure during intubation) or low risk (eg, exposure during doffing). RESULTS: Two hundred and five health care providers were contacted and 105 completed the survey (51%); 91 completed the serological test. Sixty-one of the respondents (58%) reported at least 1 work-related exposure and 54% of the exposures were high risk. Among respondents reporting a work-related exposure, 16 (26.2%) reported postexposure COVID-19-like symptoms. The most frequent symptoms were myalgia (9 cases), diarrhea (8 cases), fever (7 cases), and sore throat (7 cases). COVID-19 antibodies were detected in 11 of the 91 tested respondents (12.1%), with no difference between respondents with (11.8%) or without (12.5%) a work-related exposure, including high-risk exposure. Compared with antibody-negative respondents, antibody-positive respondents were more likely to use NYC subway to commute to work and report COVID-19-like symptoms in the past 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: In the epicenter of the United States' pandemic and within 6-8 weeks of the COVID-19 outbreak, a small proportion of anesthesiologists and affiliated intensive care providers reported COVID-19-like symptoms after a work-related exposure and even fewer had detectable COVID-19 antibodies. The presence of COVID-19 antibodies appeared to be associated with community/environmental transmission rather than secondary to work-related exposures involving high-risk procedures.