COVID-19 and social determinants of health: Medicaid managed care organizations' experiences with addressing member social needs.

BACKGROUND: The significant adverse social and economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has cast broader light on the importance of addressing social determinants of health (SDOH). Medicaid Managed Care Organizations (MMCOs) have increasingly taken on a leadership role in integrating medical and social services for Medicaid members. However, the experiences of MMCOs in addressing member social needs during the pandemic has not yet been examined. AIM: The purpose of this study was to describe MMCOs' experiences with addressing the social needs of Medicaid members during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The study was a qualitative study using data from 28 semi-structured interviews with representatives from 14 MMCOs, including state-specific markets of eight national and regional managed care organizations. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Four themes emerged: the impact of the pandemic, SDOH response efforts, an expanding definition of SDOH, and managed care beyond COVID-19. Specifically, participants discussed the impact of the pandemic on enrollees, communities, and healthcare delivery, and detailed their evolving efforts to address member nonmedical needs during the pandemic. They reported an increased demand for social services coupled with a significant retraction of community social service resources. To address these emerging social service gaps, participants described mounting a prompt and adaptable response that was facilitated by strong existing relationships with community partners. CONCLUSION: Among MMCOs, the COVID-19 pandemic has emphasized the importance of addressing member social needs, and the need for broader consideration of what constitutes SDOH from a healthcare delivery standpoint.

The Risk of Readmission after Early Postpartum Discharge during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether early postpartum discharge during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was associated with a change in the odds of maternal postpartum readmissions. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of uncomplicated postpartum low-risk women in seven obstetrical units within a large New York health system. We compared the rate of postpartum readmissions within 6 weeks of delivery between two groups: low-risk women who had early postpartum discharge as part of our protocol during the COVID-19 pandemic (April 1-June 15, 2020) and similar low-risk patients with routine postpartum discharge from the same study centers 1 year prior. Statistical analysis included the use of Wilcoxon's rank-sum and chi-squared tests, Nelson-Aalen cumulative hazard curves, and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 8,206 patients included, 4,038 (49.2%) were patients who had early postpartum discharge during the COVID-19 pandemic and 4,168 (50.8%) were patients with routine postpartum discharge prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The rates of postpartum readmissions after vaginal delivery (1.0 vs. 0.9%; adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-1.45) and cesarean delivery (1.5 vs. 1.9%; adjusted OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.29-1.45) were similar between the two groups. Demographic risk factors for postpartum readmission included Medicaid insurance and obesity. CONCLUSION: Early postpartum discharge during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with no change in the odds of maternal postpartum readmissions after low-risk vaginal or cesarean deliveries. Early postpartum discharge for low-risk patients to shorten hospital length of stay should be considered in the face of public health crises. KEY POINTS: · Early postpartum discharge was not associated with an increase in odds of hospital readmissions after vaginal delivery.. · Early postpartum discharge was not associated with an increase in odds of hospital readmissions after cesarean delivery.. · Early postpartum discharge for low-risk patients should be considered during a public health crisis..

Insurance coverage and financing landscape for HIV treatment and prevention in the USA.

In 2010, the US health insurance system underwent one of its most substantial transformations with the passage of the Affordable Care Act, which increased coverage for millions of people in the USA, including those with and at risk of HIV. Even so, the system of HIV care and prevention services in the USA is a complex patchwork of payers, providers, and financing mechanisms. People with HIV are primarily covered by Medicaid, Medicare, private insurance, or a combination of these; many get care through other programmes, particularly the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, which serves as the nation's safety net for people with HIV who remain uninsured or underinsured but offers modest to no support for prevention services. While uninsurance has drastically declined over the past decade, the USA trails other high-income countries in key HIV-specific metrics, including rates of viral suppression. In this paper in the Series, we provide an overview of the coverage and financing landscape for HIV treatment and prevention in the USA, discuss how the Affordable Care Act has changed the domestic health-care system, examine the major programmes that provide coverage and services, and identify remaining challenges.

Association between definitive chemoradiotherapy wait-time and survival in locally-advanced cervical cancer: Implications during the coronavirus pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The current coronavirus pandemic caused a significant decrease in cancer-related encounters resulting in a delay in treatment of cancer patients. The objective of this study was to examine the survival effect of delay in starting concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (CCRT) in women with locally-advanced cervical cancer. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study querying the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2016. Women with stage IB2-IVA squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma of the uterine cervix who received definitive CCRT with known wait-time for CCRT initiation after cancer diagnosis were eligible (N=13,617). Cox proportional hazard regression model with restricted cubic spline transformation was fitted to assess the association between CCRT wait-time and all-cause mortality in multivariable analysis. RESULTS: The median wait-time to start CCRT was 6 (IQR 4-8) weeks. In a multivariable analysis, older age, non-Hispanic black and Hispanic ethnicity, recent year of diagnosis, Medicaid and uninsured status, medical comorbidities, and absence of nodal metastasis were associated with longer CCRT wait-time (P<.05). Women with aggressive tumor factors (poorer differentiation, large tumor size, nodal metastasis, and higher cancer stage) were more likely to have a short CCRT wait-time (P<.05). After controlling for the measured covariates, CCRT wait-time of 6.1-9.8 weeks was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality compared to a wait-time of 6 weeks. Similar association was observed when the cohort was stratified by histology, cancer stage, tumor size, or brachytherapy use. CONCLUSION: An implication of this study for the current coronavirus pandemic is that in the absence of aggressive tumor factors, a short period of wait-time to start definitive CCRT may not be associated with increased risk of mortality in women with locally-advanced cervical cancer.

Emergency Department Access During COVID-19: Disparities in Utilization by Race/Ethnicity, Insurance, and Income.

INTRODUCTION: In March 2020, shelter-in-place orders were enacted to attenuate the spread of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). Emergency departments (EDs) experienced unexpected and dramatic decreases in patient volume, raising concerns about exacerbating health disparities. METHODS: We queried our electronic health record to describe the overall change in visits to a two-ED healthcare system in Northern California from March-June 2020 compared to 2019. We compared weekly absolute numbers and proportional change in visits focusing on race/ethnicity, insurance, household income, and acuity. We calculated the z-score to identify whether there was a statistically significant difference in proportions between 2020 and 2019. RESULTS: Overall ED volume declined 28% during the study period. The nadir of volume was 52% of 2019 levels and occurred five weeks after a shelter-in-place order was enacted. Patient demographics also shifted. By week 4 (April 5), the proportion of Hispanic patients decreased by 3.3 percentage points (pp) (P = 0.0053) compared to a 6.2 pp increase in White patients (P = 0.000005). The proportion of patients with commercial insurance increased by 11.6 pp, while Medicaid visits decreased by 9.5 pp (P < 0.00001) at the initiation of shelter-in-place orders. For patients from neighborhoods <300% federal poverty levels (FPL), visits were -3.8 pp (P = 0.000046) of baseline compared to +2.9 pp (P = 0.0044) for patients from ZIP codes at >400% FPL the week of the shelter-in-place order. Overall, 2020 evidenced a consistently elevated proportion of high-acuity Emergency Severity Index (ESI) level 1 patients compared to 2019. Increased acuity was also demonstrated by an increase in the admission rate, with a 10.8 pp increase from 2019. Although there was an increased proportion of high-acuity patients, the overall census was decreased. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate changing ED utilization patterns circa the shelter-in-place orders. Those from historically vulnerable populations such as Hispanics, those from lower socioeconomic areas, and Medicaid users presented at disproportionately lower rates and numbers than other groups. As the pandemic continues, hospitals should use operations data to monitor utilization patterns by demographic, in addition to clinical indicators. Messaging about availability of emergency care and other services should include vulnerable populations to avoid exacerbating healthcare disparities.

Who Stayed Home Under Safer-at-Home? Impacts of COVID-19 on Volume and Patient-Mix at an Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: To describe the impact of COVID-19 on a large, urban emergency department (ED) in Los Angeles, California, we sought to estimate the effect of the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) and "safer-at-home" declaration on ED visits, patient demographics, and diagnosis-mix compared to prior years. METHODS: We used descriptive statistics to compare ED volume and rates of admission for patients presenting to the ED between January and early May of 2018, 2019, and 2020. RESULTS: Immediately after California's "safer-at-home" declaration, ED utilization dropped by 11,000 visits (37%) compared to the same nine weeks in prior years. The drop affected patients regardless of acuity, demographics, or diagnosis. Reductions were observed in the number of patients reporting symptoms often associated with COVID-19 and all other complaints. After the declaration, higher acuity, older, male, Black, uninsured or non-Medicaid, publicly insured, accounted for a disproportionate share of utilization. CONCLUSION: We show an abrupt, discontinuous impact of COVID-19 on ED utilization with a slow return as safer-at-home orders have lifted. It is imperative to determine how this reduction will impact patient outcomes, disease control, and the health of the community in the medium and long terms.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Patients-An Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The United States currently has more confirmed cases of COVID-19 than any other country in the world. Given the variability in COVID-19 testing and prevention capability, identifying factors associated with mortality in patients requiring mechanical ventilation is critical. This study aimed to identify which demographics, comorbidities, markers of disease progression, and interventions are associated with 30-day mortality in COVID-19 patients requiring mechanical ventilation. METHODS: Adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 admitted to one of the health system's intensive care units and requiring mechanical ventilation between March 9, 2020 and April 1, 2020, were included in this observational cohort study. We used Chi-Square and Mann-Whitney U tests to compare patient characteristics between deceased and living patients and multiple logistic regression to assess the association between independent variables and the likelihood of 30-day mortality. RESULTS: We included 85 patients, of which 20 died (23.5%) within 30 days of the first hospital admission. In the univariate analysis, deceased patients were more likely ≥60 years of age (p < 0.001), non-Hispanic (p = 0.026), and diagnosed with a solid malignant tumor (p = 0.003). Insurance status also differed between survivors and non-survivors (p = 0.019). Age ≥60 and malignancy had a 9.5-fold (95% confidence interval 1.4-62.3, p = 0.020) and 5.8-fold higher odds ratio (95% confidence interval 1.2-28.4, p = 0.032) for 30-day mortality after adjusted analysis using multivariable logistic regression, while other independent variables were no longer significant. CONCLUSIONS: In our observational cohort study of 85 mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients, age, and a diagnosis of a solid malignant tumor were associated with 30-day mortality. Our findings validate concerns for the survival of elderly and cancer patients in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, where testing capabilities and preventative measures have been inconsistent. Preventative efforts geared to patients at risk for intensive care unit mortality from COVID-19 should be explored.

Medicaid Expansion: Effects On Hospital Finances And Implications For Hospitals Facing COVID-19 Challenges.

States' decisions to expand Medicaid may have important implications for their hospitals' financial ability to weather the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study estimated the effects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion on hospital finances in 2017 to update earlier findings. The analysis also explored how the ACA Medicaid expansion affects different types of hospitals by size, ownership, rurality, and safety-net status. We found that the early positive financial impact of Medicaid expansion was sustained in fiscal years 2016 and 2017 as hospitals in expansion states continued to experience decreased uncompensated care costs and increased Medicaid revenue and financial margins. The magnitude of these impacts varied by hospital type. As COVID-19 has brought hospitals to a time of great need, findings from this study provide important information on what hospitals in states that have yet to expand Medicaid could gain through expansion and what is at risk should any reversal of Medicaid expansions occur.

Disparities in outpatient visits for mental health and/or substance use disorders during the COVID surge and partial reopening in Massachusetts.

OBJECTIVE: To examine changes in outpatient visits for mental health and/or substance use disorders (MH/SUD) in an integrated healthcare organization during the initial Massachusetts COVID-19 surge and partial state reopening. METHODS: Observational study of outpatient MH/SUD visits January 1st-June 30th, 2018-2020 by: 1) visit diagnosis group, 2) provider type, 3) patient race/ethnicity, 4) insurance, and 5) visit method (telemedicine vs. in-person). RESULTS: Each year, January-June 52,907-73,184 patients were seen for a MH/SUD visit. While non-MH/SUD visits declined during the surge relative to 2020 pre-pandemic (-38.2%), MH/SUD visits increased (9.1%)-concentrated in primary care (35.3%) and non-Hispanic Whites (10.5%). During the surge, MH visit volume increased 11.7% while SUD decreased 12.7%. During partial reopening, while MH visits returned to 2020 pre-pandemic levels, SUD visits declined 31.1%; MH/SUD visits decreased by Hispanics (-33.0%) and non-Hispanic Blacks (-24.6%), and among Medicaid (-19.4%) and Medicare enrollees (-20.9%). Telemedicine accounted for ~5% of MH/SUD visits pre-pandemic and 83.3%-83.5% since the surge. CONCLUSIONS: MH/SUD visit volume increased during the COVID surge and was supported by rapidly-scaled telemedicine. Despite this, widening diagnostic and racial/ethnic disparities in MH/SUD visit volume during the surge and reopening suggest additional barriers for these vulnerable populations, and warrant continued monitoring and research.

Prevalence of COVID-19 in Ohio Nursing Homes: What's Quality Got to Do with It?

With nursing homes being hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to know whether facilities that have any cases, or those with particularly high caseloads, are different from nursing homes that do not have any reported cases. Our analysis found that through mid-June, just under one-third of nursing homes in Ohio had at least one resident with COVID-19, with over 82% of all cases in the state coming from 37% of nursing homes. Overall findings on the association between facility quality and the prevalence of COVID-19 showed that having any resident case of the virus or even having a high caseload of residents with the virus is not more likely in nursing homes with lower quality ratings.

Children's Health Insurance Coverage: Progress, Problems, And Priorities For 2021 And Beyond.

Expansion of Medicaid and establishment of the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) represent a significant success story in the national effort to guarantee health insurance for children. That success is reflected in the high rates of coverage and health care access achieved for children, including those in low-income families. But significant coverage gaps remain-gaps that have been increasing since 2016 and are likely to accelerate with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the associated recession. Using National Health Interview Survey data, we found that the proportion of uninsured children was 5.5 percent in 2018. Children continue to face coverage interruptions, and Latino, adolescent, and noncitizen children continue to face elevated risks of being uninsured. Although we note the benefits of a universal, federally financed, single-payer approach to coverage, we also offer two possible reform pathways that can take place within the current multipayer system, aimed at ensuring coverage, access, continuity, and comprehensiveness to move the nation closer to the goal of providing the health care that children need to reach their full potential and to reduce racial and economic inequalities.

Assessment of Receipt of the First Home Health Care Visit After Hospital Discharge Among Older Adults.

Importance: Home health care is one of the fastest growing postacute services in the US and is increasingly important in the era of coronavirus disease 2019 and payment reform, yet it is unknown whether patients who need home health care are receiving it. Objective: To examine how often patients referred to home health care at hospital discharge receive it and whether there is evidence of disparities. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Medicare data regarding the postacute home health care setting from October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016. The participants were Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries who were discharged alive from a hospital with a referral to home health care (2 379 506 discharges). Statistical analysis was performed from July 2019 to June 2020. Exposures: Hospital referral to home health care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes included whether discharges received their first home health care visit within 14 days of hospital discharge and the number of days between hospital discharge and the first home health visit. Differences in the likelihood of receiving home health care across patient, zip code, and hospital characteristics were also examined. Results: Among 2 379 506 discharges from the hospital with a home health care referral, 1 358 697 patients (57.1%) were female, 468 762 (19.7%) were non-White, and 466 383 (19.6%) were dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid; patients had a mean (SD) age of 73.9 (11.9) years and 4.1 (2.1) Elixhauser comorbidities. Only 1 284 300 patients (54.0%) discharged from the hospital with a home health referral received home health care services within 14 days of discharge. Of the remaining 1 095 206 patients (46.0%) discharged, 37.7% (896 660 discharges) never received any home health care, while 8.3% (198 546 discharges) were institutionalized or died within 14 days without a preceding home health care visit. Patients who were Black or Hispanic received home health at lower rates than did patients who were White (48.0% [95% CI, 47.8%-48.1%] of Black and 46.1% [95% CI, 45.7%-46.5%] of Hispanic discharges received home health within 14 days compared with 55.3% [95% CI, 55.2%-55.4%] of White discharges). In addition, disadvantaged patients waited longer for their first home health care visit. For example, patients living in high-unemployment zip codes waited a mean of 2.0 days (95% CI, 2.0-2.0 days), whereas those living in low-unemployment zip codes waited 1.8 days (95% CI, 1.8-1.8 days). Conclusions and Relevance: Disparities in the use of home health care remain an issue in the US. As home health care is increasingly presented as a safer alternative to institutional postacute care during coronavirus disease 2019, and payment reforms continue to pressure hospitals to discharge patients home, ensuring the availability of safe and equitable care will be crucial to maintaining high-quality care.

COVID-19 Has Increased Medicaid Enrollment, But Short-Term Enrollment Changes Are Unrelated To Job Losses.

The recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has resulted in unprecedented job losses in the United States, disrupting health insurance coverage for millions of people. Several models have predicted large increases in Medicaid enrollment among those who have lost jobs, yet the number of Americans who have gained coverage since the pandemic began is unknown. We compiled Medicaid enrollment reports covering the period from March 1 through June 1, 2020, for twenty-six states. We found that in these twenty-six states, Medicaid covered more than 1.7 million additional Americans in roughly a three-month period. Relative changes in Medicaid enrollment differed significantly across states, although enrollment growth was not systemically related to job losses. Our results point to the important effects of state policy differences in the response to COVID-19.

Telehealth Uptake into Prenatal Care and Provider Attitudes during the COVID-19 Pandemic in New York City: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) determine to what degree prenatal care was able to be transitioned to telehealth at prenatal practices associated with two affiliated hospitals in New York City during the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and (2) describe providers' experience with this transition. STUDY DESIGN: Trends in whether prenatal care visits were conducted in-person or via telehealth were analyzed by week for a 5-week period from March 9 to April 12 at Columbia University Irving Medical Center (CUIMC)-affiliated prenatal practices in New York City during the COVID-19 pandemic. Visits were analyzed for maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) and general obstetrical faculty practices, as well as a clinic system serving patients with public insurance. The proportion of visits that were telehealth was analyzed by visit type by week. A survey and semistructured interviews of providers were conducted evaluating resources and obstacles in the uptake of telehealth. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 4,248 visits, of which approximately one-third were performed by telehealth (n = 1,352, 31.8%). By the fifth week, 56.1% of generalist visits, 61.5% of MFM visits, and 41.5% of clinic visits were performed via telehealth. A total of 36 providers completed the survey and 11 were interviewed. Accessing technology and performing visits, documentation, and follow-up using the telehealth electronic medical record were all viewed favorably by providers. In transitioning to telehealth, operational challenges were more significant for health clinics than for MFM and generalist faculty practices with patients receiving public insurance experiencing greater difficulties and barriers to care. Additional resources on the patient and operational level were required to optimize attendance at in-person and video visits for clinic patients. CONCLUSION: Telehealth was rapidly implemented in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic and was viewed favorably by providers. Limited barriers to care were observed for practices serving patients with commercial insurance. However, to optimize access for patients with Medicaid, additional patient-level and operational supports were required. KEY POINTS: · Telehealth uptake differed based on insurance.. · Medicaid patients may require increased assistance for telehealth.. · Quick adoption of telehealth is feasible..