Cost-Free Preventive Care Under the ACA Faces Legal Challenge.

This Viewpoint examines the recent decision by a federal district court that undercuts the Affordable Care Act's mandate for cost-free coverage of preventive services, including contraception, some vaccinations, many screenings, and preexposure prophylaxis for HIV, among others.

Effects of the Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansions on Mental Health During the COVID-19 Pandemic in 2020-2021.

To examine whether previous Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansions had an added effect on the mental health of low-income adults during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021. We use the 2017-2021 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data. We use an event study difference-in-differences model to compare the number of days in poor mental health in the past 30 days and the likelihood of frequent mental distress among 18 to 64 year old individuals with household incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level who participated in BRFSS in one of the surveys from 2017 to 2021 and who resided in states that expanded Medicaid by 2016 or states that had not expanded by 2021. We also examine the heterogeneity of the expansion effects across subpopulation groups. We find some evidence that the Medicaid expansion was associated with better mental health during the pandemic for adults younger than 45, females, and non-Hispanic Black and other non-Hispanic non-White individuals. There is some evidence of an added benefit to mental health from Medicaid expansion status during the pandemic for some subgroups among low-income adults, suggesting potential health benefits from Medicaid eligibility during public health and economic crises.

The risk of losing health insurance in the United States is large, and remained so after the Affordable Care Act.

Health insurance coverage in the United States is highly uncertain. In the post-Affordable Care Act (ACA), pre-COVID United States, we estimate that while 12.5% of individuals under 65 are uninsured at a point in time, twice as many-one in four-are uninsured at some point over a 2-y period. Moreover, the risk of losing insurance remained virtually unchanged with the introduction of the landmark ACA. Risk of insurance loss is particularly high for those with health insurance through Medicaid or private exchanges; they have a 20% chance of losing coverage at some point over a 2-y period, compared to 8.5% for those with employer-provided coverage. Those who lose insurance can experience prolonged periods without coverage; about half are still uninsured 6 mo later, and almost one-quarter are uninsured for the subsequent 2 y. These facts suggest that research and policy attention should focus not only on the "headline number" of the share of the population uninsured at a point in time, but also on the stability and certainty (or lack thereof) of being insured.

The Early Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Hospital Finances.

GOAL: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused both short- and long-term impacts on every aspect of society. Hospitals are among the most critical frontliners and have had to continually navigate the challenges caused by the pandemic. In this study, we examined hospitals' financial performance following the onset of the pandemic. METHODS: We used data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Healthcare Cost Report Information System. The study sample included all general acute care and critical access hospitals that receive Medicare payments. The primary outcomes included operating margins, net patient revenues, operating expenses, and uncompensated care costs. We tested for average changes from 2019 to 2020 in hospitals' financial outcomes. We also tested for changes in financial outcomes across samples stratified by hospital characteristics: ownership type (investor-owned, nonprofit, and public), Medicaid disproportionate share hospital status, rural status, county uninsured rate quartile, and Medicaid expansion status. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Our sample consisted of a balanced panel of 4,059 hospitals (8,118 observations) with data spanning 2019 and 2020. Across the full sample of hospitals, operating margins declined by an average of 5.3 percentage points between 2019 and 2020, equating to a 130% reduction from 2019 levels. Underlying these margin declines, net patient revenues declined by 3.2% on average, while operating expenses increased by 1.5%. We observed no changes in uncompensated care costs despite the large number of job losses that accompanied the pandemic. When stratifying the analysis by hospital characteristics, differences were observed across ownership types. Notably, investor-owned facilities were less affected financially than nonprofit and public hospitals. Although safety-net and rural hospitals generally fared no worse than their non-safety-net and nonrural counterparts, hospitals located in Medicaid expansion states experienced steeper declines in operating margins relative to hospitals located in nonexpansion states, driven by larger relative declines in patient revenues. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: The operating margin declines we observed can be attributed to supply-chain issues, persistent labor shortages, and suspension of elective services. The Affordable Care Act reforms in health insurance markets likely helped to insulate hospitals from increases in uncompensated care costs. In the shifting context of the pandemic, it is important to understand hospitals' financial performance so that measures can be taken to address further financial distress that may eventually lead to increased consolidation, hospital closures, and lower quality of care. Our findings stress the need for targeted responses that are tailored to underlying hospital characteristics. Temporary and targeted increases in inpatient and outpatient service prices can help offset revenue losses from the deferment of nonurgent care. Other policies can address the ongoing workforce challenges and supply-chain issues.

Popular to a Point: The Enduring Political Challenges of the Public Option.

Policy Points A decade after failing to make it into the Affordable Care Act, the public option reemerged as a health reform goal at both the national and state levels, with polls reporting strong, bipartisan support. A 2020 poll that probed both support for one public option approach (Medicare "buy-in") and attitudes toward government suggests that differences in these attitudes could plague reform advocates' efforts. Although the COVID-19 pandemic viscerally highlighted the need for a more coherent health care system-including universal coverage-other recent evolutions in the broader US political context could undermine reform.

Duration and Continuity of Medicaid Enrollment Before the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: COVID-19 relief legislation created a temporary moratorium on Medicaid disenrollment, but when the public health emergency ends, states will begin to "unwind" Medicaid enrollment. Prepandemic data shed light on factors that can affect Medicaid coverage stability. Objective: To assess factors associated with the duration and continuity of Medicaid enrollment. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional analyses of a Medicaid data set for 2016 that was released by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality in June of 2022, we analyze a nationally representative data set of 5.7 million persons, weighted to represent 70 million Medicaid beneficiaries in 2016. We focus on 22 million nondisabled, nonelderly adults for this analysis. The data were analyzed between July and September of 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the average months of Medicaid enrollment in 2016 and the probability of churning, defined as a break in coverage between 2 periods of enrollment during the calendar year. We compared these outcomes by eligibility category, state, demographic characteristics, and key Medicaid policies, including whether the state expanded Medicaid and whether it used ex parte reviews (automated reviews of other administrative data to reduce renewal paperwork burdens). Results: In this cross-sectional analysis, we analyze a nationally representative Medicaid data set of 5.7 million persons, weighted to represent 70 million Medicaid beneficiaries in 2016, released by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality in June of 2022. The analysis focused on nonelderly, nondisabled adults (aged 18-64 years) with a weighted population size of 22.7 million, of which 18.4% were Black, 19.2% were Latino, 39.5% were White, 7.3% were other/Asian/Native American, and 15.5% had unknown race. Multivariable regression analysis indicated that those living in states that expanded Medicaid but did not use ex parte reviews had longer average duration (0.31 months longer; 95% CI, 0.03-0.59) and lower risk of churning(odds ratio [OR], .40; 95% CI, 0.39-0.40), whereas those living in nonexpansion states that used ex parte reviews had lower odds of churning (OR, .68; 95% CI, 0.66-0.70) but also had shorter average duration (3.1 months shorter; 95% CI, -3.4 to -2.8). Those living in expansion states that used ex parte reviews also had reduced churning (OR, .83; 95% CI, 0.82-0.85). The average duration varied widely by state, even after adjustments for demographic and state policy factors. Conclusions and Relevance: If state Medicaid programs revert to prepandemic policies after the temporary moratorium ends, Medicaid coverage, particularly for nondisabled, nonelderly adults, is likely to become less stable again. Medicaid expansions are associated with improved continuity, but ex parte review may have a more complex role.

Identifying barriers and facilitators for nurse practitioners' opioid management of chronic pain.

BACKGROUND: Drug overdose deaths greatly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, with 100,306 cases occurring in the United States over 12 months from 2020 to 2021, an increase of 28.5% from the year before. Three quarters of these deaths involved opioids, and this epidemic has seriously complicated chronic pain management. The role of nurse practitioners (NPs) in opioid prescription has expanded since Affordable Care Act passage in 2010, but their prescription of opioids for chronic pain management is not well understood. OBJECTIVES: This integrative review aimed to identify barriers, facilitators, and other factors influencing NPs' management of chronic pain with opioids. DATA SOURCES: Five databases were searched for the highest level of evidence in articles published from 2011 to 2021. Search results were refined to focus on NPs' chronic pain management via opioid prescription. CONCLUSIONS: Nine studies were selected for the review. Six identified themes were indicative of barriers, facilitators, and other factors affecting NPs' opioid management: nurse practitioner education, patient subjectivity and patient education, systemic change and alternative treatment access, interprofessional collaboration, nurse practitioner prescriptive authority, and practice environment. States and schools of nursing should modify policy and curricula to better support NPs' opioid management and reduce associated prescription barriers. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: NPs' opioid management can best be improved by providing them with current guideline-based education regarding opioid prescription, emphasizing patient education, supplying NPs with systemic support, encouraging interprofessional collaboration, and solving the prescriptive authority issues. Enhancing NPs' opioid prescription and chronic pain management knowledge would help to mitigate the opioid epidemic.

Employer-Sponsored Coverage Stabilized And Uninsurance Declined In The Second Year Of The COVID-19 Pandemic.

The health risks of COVID-19, combined with widespread economic instability in the US, spurred Congress to pass temporary measures to improve access to health insurance. Using data from the Household Pulse Survey, a high-frequency, population-based survey, we examined trends in health coverage during 2021 and early 2022 among nonelderly adults. We estimated that eight million people gained coverage during this period, primarily because of increases in Medicaid and other public coverage. Despite rising employment, rates of employer-sponsored coverage remained flat. In Medicaid expansion states, employment rates increased significantly among Medicaid enrollees. Our results suggest that when the public health emergency ends, many people currently enrolled in Medicaid might no longer be eligible, particularly in Medicaid expansion states. Policy makers and employers should be prepared to help people who lose Medicaid eligibility identify and navigate enrollment in alternative sources of health insurance, including both Affordable Care Act Marketplace and employer-sponsored coverage.

Comparing Measures Of Functional Difficulty With Self-Identified Disability: Implications For Health Policy.

The Affordable Care Act mandated data collection standards to identify people with disabilities in federal surveys to better understand and address health disparities within this population. Most federal surveys use six questions from the American Community Survey (ACS-6) to identify people with disabilities, whereas many international surveys use the six-item Washington Group Short Set (WG-SS). The National Survey on Health and Disability (NSHD), which focuses on working-age adults ages 18-64, uses both question sets and contains other disability questions. We compared ACS-6 and WG-SS responses with self-reported disability types. The ACS-6 and WG-SS failed to identify 20 percent and 43 percent, respectively, of respondents who reported disabilities in response to other NSHD questions (a broader WG-SS version missed 4.4 percent of respondents). The ACS-6 and the WG-SS performed especially poorly in capturing respondents with psychiatric disabilities or chronic health conditions. Researchers and policy makers must augment or strengthen federal disability questions to improve the accuracy of disability prevalence counts, understanding of health disparities, and planning of appropriate services for a diverse and growing population.

Falling Short: Examining Medical Debt and Cost Avoidance in American Indian and Alaska Native Households.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) expanded access and assistance to many Americans, but health care remains prohibitively expensive for some, including people with insurance. The COVID-19 pandemic brought to the forefront the precarious conditions of those facing financial and health crises, including American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/ANs). Theoretically, AI/ANs should have some insulation because of their health care access through Indian Health Service (IHS) and ACA Tribal health insurance options. We use 2018 National Financial Capability Study's survey data to examine household medical debt and cost avoidance behaviors. Findings show AI/ANs are more likely to have medical debt and skip filling prescriptions due to costs than non-Hispanic Whites. Implications are AI/ANs may face financial and health burdens due to insufficient health coverage, possibly exacerbated by the shortcomings of IHS or other underlying factors. Future research should use a qualitative approach to elucidate factors influencing health care finances and behaviors of AI/AN communities.

Health insurance and financial hardship in cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Uninsured or underinsured individuals with cancer are likely to experience financial hardship, including forgoing healthcare or non-healthcare needs such as food, housing, or utilities. This study evaluates the association between health insurance coverage and financial hardship among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-sectional analysis used Patient Advocate Foundation (PAF) survey data from May to July 2020. Cancer survivors who previously received case management or financial aid from PAF self-reported challenges paying for healthcare and non-healthcare needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Associations between insurance coverage and payment challenges were estimated using Poisson regression with robust standard errors, which allowed for estimation of adjusted relative risks (aRR). Of 1,437 respondents, 74% had annual household incomes <$48,000. Most respondents were enrolled in Medicare (48%), 22% in employer-sponsored insurance, 13% in Medicaid, 6% in an Affordable Care Act (ACA) plan, and 3% were uninsured. Approximately 31% of respondents reported trouble paying for healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents who were uninsured (aRR 2.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.83-3.64), enrolled in an ACA plan (aRR 1.86, 95% CI 1.28-2.72), employer-sponsored insurance (aRR 1.70, 95% CI 1.23-2.34), or Medicare (aRR 1.49, 95% CI 1.09-2.03) had higher risk of trouble paying for healthcare compared to Medicaid enrollees. Challenges paying for non-healthcare needs were reported by 57% of respondents, with 40% reporting trouble paying for food, 31% housing, 28% transportation, and 20% internet. In adjusted models, Medicare and employer-sponsored insurance enrollees were less likely to have difficulties paying for non-healthcare needs compared to Medicaid beneficiaries. Despite 97% of our cancer survivor sample being insured, 31% and 57% reported trouble paying for healthcare and non-healthcare needs during the COVID-19 pandemic, respectively. Greater attention to both medical and non-medical financial burden is needed given the economic pressures of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Financial Instability of Federal Navigator Program Challenges Organizations to Help Uninsured Enroll in Health Insurance Coverage.

Under the Affordable Care Act, the federal Health Insurance Navigator Program aims to reduce the rate of uninsured in the United States. Under this program, navigators help people obtain insurance coverage through federally facilitated Marketplaces. However, the program's financial instability and substantial budget cuts created a severe shortage of navigator assistance for the uninsured and underserved. The COVID-19 pandemic added further pressure to the already-strained program. Our study examined how unstable and unpredictable federal funding and the COVID-19 pandemic affected organizations' navigator work in the federal program in 2020. The results study show (1) that navigator organizations provide vital, year-round resources; (2) that organizations feel pushed to direct scarce resources to grant management and cut service provision; and (3) that there are policy changes that can support navigator organizations in the future. Increased and ongoing federal investment is needed to support this vital health workforce and expand enrollment assistance for underserved communities.

Association between state Medicaid expansion status and health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To assess post-COVID-19 changes in insurance coverage, health behaviors, and self-assessed health among low-income, non-elderly adults by state Medicaid expansion status. DATA SOURCES: We used nationally representative survey data from the 2016 through 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). The sample was restricted to adults aged 19-64 with household income below 138 percent of the federal poverty level (N = 179,135). STUDY DESIGN: We examined a broad set of outcomes related to coverage, health behaviors, and self-assessed health available in the BRFSS. We used a difference-in-differences model to compare changes in outcomes for individuals living in the 35 states and DC that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act to those in the 15 non-expansion states before and after the COVID-19 pandemic commenced in March 2020. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: N/A. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We found that the expansions provided some protection for low-income people during the pandemic. In 2020, relative to earlier years, people in expansion states were more likely to report very good or excellent health (4.9 percentage points, 95%CI = 0.022, 0.076; p < 0.01) and physical health (-0.393 days of poor physical health in the past month, 95%CI = -0.714, -0.072; p < 0.05), lower rates of smoking (-1.9 percentage points, 95%CI = -0.041, 0.004; p < 0.10) and heavy drinking (-1.4 percentage points, 95%CI = -0.025, -0.004; p < 0.01), and higher flu vaccination rates (2.8 percentage points, 95%CI = 0.005, 0.051; p < 0.05) than those in non-expansion states. These benefits were particularly salient for Black and Hispanic individuals. We found no significant differences in insurance coverage, exercise, obesity, and self-assessed mental health between expansion and non-expansion states for the overall low-income sample. However, the expansion was associated with greater insurance coverage for Hispanic adults during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Investments in public health through expanding Medicaid may shield low-income populations from some of the health ramifications of public health emergencies.

Virginia Medicaid Expansion: New Members Report Reduced Financial Concerns During The COVID-19 Pandemic.

Medicaid is a critical antipoverty program. Since the Affordable Care Act expanded Medicaid eligibility, millions of newly eligible people have enrolled, creating positive financial improvements for low-income families. We examined the association of Virginia's 2019 Medicaid expansion and changes in health care-related and non-health-care-related financial needs among newly eligible Medicaid enrollees. Our unique survey collected responses between December 2018 and April 2019 from newly enrolled members reporting on experiences in the year before enrollment and between July 2020 and May 2021 from members reporting on experiences one year after enrollment. The follow-up period coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic. Medicaid enrollment was associated with decreases in concern about all financial needs assessed: housing, food, monthly bills, credit card and loan payments, and health care costs. These reductions were broadly similar across demographic subgroups and across the months of the pandemic that overlapped with the follow-up period. We add to the evidence that Medicaid expansion is a social safety-net policy that could improve equity among low-income families, potentially encouraging states that have yet to expand to do so.

COVID-19-related Medicaid enrollment in Medicaid expansion and non-expansion states.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: To explore whether expanded Medicaid helps mitigate the relationship between unemployment due to COVID and being uninsured. Unanticipated unemployment spells are generally associated with disruptions in health insurance coverage, which could also be the case for job losses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Expanded access to Medicaid may insulate some households from long uninsurance gaps due to job loss. DATA SOURCE: Phase 1 of the Census Bureau's Experimental Household Pulse Survey covering April 23, 2020-July 21, 2020. STUDY DESIGN: We compare differences in health insurance coverage source and status linked to recent lob losses attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic in states that expanded Medicaid against states that did not expand Medicaid. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Our analytical dataset was limited to 733,181 non-elderly adults aged 20-64. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Twenty-six percent of our study sample experienced an income loss between March 13, 2020, and the time leading up to the survey-16% experienced job losses (e.g., layoff, furlough) due to the COVID-19 crisis, and 11% had other reasons they were not working. COVID-linked job losses were associated with a 20 (p < 0.01) percentage-point (PPT) lower likelihood of having employer-sponsored health insurance (ESI). Relative to persons in states that did not expand Medicaid, persons in Medicaid expansion states experiencing COVID-linked job losses were 9 PPT (p < 0.01) more likely to report having Medicaid and 7 PPT (p < 0.01) less likely to be uninsured. The largest increases in Medicaid enrollment were among people who, based on their 2019 incomes, would not have qualified for Medicaid previously. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that expanded Medicaid eligibility may allow households to stabilize health care needs and they should become detached from private health coverage due to job loss during the pandemic. Households negatively affected by the pandemic are using Medicaid to insure themselves against the potential health risks they would incur while being unemployed.

Comparison of Unemployment-Related Health Insurance Coverage Changes in Medicaid Expansion vs Nonexpansion States During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with increased unemployment rates and long periods when individuals were without health insurance. Little is known about how Medicaid expansion facilitates Medicaid enrollment as a buffer to coverage loss owing to unemployment. Objective: To compare changes in health insurance coverage status associated with pandemic-related unemployment among previously employed adults in states that have vs have not expanded Medicaid eligibility. Design Setting and Participants: This cohort study included US adults aged 27 to 64 years who were employed at baseline in the 2020 to 2021 Current Population Survey's Annual Social and Economic Supplement, which included calendar years 2019 to 2020 (32 462 person-years). Data analyses were conducted between November 2021 and April 2022. Exposures: Job loss (ie, new unemployment) experienced during 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were coverage status (ie, uninsured status) and source of coverage (ie, employer sponsored, marketplace, and Medicaid). Using 2-way person-by-year fixed-effects regression models, changes in coverage status associated with unemployment in states that expanded Medicaid were compared with states that did not expand Medicaid. Additional analyses were performed based on prepandemic coverage status. Results: The cohort included 16 231 adults (mean age, 46.8 [95% CI, 46.6-47.0] years; 51.6% women). New unemployment was associated with an increase of 2.9 (95% CI, 1.1-4.6) percentage points (P = .002) in the proportion of uninsured adults in Medicaid expansion states and an increase of 10.7 (95% CI, 2.4-18.9) percentage points (P = .01) in nonexpansion states. Workers were 5.4 (95% CI, 1.9-8.9) percentage points (P = .003) more likely to enroll in Medicaid after a job loss if they lived in a Medicaid expansion state compared with workers experiencing job loss in nonexpansion states. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of US adults, unemployment-related Medicaid enrollment was more frequent in Medicaid expansion states during the COVID-19 pandemic. Medicaid expansion led to a smaller increase in uninsured adults because those who lost private insurance coverage (eg, employer sponsored) appeared more able to transition to Medicaid after job loss.

Evidence and Implications of the Affordable Care Act for Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Diabetes Health During and Beyond the Pandemic.

Amid the global pandemic, it becomes more apparent that diabetes is a pressing health concern because racial/ethnic minorities with underlying diabetes conditions have been disproportionately affected. The study proposes a multiyear examination to document the role of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes health. Using the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System from 2011 to 2019, the study with a pre-post design investigated changes in access to care and diabetes health among non-White minorities compared with Whites before and after the ACA by conducting multivariable linear regression, with state-fixed effects and robust standard errors. Compared with Whites, racial/ethnic minorities showed significant improvements in health insurance coverage, having a personal doctor, and not seeing a doctor because of cost. Blacks (3.2% points, P ≤ 0.000), Hispanics (1.6% points, P = 0.001), and "other" racial/ethnic group (1.5% points, P = 0.003) experienced a greater increase in diagnosed prediabetes than Whites, whereas no and small differences were found in diagnosed diabetes and obesity, respectively. The yearly comparisons of changes in diagnosed prediabetes showed that Blacks compared with Whites had a growing increase from 1.2% points (P = 0.001) in 2014 to 3.3% points (P = 0.001) in 2019. Insurance coverage has declined after 2016, and obesity had an increasing trend across race/ethnicity. The ACA had a positive role in improving access to care and identifying those at risk for diabetes to a larger extent among racial/ethnic minorities. However, the policy impacts have been diminishing in recent years. Continued efforts are needed for sustained policy effects.