ABSTRACT
As of August 2020, the United States is the global epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging data suggests that "essential" workers, who are disproportionately more likely to be racial/ethnic minorities and immigrants, bear a disproportionate degree of risk. We used publicly available data to build a series of spatial autoregressive models assessing county level associations between COVID-19 mortality and (1) percentage of individuals engaged in farm work, (2) percentage of households without a fluent, adult English-speaker, (3) percentage of uninsured individuals under the age of 65, and (4) percentage of individuals living at or below the federal poverty line. We further adjusted these models for total population, population density, and number of days since the first reported case in a given county. We found that across all counties that had reported a case of COVID-19 as of July 12, 2020 (n = 3024), a higher percentage of farmworkers, a higher percentage of residents living in poverty, higher density, higher population, and a higher percentage of residents over the age of 65 were all independently and significantly associated with a higher number of deaths in a county. In urban counties (n = 115), a higher percentage of farmworkers, higher density, and larger population were all associated with a higher number of deaths, while lower rates of insurance coverage in a county was independently associated with fewer deaths. In non-urban counties (n = 2909), these same patterns held true, with higher percentages of residents living in poverty and senior residents also significantly associated with more deaths. Taken together, our findings suggest that farm workers may face unique risks of contracting and dying from COVID-19, and that these risks are independent of poverty, insurance, or linguistic accessibility of COVID-19 health campaigns.
Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Socioeconomic Factors , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Demography/statistics & numerical data , Emigrants and Immigrants/statistics & numerical data , Farmers/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , United StatesABSTRACT
The annual Kaiser Family Foundation Employer Health Benefits Survey is the benchmark survey of the cost and coverage of employer-sponsored health benefits in the United States. The 2020 survey was designed and largely fielded before the full extent of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had been felt by employers. Data collection took place from mid-January through July, with half of the interviews being completed in the first three months of the year. Most of the key metrics that we measure-including premiums and cost sharing-reflect employers' decisions made before the full impacts of the pandemic were felt. We found that in 2020 the average annual premium for single coverage rose 4 percent, to $7,470, and the average annual premium for family coverage also rose 4 percent, to $21,342. Covered workers, on average, contributed 17 percent of the cost for single coverage and 27 percent of the cost for family coverage. Fifty-six percent of firms offered health benefits to at least some of their workers, and 64 percent of workers were covered at their own firm. Many large employers reported having "very broad" provider networks, but many recognized that their largest plan had a narrower network for mental health providers.
Subject(s)
Benchmarking , Coronavirus Infections , Cost Sharing/statistics & numerical data , Health Benefit Plans, Employee , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , COVID-19 , Health Benefit Plans, Employee/organization & administration , Health Benefit Plans, Employee/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Surveys and Questionnaires , United StatesSubject(s)
Aging , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Aged , COVID-19 , Empathy , Homes for the Aged/organization & administration , Humans , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Nursing Homes/organization & administration , Pandemics , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Any physician can look out over the COVID-19 landscape and see important areas of health care tied to their specialty that are being downplayed or ignored as resources pour into fighting the pandemic and scared patients chose not to come to their doctors' offices.
Subject(s)
Communicable Disease Control , Coronavirus Infections , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Change Management , Communicable Disease Control/instrumentation , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Coronavirus Infections/economics , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Health Care Rationing/methods , Humans , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Mental Health/trends , Pandemics/economics , Pediatrics/methods , Pediatrics/trends , Pneumonia, Viral/economics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors , Texas/epidemiologyABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Eligibility Determination/statistics & numerical data , Employment/statistics & numerical data , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Medicaid/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Databases, Factual , Eligibility Determination/methods , Employment/economics , Female , Humans , Incidence , Insurance, Health/organization & administration , Male , Medically Uninsured/statistics & numerical data , Needs Assessment , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Time Factors , United StatesABSTRACT
Four decades of neoliberal health policies have left the United States with a health care system that prioritizes the profits of large corporate actors, denies needed care to tens of millions, is extraordinarily fragmented and inefficient, and was ill prepared to address the COVID-19 pandemic. The payment system has long rewarded hospitals for providing elective surgical procedures to well-insured patients while penalizing those providing the most essential and urgent services, causing hospital revenues to plummet as elective procedures were cancelled during the pandemic. Before the recession caused by the pandemic, tens of millions of Americans were unable to afford care, compromising their physical and financial health; deep-pocketed corporate interests were increasingly dominating the hospital industry and taking over physicians' practices; and insurers' profits hit record levels. Meanwhile, yawning class-based and racial inequities in care and health outcomes remain and have even widened. Recent data highlight the failure of policy strategies based on market models and the need to shift to a nonprofit social insurance model.
Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Costs and Cost Analysis , Delivery of Health Care/economics , Health Services Accessibility/organization & administration , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Insurance Coverage/economics , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Insurance, Health/economics , Insurance, Health/statistics & numerical data , Medicare/economics , Pandemics , Politics , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
As a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, virtually all in-person outpatient visits were canceled in many parts of the country between March and May 2020. We sought to estimate the potential impact of COVID-19 on the operating expenses and revenues of primary care practices. Using a microsimulation model incorporating national data on primary care use, staffing, expenditures, and reimbursements, including telemedicine visits, we estimated that over the course of calendar year 2020, primary care practices would be expected to lose 67,774 in gross revenue per full-time-equivalent physician (the difference between 2020 gross revenue with COVID-19 and the anticipated gross revenue if COVID-19 had not occurred). We further estimated that the cost at a national level to neutralize the revenue losses caused by COVID-19 among primary care practices would be $15.1 billion. This could more than double if COVID-19 telemedicine payment policies are not sustained.
Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Health Expenditures , Insurance Coverage/economics , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Primary Health Care/economics , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/economics , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Female , Humans , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Male , Models, Economic , Pandemics/economics , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/economics , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , United StatesABSTRACT
The Supreme Court holds that the government owes insurers the full risk corridors payments due under the Affordable Care Act.