Black-White Disparities in Asthma Hospitalizations and ED Visits Among Medicaid-Enrolled Children.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Asthma is a common, potentially serious childhood chronic condition that disproportionately afflicts Black children. Hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits for asthma can often be prevented. Nearly half of children with asthma are covered by Medicaid, which should facilitate access to care to manage and treat symptoms. We provide new evidence on racial disparities in asthma hospitalizations and ED visits among Medicaid-enrolled children. METHODS: We used comprehensive Medicaid claims data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System. Our study population included 279 985 Medicaid-enrolled children with diagnosed asthma. We identified asthma hospitalizations and ED visits occurring in 2019. We estimated differences in the odds of asthma hospitalizations and ED visits for non-Hispanic Black versus non-Hispanic white children, adjusting for sex, age, Medicaid eligibility group, Medicaid plan type, state, and rurality. RESULTS: In 2019, among Black children with asthma, 1.2% had an asthma hospitalization and 8.0% had an asthma ED visit compared with 0.5% and 3.4% of white children with a hospitalization and ED visit, respectively. After adjusting for other characteristics, the rates for Black children were more than twice the rates for white children (hospitalization adjusted odds ratio 2.45, 95% confidence interval 2.23-2.69; ED adjusted odds ratio 2.42; 95% confidence interval 2.33-2.51). CONCLUSIONS: There are stark racial disparities in asthma hospitalizations and ED visits among Medicaid-enrolled children with asthma. To diminish these disparities, it will be important to implement solutions that address poor quality care, discriminatory treatment in health care settings, and the structural factors that disproportionately expose Black children to asthma triggers and access barriers.

Racialized economic segregation and potentially preventable hospitalizations among Medicaid/CHIP-enrolled children.

OBJECTIVE: To examine geographic variation in preventable hospitalizations among Medicaid/CHIP-enrolled children and to test the association between preventable hospitalizations and a novel measure of racialized economic segregation, which captures residential segregation within ZIP codes based on race and income simultaneously. DATA SOURCES: We supplement claims and enrollment data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) representing over 12 million Medicaid/CHIP enrollees in 24 states with data from the Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project measuring racialized economic segregation. STUDY DESIGN: We measure preventable hospitalizations by ZIP code among children. We use logistic regression to estimate the association between ZIP code-level measures of racialized economic segregation and preventable hospitalizations, controlling for sex, age, rurality, eligibility group, managed care plan type, and state. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: We include children ages 0-17 continuously enrolled in Medicaid/CHIP throughout 2018. We use validated algorithms to identify preventable hospitalizations, which account for characteristics of the pediatric population and exclude children with certain underlying conditions. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Preventable hospitalizations vary substantially across ZIP codes, and a quarter of ZIP codes have rates exceeding 150 hospitalizations per 100,000 Medicaid-enrolled children per year. Preventable hospitalization rates vary significantly by level of racialized economic segregation: children living in the ZIP codes that have the highest concentration of low-income, non-Hispanic Black residents have adjusted rates of 181 per 100,000 children, compared to 110 per 100,000 for children in ZIP codes that have the highest concentration of high-income, non-Hispanic white residents (p < 0.01). This pattern is driven by asthma-related preventable hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid-enrolled children's risk of preventable hospitalizations depends on where they live, and children in economically and racially segregated neighborhoods-specifically those with higher concentrations of low-income, non-Hispanic Black residents-are at particularly high risk. It will be important to identify and implement Medicaid/CHIP and other policies that increase access to high-quality preventive care and that address structural drivers of children's health inequities.

How did the Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion Affect Coverage and Access to Care for Low-Income Parents Who Were Eligible for Medicaid Before the Law Was Passed?

We use the National Health Interview Survey from 2010 to 2017 and a difference-in-differences approach to assess the impact of the Affordable Care Cct (ACA) Medicaid expansion on coverage and access to care for a subset of low-income parents who were already eligible for Medicaid when the ACA was passed. Any gains in coverage would typically be expected to improve access to and affordability of care, but there were concerns that by increasing the total population with coverage and thereby straining provider capacity, that the ACA would reduce access to care for individuals who were already eligible for Medicaid prior to the passage of the law. We found that the expansion reduced uninsurance among previously eligible parents by 12.6 percentage points, or a 40 percent decline from their 2012-2013 uninsurance rate. Moreover, these effects grew stronger over time with a 55 percent decline in uninsurance 2 to 3 years following expansion. Though we identified very few statistically significant impacts of the expansion on affordability of care, descriptive estimates show substantial declines in unmet needs due to cost and problems paying family medical bills. Descriptively, we find no significant increases in provider access problems for previously eligible parents, and very limited evidence that the Medicaid expansion was associated with more constrained provider capacity. Though sample size constraints were likely a factor in our ability to identify impacts on access and affordability measures, our overall findings suggest that the ACA Medicaid expansion positively affected our sample of low-income parents who met pre-ACA Medicaid eligibility criteria.

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.

ACA Medicaid Expansion and Insurance Coverage Among New Mothers Living in Poverty.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid plays a critical role during the perinatal period, but pregnancy-related Medicaid eligibility only extends for 60 days post partum. In 2014, the Affordable Care Act's (ACA's) Medicaid expansions increased adult Medicaid eligibility to 138% of the federal poverty level in participating states, allowing eligible new mothers to remain covered after pregnancy-related coverage expires. We investigate the impact of ACA Medicaid expansions on insurance coverage among new mothers living in poverty. METHODS: We define new mothers living in poverty as women ages 19 to 44 with incomes below the federal poverty level who report giving birth in the past 12 months. We use 2010-2017 American Community Survey data and a difference-in-differences approach using parental Medicaid-eligibility thresholds to estimate the effect of ACA Medicaid expansions on insurance coverage among poor new mothers. RESULTS: A 100-percentage-point increase in parental Medicaid-eligibility is associated with an 8.8-percentage-point decrease (P < .001) in uninsurance, a 13.2-percentage-point increase (P < .001) in Medicaid coverage, and a 4.4-percentage-point decrease in private or other coverage (P = .001) among poor new mothers. The average increase in Medicaid eligibility is associated with a 28% decrease in uninsurance, a 13% increase in Medicaid coverage, and an 18% decline in private or other insurance among poor new mothers in expansion states. However, in 2017, there were ∼142 000 remaining uninsured, poor new mothers. CONCLUSIONS: ACA Medicaid expansions are associated with increased Medicaid coverage and reduced uninsurance among poor new mothers. Opportunities remain for expansion and nonexpansion states to increase insurance coverage among new mothers living in poverty.

Neonatal abstinence syndrome management in California birth hospitals: results of a statewide survey.

OBJECTIVE: Assess management of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) in California hospitals to identify potential opportunities to expand the use of best practices. STUDY DESIGN: We fielded an internet-based survey of 37 questions to medical directors or nurse managers at 145 birth hospitals in California. RESULTS: Seventy-five participants (52%) responded. Most respondents reported having at least one written protocol for managing NAS, but gaps included protocols for pharmacologic management. Newer tools for assessing NAS severity were not commonly used. About half reported usually or always using nonpharmacologic strategies; there is scope for increasing breastfeeding when recommended, skin-to-skin care, and rooming-in. CONCLUSIONS: We found systematic gaps in care for infants with NAS in a sample of California birth hospitals, as well as opportunities to spread best practices. Adoption of new approaches will vary across hospitals. A concerted statewide effort to facilitate such implementation has strong potential to increase access to evidence-based treatment for infants and mothers.

Opioid and Substance Use Disorder and Receipt of Treatment Among Parents Living With Children in the United States, 2015-2017.

PURPOSE: Little is known about the prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD) among parents who are living with children and their receipt of treatment, which could reduce the harmful effects of OUD on families. METHODS: We used 2015-2017 cross-sectional national survey data to estimate prevalence and treatment of opioid use disorder and other substance use disorders (SUD) among parents living with children. RESULTS: An estimated 623,000 parents with opioid use disorder are living with children, and less than one-third of these parents received treatment for illicit drug or alcohol use at a specialty facility or doctor's office. Treatment rates were even lower among the more than 4,000,000 parents estimated to have other SUDs. CONCLUSION: Many parents in both groups have concurrent mental health issues, including suicidal thoughts and behavior. Primary care practices can play a critical role in screening and facilitating treatment initiation.

Changes in primary care access at community health centers between 2012/2013 and 2016.

OBJECTIVE: To compare access at community health centers (CHCs) vs private offices (non-CHCs) under the Affordable Care Act. DATA SOURCE: Ten state primary care audit conducted in 2012/2013 and 2016. STUDY DESIGN: CHCs and non-CHCs were called. We calculated difference in differences comparing CHCs vs non-CHCs by caller insurance type. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In both rounds, Medicaid and uninsured callers had higher appointment rates at CHC than non-CHCs. CHC appointment rates significantly increased between 2012/2013 and 2016 for both employer-sponsored and Medicaid callers, with no significant wait time changes. Appointment rates increased (13.5% points, P < 0.001) and wait times decreased (-5.7 days, P = 0.017) at CHCs relative to non-CHCs for employer-sponsored insurance. CONCLUSION: Appointment availability at CHCs improved after ACA implementation, without increased wait times.

Medicaid/CHIP Participation Reached 93.7 Percent Among Eligible Children In 2016.

Children's participation in Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) rose by 5 percentage points between 2013 and 2016. As a result, 1.7 million fewer Medicaid/CHIP-eligible children were uninsured in 2016. Participation was lower among adults than among children, and nearly 6 million Medicaid-eligible adults were uninsured in 2016.

Most Primary Care Physicians Provide Appointments, But Affordability Remains A Barrier For The Uninsured.

The US uninsurance rate has nearly been cut in half under the Affordable Care Act, and access to care has improved for the newly insured, but less is known about how the remaining uninsured have fared. In 2012-13 and again in 2016 we conducted an experiment in which trained auditors called primary care offices, including federally qualified health centers, in ten states. The auditors portrayed uninsured patients seeking appointments and information on the cost of care and payment arrangements. In both time periods, about 80 percent of uninsured callers received appointments, provided they could pay the full cash amount. However, fewer than one in seven callers in both time periods received appointments for which they could make a payment arrangement to bring less than the full amount to the visit. Visit prices in both time periods averaged about $160. Trends were largely similar across states, despite their varying changes in the uninsurance rate. Federally qualified health centers provided the highest rates of primary care appointment availability and discounts for uninsured low-income patients.

Medicaid Versus Marketplace Coverage For Near-Poor Adults: Effects On Out-Of-Pocket Spending And Coverage.

In states that expanded Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act, nonelderly near-poor adults-those with family incomes of 100-138 percent of the federal poverty level-are generally eligible for Medicaid, with no premiums and minimal cost sharing. In states that did not expand eligibility, these adults may qualify for premium tax credits to purchase Marketplace plans that have out-of-pocket premiums and cost-sharing requirements. We used data for 2010-15 to estimate the effects of Medicaid expansion on coverage and out-of-pocket expenses, compared to the effects of Marketplace coverage. For adults with family incomes of 100-138 percent of poverty, living in a Medicaid expansion state was associated with a 4.5-percentage-point reduction in the probability of being uninsured, a $344 decline in average total out-of-pocket spending, a 4.1-percentage-point decline in high out-of-pocket spending burden (that is, spending more than 10 percent of income), and a 7.7-percentage-point decline in the probability of having any out-of-pocket spending relative to living in a nonexpansion state. These findings suggest that policies that substitute Marketplace for Medicaid eligibility could lower coverage rates and increase out-of-pocket expenses for enrollees.

Newly Eligible Enrollees In Medicaid Spend Less And Use Less Care Than Those Previously Eligible.

Understanding the health care spending and utilization of various types of Medicaid enrollees is important for assessing the budgetary implications of both expansion and contraction in Medicaid enrollment. Despite the intense debate surrounding the Affordable Care Act (ACA), however, little information is available on the spending and utilization patterns of the nonelderly adult enrollees who became newly eligible for Medicaid under the ACA. Using data for 2012-14 from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we compared health care spending and utilization of newly eligible Medicaid enrollees with those of nondisabled adults who were previously eligible and enrolled. We found that average monthly expenditures for newly eligible enrollees were $180-21 percent less than the $228 average for previously eligible enrollees. Utilization differences between these groups likely contributed to this differential.

Off-Marketplace Enrollment Remains An Important Part Of Health Insurance Under The ACA.

The introduction of Marketplaces under the Affordable Care Act greatly expanded individual-market health insurance coverage in 2014, but millions of adults continued to purchase individual coverage outside of the Marketplaces. They were more likely to be male, be white, have higher incomes, and be in excellent or very good health, compared to Marketplace enrollees.

Medicaid Expansion Increased Coverage, Improved Affordability, And Reduced Psychological Distress For Low-Income Parents.

Despite receiving less attention than their childless counterparts, low-income parents also experienced significant expansions of Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). We used data for the period 2010-15 from the National Health Interview Survey to examine the impacts of the ACA's Medicaid expansion on coverage, access and use, affordability, and health status for low-income parents. We found that eligibility expansions increased coverage, reduced problems paying medical bills, and reduced severe psychological distress. We found only limited evidence of increased use of care among parents in states with the smallest expansions, and no significant effects of the expansions on general health status or problems affording prescription drugs or mental health care. Together, our results suggest that the improvements in mental health status may be driven by reduced stress associated with improved financial security from insurance coverage. We also found large missed opportunities for low-income parents in states that did not expand Medicaid: If these states had expanded Medicaid, uninsurance rates for low-income parents would have fallen by an additional 28 percent.

Primary Care Appointment Availability and the ACA Insurance Expansions.

In the current debate in Congress over the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the issue of provider access is a major concern. Fortunately, our 10-state audit study published in JAMA Internal Medicine finds that primary care appointment availability for new patients with Medicaid increased 5.4 percentage points between 2012 and 2016 and remained stable for patients with private coverage. Over the same period, both Medicaid patients and the privately insured experienced a one-day increase in median wait times. Higher appointment availability for Medicaid patients is a surprising result given the increase in demand for care from millions of new Medicaid enrollees. In this Issue Brief, we summarize our study's findings, expand on possible explanations, and extend the analysis by examining the relationship between appointment availability and state-level Medicaid expansions. We find that access to primary care increased for Medicaid patients only in states that extended Medicaid eligibility to low-income, nonelderly adults. Combined, these results suggest coverage provisions in the ACA have not overwhelmed primary care capacity.

Access to Primary Care Appointments Following 2014 Insurance Expansions.

PURPOSE: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) expanded coverage to roughly 12 million individuals by mid-2014 and 20 million by 2016, raising concern about the capacity of the primary care system to absorb these individuals. We set out to determine how justified the concern was. METHODS: We used an audit design in which simulated patients called primary care practices seeking new-patient appointments in 10 diverse states (Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Texas) from November 2012 through March 2013 and from May 2014 through July 2014, before and after the major ACA insurance expansions. Callers were randomly assigned to scripts specifying either private or Medicaid insurance and called only offices identified as "in network" for each plan. RESULTS: We completed 5,385 private insurance and 4,352 Medicaid calls in 2012-2013 and 2,424 private insurance and 2,474 Medicaid calls in 2014. Overall appointment rates for private insurance remained stable from 2012 (84.7%) to 2014 (85.8%) with Massachusetts and Pennsylvania experiencing significant increases. Overall, Medicaid appointment rates increased 9.7 percentage points (57.9% to 67.6%) with substantial variation by state. Across all callers, median wait times for those obtaining an appointment were 7 days in 2012 and 5 days in 2014, but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to widespread concern, we find no evidence that the millions of individuals newly insured through the ACA decreased new-patient appointment availability across 10 states as shown by stable wait times and appointment rates for private insurance as of mid-2014.