Has the Expansion of Health Insurance Coverage via the Implementation of the Affordable Care Act Influenced Inequities in Coronary Revascularization in New York City?

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: In 2014, New York City implemented the Affordable Care Act (ACA) leading to insurance coverage gains intended to reduce inequities in healthcare services use. The paper documents inequalities in coronary revascularization procedures (percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting) usage by race/ethnicity, gender, insurance type, and income before and after the implementation of the ACA. METHODS: We used data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project to identify NYC patients hospitalized with the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or congestive heart failure (CHF) in 2011-2013 (pre-ACA) and 2014-2017 (post-ACA). Next, we calculated age-adjusted rates of CAD and/or CHF hospitalization and coronary revascularization. Logistic regression models were used to identify the variables associated with receiving a coronary revascularization in each period. RESULTS: Age-adjusted rates of CAD and/or CHF hospitalization and coronary revascularization in patients 45-64 years of age and 65 years of age and older declined in the post-ACA period. Disparities by gender, race/ethnicity, insurance type, and income in the use of coronary revascularization persist in the post-ACA period. CONCLUSIONS: Although this health care reform law led to the narrowing of inequities in the use of coronary revascularization, disparities persist in NYC in the post-ACA period.

Access to outpatient care in Manhattan and Paris: A tale of real change in two world cities.

France's system of universal health insurance (UHI) offers more equitable access to outpatient care than the patchwork system in the U.S., which does not have a UHI system. We investigate the degree to which the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) has narrowed the gap in access to outpatient care between France and the U.S. To do so, we update a previous comparison of access to outpatient care in Manhattan and Paris as measured by age-adjusted rates of hospital discharge for avoidable hospital conditions (AHCs). We compare these rates immediately before and after the implementation of the ACA in 2014. We find that AHC rates in Manhattan declined by about 25% and are now lower than those in Paris. Despite evidence that access to outpatient care in Manhattan has improved, Manhattanites continue to experience greater residence-based neighborhood inequalities in AHC rates than Parisians. In Paris, there was a 3% increase in AHC rates and neighborhood-level inequalities increased significantly. Our analysis highlights the persistence of access barriers to outpatient care in Manhattan, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities, even following the expansion of health insurance coverage.

Neighborhood inequalities and the decline of infant mortality in São Paulo.

This paper documents changes in infant mortality (IM) rates in São Paulo, Brazil, between 2003 and 2013 and examines the association among neighborhood characteristics and IM. We investigate the extent to which increased use of health care services and improvements in economic and social conditions are associated with reductions in IM. Using data from the Brazilian Census and the São Paulo Secretaria Municipal da Saúde/SMS, we conducted a longitudinal analysis of panel data in all 96 districts of São Paulo for every year between 2003 and 2013. Our regression model includes district level measures that reflect economic, health care and social determinants of IM. We find that investments in health care have contributed to lower IM rates in the city, but the direct effect of increased spending is most evident for people living in São Paulo's middle- and high-income neighborhoods. Improvements in social conditions were more strongly associated with IM declines than increases in the use of health care among São Paulo's low-income neighborhoods. To reduce health inequalities, policies should target benefits to lower-income neighborhoods. Subsequent research should document the consequences of recent changes in Brazil's economic capacity and commitment to public health spending for population health.

Xenotransplantation Clinical Trials and the Need for Community Engagement.

There are several ethical concerns facing first-in-human clinical trials involving xenotransplantation. Who should participate in these trials? If we limit trial participation to those who have exhausted other treatment options, how can we avoid therapeutic misconception? How should we balance the desire for long-term monitoring of trial participants against the well-established principle that research participants have the right to withdraw from research? Finally, how should we balance concerns about equitable access to these trials with deep mistrust of the scientific community? In particular, should xenotransplant clinical trials attempt to address well-known inequities in clinical trial participation by race and ethnicity? In this commentary, I argue that clinical investigators and regulators have an obligation to engage with underrepresented communities to develop answers to these questions.

The evolution of infant mortality and neighbourhood inequalities in four world cities: 1988-2016.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the level of neighbourhood inequalities in infant mortality (IM) rates in the urban core of four world cities and to examine the association between neighbourhood-level income and IM. We compare our findings with those published in 2004 to better understand how these city health systems have evolved. METHODS: We compare IM rates among and within the four cities using data from four periods: 1988-1992; 1993-1997; 2003-2008 and 2012-2016. Using a maximum-likelihood negative binomial regression model that controls for births, we predict the relationship between neighbourhood-level income and IM. RESULTS: IM rates have declined in all four cities. Neighbourhood-level income is statistically significant for New York and, for the two most recent periods, in Paris. In contrast, there is no significant relationship between neighbourhood income and IM in London or Tokyo. CONCLUSIONS: Despite programmes to reduce IM inequalities at national and local levels, these persist in New York. Until the early part of this century, none of the other cities experienced a relationship between neighbourhood income and IM, but growing income inequalities within Paris have changed this situation. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Policy-makers in these cities should focus on better understanding the social and economic factors associated with neighbourhood inequalities in IM.

Public Deliberation about Gene Editing in the Wild.

Genetic editing technologies have long been used to modify domesticated nonhuman animals and plants. Recently, attention and funding have also been directed toward projects for modifying nonhuman organisms in the shared environment-that is, in the "wild." Interest in gene editing nonhuman organisms for wild release is motivated by a variety of goals, and such releases hold the possibility of significant, potentially transformative benefit. The technologies also pose risks and are often surrounded by a high uncertainty. Given the stakes, scientists and advisory bodies have called for public engagement in the science, ethics, and governance of gene editing research in nonhuman organisms. Most calls for public engagement lack details about how to design a broad public deliberation, including questions about participation, how to structure the conversations, how to report on the content, and how to link the deliberations to policy. We summarize the key design elements that can improve broad public deliberations about gene editing in the wild.

Envisioning Complex Futures: Collective Narratives and Reasoning in Deliberations over Gene Editing in the Wild.

The development of technologies for gene editing in the wild has the potential to generate tremendous benefit, but also raises important concerns. Using some form of public deliberation to inform decisions about the use of these technologies is appealing, but public deliberation about them will tend to fall back on various forms of heuristics to account for limited personal experience with these technologies. Deliberations are likely to involve narrative reasoning-or reasoning embedded within stories. These are used to help people discuss risks, processes, and fears that are otherwise difficult to convey. In this article, we identify three forms of collective narrative that are particularly relevant to debates about modifying genes in the wild. Our purpose is not to privilege any particular narrative, but to encourage people involved in deliberations to make these narratives transparent. Doing so can help guard against the way some narratives-referred to here as "crafted narratives"-may be manipulated by powerful elites and concentrated economic interests for their own strategic ends.

Regulating Gene Editing in the Wild: Building Regulatory Capacity to Incorporate Deliberative Democracy.

The release of genetically engineered organisms into the shared environment raises scientific, ethical, and societal issues. Using some form of democratic deliberation to provide the public with a voice on the policies that govern these technologies is important, but there has not been enough attention to how we should connect public deliberation to the existing regulatory process. Drawing on lessons from previous public deliberative efforts by U.S. federal agencies, we identify several practical issues that will need to be addressed if relevant federal agencies are to undertake public deliberative activities to inform decision-making about gene editing in the wild. We argue that, while agencies may have institutional capacity to undertake public deliberative activities, there may not be sufficient political support for them to do so. Advocates of public deliberation need to make a stronger case to Congress about why federal agencies should be encouraged and supported to conduct public deliberations.

Variation in end-of-life care and hospital palliative care among hospitals and local authorities: A preliminary contribution of big data.

BACKGROUND: Many studies explore the clinical and ethical dimensions of care at the end-of-life, but fewer use administrative data to examine individual and geographic differences, including the use of palliative care. AIM: Provide a population-based perspective on end-of-life and hospital palliative care among local authorities and hospitals in France. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of care received by 17,928 decedents 65 and over (last 6 months of life), using the French national health insurance database. RESULTS: 55.7% of decedents died in acute-care hospitals; 79% were hospitalized in them at least once; 11.7% were admitted at least once for hospital palliative care. Among 31 academic medical centers, intensive care unit admissions ranged from 12% to 67.4%; hospital palliative care admissions, from 2% to 30.6%. Across local authorities, for intensive care unit days and hospital palliative care admissions, the ratios between the values at the third and the first quartile were 2.4 and 1.5. The odds of admission for hospital palliative care or to an intensive care unit for more than 7 days were more than twice as high among people ⩽85 years (aOR = 2.11 (1.84-2.43) and aOR = 2.59 (2.12-3.17), respectively). The odds of admission for hospital palliative care were about 25% lower (p = 0.04) among decedents living in local authorities with the lowest levels of education than those with the highest levels. CONCLUSION: The variation we document in end-of-life and hospital palliative care across different categories of hospitals and 95 local authorities raises important questions as to what constitutes appropriate hospital use and intensity at the end-of-life.

Medicaid Waivers and Tenancy Supports for Individuals Experiencing Homelessness: Implementation Challenges in Four States.

Policy Points Medicaid policymakers have a growing interest in addressing homelessness as a social determinant of health and driver of the potentially avoidable use of expensive medical services. Drawing on extensive document reviews and in-depth interviews in four early-adopter states, we examined the implementation of Medicaid's Section 1115 demonstration waivers to test strategies to finance tenancy support services for persons experiencing or at risk of homelessness. CONTEXT: The Affordable Care Act extended Medicaid eligibility to large numbers of individuals experiencing or at risk of homelessness. This legislative development and the growing recognition of homelessness as a significant social determinant of health have encouraged advocates and policymakers to seek new ways to use Medicaid to provide housing supports. METHODS: We conducted 28 semistructured interviews with 36 stakeholders in four states. The stakeholders were government administrators, health care providers, nonprofit housing staff, and consultants. We supplemented these interviews with extensive reviews of public documents, media accounts, think-tank reports, and published literature. We also conducted a systematic inductive qualitative analysis. FINDINGS: We identified seven challenges to the successful implementation of tenancy support demonstration projects: resolving the housing supply and NIMBY, removing silos between health care and homeless services providers, enrolling and retaining the target populations in Medicaid, contracting with and paying tenancy support providers, recruiting and retaining key workers, ensuring Medicaid's waiver durability, and reducing administrative crowd-out and waiver burden. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding these challenges, three of the four states have made significant progress in launching their initiatives. At this point, the fourth state has delayed its start-up to consider alternatives to a Medicaid demonstration waiver to provide tenancy supports. The experience of the four states suggests lessons for Medicaid officials in other jurisdictions that are interested in pursuing tenancy support initiatives. Nevertheless, the limitations of tenancy support waiver programs suggest that federal policymakers should consider allowing states to more directly subsidize housing costs for those experiencing or at risk of homelessness as an optional Medicaid benefit.

Unsanitized and Unfair: How COVID-19 Bailout Funds Refuel Inequity in the US Health Care System.

CONTEXT: The CARES Act of 2020 allocated provider relief funds to hospitals and other providers. We investigate whether these funds were distributed in a way that responded fairly to COVID-19-related medical and financial need. The US health care system is bifurcated into the "haves" and "have nots." The health care safety net hospitals, which were already financially weak, cared for the bulk of COVID-19 cases. In contrast, the "have" hospitals suffered financially because their most profitable procedures are elective and were postponed during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: To obtain relief fund data for each hospital in the United States, we started with data from the HHS website. We use the RAND Hospital Data tool to analyze how fund distributions are associated with hospital characteristics. FINDINGS: Our analysis reveals that the "have" hospitals with the most days of cash on hand received more funding per bed than hospitals with fewer than 50 days of cash on hand (the "have nots"). CONCLUSIONS: Despite extreme racial inequities, which COVID-19 exposed early in the pandemic, the federal government rewards those hospitals that cater to the most privileged in the United States, leaving hospitals that predominantly serve low-income people of color with less.

Civic Learning for a Democracy in Crisis.

This essay introduces a special report from The Hastings Center entitled Democracy in Crisis: Civic Learning and the Reconstruction of Common Purpose, which grew out of a project supported by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. This multiauthored report offers wide-ranging assessments of increasing polarization and partisanship in American government and politics, and it proposes constructive responses to this in the provision of objective information, institutional reforms in government and the electoral system, and a reexamination of cultural and political values needed if democracy is to function well in a pluralistic and diverse society. The essays in the special report explore the norms of civic learning and institutions, social movements, and communal innovations that can revitalize civic learning in practice. This introductory essay defines and explains the notion of civic learning, which is a lynchpin connecting many of the essays in the report. Civic learning pertains to the ways in which citizens learn about collective social problems and make decisions about them that reflect the duties and responsibilities of citizenship. Such learning can occur in many social settings in everyday life, and it can also be facilitated through participation in the processes of democratic governance on many levels. Civic learning is not doctrinaire and is compatible with a range of public goals and policies. It is an activity that increases what might be called the democratic capability of a people.

Recommendations for Better Civic Learning: Building and Rebuilding Democracy.

This is the concluding essay for a special report from The Hastings Center entitled Democracy in Crisis: Civic Learning and the Reconstruction of Common Purpose, which grew out of a project supported by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. This essay provides an integrative discussion of various theoretical and practical reform perspectives offered by other essays in the report. It also offers a number of recommendations. It notes that the aim of the special report is not to propose specific reform measures but, rather, to consider larger, more theoretic concerns related to political and economic questions, which are personal and structural-psychological, cultural, and institutional-at the same time. In response, this essay argues that the best relationship between the citizenry and government in a democracy is not one of deference, nor one of contestation, but one that is critically constructive, which in turn is linked to practices of civic learning. To be constructive, citizens need scientific literacy, an understanding of how government and other institutions work, critical thinking abilities, and many open and diverse forums for civic learning to offset the increasingly isolating media "bubbles" that are the only source of information for many. The essay then formulates five recommendations designed to facilitate critically constructive citizenship and civic learning. These are creating a basis for civic participation, acquiring information, talking to each other, designing institutional change, and achieving deliberation.

Residential Segregation and Publicly Spirited Democracy.

Successful deliberations over contentious issues require a publicly spirited citizenry that will encourage elected officials to promote what James Madison called the "permanent and aggregate interests" of the country. Unfortunately, atomizing forces have pulled American society apart, undermining trust and making collective action difficult. Residential segregation is one of those atomizing forces. Residential segregation undermines a commitment to civic virtue because it encourages people to think about fellow citizens as "others" with whom they have little in common. To address this situation, we must start by fixing our neighborhoods and creating local institutions that enhance trust and foster a public-spirited democratic citizenry. For example, our existing educational policies reinforce the disparities associated with residential segregation and have created massive resource inequalities among school districts across the country. A useful first step would be to equalize school district funding to promote a more genuine equality of opportunity.

Civic Learning, Science, and Structural Racism.

Vaccine hesitancy is a major public health challenge, and racial disparities in the acceptance of vaccines is a particular concern. In this essay, we draw on interviews with mothers of Black male adolescents to offer insights into the reasons for the low rate of vaccination against the human papillomavirus among this group of adolescents. Based on these conversations, we argue that increasing the acceptance of HPV and other vaccines cannot be accomplished merely by providing people with more facts. Instead, we must address the pervasive racial discrimination in the United States that undermines trust in social institutions, including the health care system. In the short term, it may be helpful to increase the number of clinicians of color working in the health system, but more fundamental changes are required. The U.S. must adopt and implement policies that dismantle structural racism if it hopes to produce greater trust and community-oriented thinking on behalf of people who have been exploited for centuries.

Commentary: Global Comparisons of Physician Associations.

The authors reflect on their own work in relation to the articles in this special section on physician organizations, and they make four observations. First, association-government power relations shift after countries introduce universal health insurance, but they are by no means diminished. In France, Germany, and Japan, physicians' economic interests are explicitly considered against broader health system goals, such as providing affordable universal insurance. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), physician organizations do not share power in the same way. Second, in higher-income countries, fragmentation may occur along specialty or generalist lines, and some physicians are unionized. Generally speaking, physician influence over reimbursement policy is reduced because of organizational fragmentation. Third, associations develop as legitimate voices for physicians, but their relationship to other professions differs in higher-income countries. Associations in LMICs form coalitions with other health professionals. Finally, although German state physician associations have a key implementation role, in most countries, state and federal policy roles seem relatively defined. Global comparison of the LMICs and other countries suggests power, unity, legitimacy, and federal roles are tied closely to the stage of health system development.