Milbank Quarterly最新文献

Policy Points This study examines exposure to out-of-pocket (OOP) costs related to childbirth and postpartum care for those with a Medicaid-insured birth compared with those with a commercially insured birth and subsequent financial outcomes at 12 months postpartum. We find that Medicaid is highly protective against health care costs for childbirth and postpartum care relative to commercial insurance, particularly for birthing people with low income. We find persistent medical debt and worry at 12 months postpartum for Medicaid recipients who reported OOP childbirth expenses.

Context: Out-of-pocket (OOP) costs related to childbirth and postpartum care may cause financial hardship, depending on type of insurance and income.

Methods: We estimated OOP spending on childbirth and postpartum care and financial strain 1 year after birth, comparing Medicaid-insured births with commercially insured births. The Postpartum Assessment of Health Survey followed up with respondents to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System after a 2020 birth in six states and New York City. The survey included questions on health care costs and financial well-being. Our analytic sample consisted of 4,453 postpartum people, 1,544 with a Medicaid-insured birth and 2,909 with a commercially insured birth.

Findings: We observe significant financial hardship from childbirth that persists into the postpartum year, with significant differences by insurance and income. We find Medicaid is highly financially protective relative to commercial insurance; 81.4% of Medicaid-insured births were free to the patient, compared with 15.7% of commercially insured births (p < 0.001). Six of ten commercially insured births (59%) cost over $1,000 OOP. Among respondents reporting OOP costs for childbirth, we found that Medicaid enrollees are more likely to have borrowed money from friends or family to pay for childbirth (8% vs. 1%, p < 0.001) and one in five had not made any payments 1 year postpartum (26% vs. 5% of commercially insured births, p < 0.001). Among the commercially insured, those with incomes under 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL) fared worse financially than those above 200% FPL on a number of indicators, including debt in collection (33% vs. 13%, p < 0.001) and financial worry (55% vs. 34%, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: The cost of childbirth and postpartum health care results in significant and persistent financial hardship, particularly for families with lower income with commercial insurance. Medicaid offers greater protection for families with low income by offering reduced cost sharing for childbirth and postpartum health care, but even minimal cost sharing in Medicaid causes financial strain.

Policy Points A large population of incarcerated people may be eligible for prerelease and transition services under the new Medicaid Reentry Section 1115 Demonstration Opportunity. We estimated the largest relative population increases in Medicaid coverage from the opportunity may be expected in smaller and more rural states. We found that mental illness, hepatitis C, and chronic kidney disease prevalence rates were sufficiently high among incarcerated populations to likely skew overall Medicaid population prevalence of these diseases when prerelease and transition services are expanded, implying the need for planning of additional data exchange and service delivery infrastructure by state Medicaid plans.

Context: As states expand prerelease and transition services for incarcerated individuals under the Medicaid Reentry Section 1115 Demonstration Opportunity, we sought to systematically inform Medicaid state and plan administrators regarding the population size and burden of disease data available on incarcerated populations in both jails and prisons in the United States.

Methods: We analyzed data on eligibility criteria for new Medicaid prerelease and transition services based on incarceration length and health conditions across states. We estimated the potentially eligible populations in prisons and jails, considering various incarceration lengths and health status requirements. We also compared disease prevalence in the incarcerated population with that of the existing civilian Medicaid population.

Findings: We found that rural and smaller states would experience a disproportionately large proportion of their Medicaid populations to be eligible for prerelease and transition services if new Medicaid eligibility rules were broadly applied. Self-reported psychological distress was notably higher among incarcerated individuals compared with those currently on Medicaid. The prevalence rates of previously diagnosed chronic hepatitis C and kidney disease were also much higher in the incarcerated population than the existing civilian Medicaid population.

Conclusions: We estimated large volumes of potentially Medicaid-eligible entrants as coverage policy changes take effect over the coming years, particularly impacting smaller and more rural states. Our findings reveal very high disease prevalence rates among the incarcerated population subject to new Medicaid coverage, including specific chronic, infectious, and behavioral health conditions that state Medicaid programs, health plans, and providers may benefit from advanced planning to address.

Policy Points In a recently commissioned report on solutions for eliminating racial and ethnic health care inequities entitled Ending Unequal Treatment, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine found a health workforce that is representative of the communities it serves is essential for health care equity. The Supreme Court decision to ban race-conscious admission constraints pathways toward health workforce representativeness and equity. This paper draws on the National Academies report's findings that health care workforce representativeness improves care quality, population health, and equity to discuss policy and programmatic options for various participants to promote health workforce representativeness in the context of race-conscious admissions bans.

Policy Points Earmarked tax policies for behavioral health are perceived as having positive impacts related to increasing flexible funding, suggesting benefits to expand this financing approach. Implementation challenges related to these earmarked taxes included tax base volatility that impedes long-term service delivery planning and inequities in the distribution of tax revenue. Recommendations for designing or revising earmarked tax policies include developing clear guidelines and support systems to manage the administrative aspects of earmarked tax programs, cocreating reporting and oversight structures with system and service delivery agents, and selecting revenue streams that are relatively stable across years.

Context: Over 200 cities and counties in the United States have implemented policies earmarking tax revenue for behavioral health services. This mixed-methods study was conducted with the aim of characterizing perceptions of the impacts of these earmarked tax policies, strengths and weaknesses of tax policy designs, and factors that influence decision making about how tax revenue is allocated for services.

Methods: Study data came from surveys completed by 274 officials involved in behavioral health earmarked tax policy implementation and 37 interviews with officials in a sample of jurisdictions with these taxes-California (n = 16), Washington (n = 12), Colorado (n = 6), and Iowa (n = 3). Interviews primarily explored perceptions of the advantages and drawbacks of the earmarked tax, perceptions of tax policy design, and factors influencing decisions about revenue allocation.

Findings: A total of 83% of respondents strongly agreed that it was better to have the tax than not, 73.2% strongly agreed that the tax increased flexibility to address complex behavioral health needs, and 65.1% strongly agreed that the tax increased the number of people served by evidence-based practices. Only 43.3%, however, strongly agreed that it was easy to satisfy tax-reporting requirements. Interviews revealed that the taxes enabled funding for services and implementation supports, such as training in the delivery of evidence-based practices, and supplemented mainstream funding sources (e.g., Medicaid). However, some interviewees also reported challenges related to volatility of funding, inequities in the distribution of tax revenue, and, in some cases, administratively burdensome tax reporting. Decisions about tax revenue allocation were influenced by goals such as reducing behavioral health care inequities, being responsive to community needs, addressing constraints of mainstream funding sources, and, to a lesser degree, supporting services considered to be evidence based.

Conclusions: Earmarked taxes are a promising financing strategy to improve access to, and quality of, behavioral health services by supplementing mainstream state and federal financing.

Policy Points The adoption of Medicaid institutions for mental disease (IMD) exclusion waivers increases the likelihood of substance abuse treatment facilities offering mental health and substance abuse treatment for co-occurring disorders, especially in residential facilities. There are differential responses to IMD waivers based on facility ownership. For-profit substance abuse treatment facilities are responsive to the adoption of IMD substance use disorder waivers, whereas private not-for-profit and public entities are not. The response of for-profit facilities suggests that integration of substance abuse and mental health treatment for individuals in residential facilities may be cost-effective.

Context: Access to integrated care for those with co-occurring mental health (MH) and substance use disorders (SUDs) has been limited because of an exclusion in Medicaid on paying for SUD care for those in institutions for mental disease (IMDs). Starting in 2015, the federal government encouraged states to pursue waivers of this exclusion, and by the end of 2020, 28 states had done so. It is unclear what impact these waivers have had on the availability of care for co-occurring disorders and the characteristics of any facilities that expanded care because of them.

Methods: Using data from the National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services, we estimate a two-stage residual inclusion model including time- and state-fixed effects to examine the effect of state IMD SUD waivers on the percentage of facilities offering co-occurring MH and SUD treatment, overall and for residential facilities specifically. Separate analyses are conducted by facility ownership type.

Findings: Results show that the adoption of an IMD SUD waiver is associated with 1.068 greater odds of that state having facilities offering co-occurring MH and substance abuse (SA) treatment a year or more later. The adoption of a waiver increases the odds of a state's residential treatment facility offering co-occurring MH and SA treatment by 1.129 a year or more later. Additionally, the results suggest 1.163 higher odds of offering co-occurring MH/SA treatment in private for-profit SA facilities in states that adopt an IMD SUD waiver while suggesting no significant impact on offered services by private not-for-profit or public facilities.

Conclusions: Our study findings suggest that Medicaid IMD waivers are at least somewhat effective at impacting the population targeted by the policy. Importantly, we find that there are differential responses to these IMD waivers based on facility ownership, providing new evidence for the literature on the role of ownership in the provision of health care.

Policy Points With increasing public attention to cases of inaccurate and misleading laboratory-developed tests, there have been calls for regulatory reform. To protect patients from faulty laboratory tests, we need a framework that balances comprehensive test review with laboratory flexibility. The Verifying Accurate Leading-edge IVCT [In Vitro Clinical Test] Development (VALID) Act would have helped ensure laboratory test safety and validity through a much-needed expansion of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight. However, Congress did not pass the VALID Act in 2022, forcing the FDA to start the regulatory reform process on its own.

Policy Points We examined the effect of the Paid Family Leave policy (PFL) and Paid Sick Leave policy (PSL) on care provision to older parents. We found that PSL adoption led to an increase in care provision, an effect mainly attributable to respondents in states/periods when PSL and PFL were concurrently offered. Some of the strongest effects were found among women and unpartnered adult children. PFL adoption by itself was not associated with care provision to parents except when PFL also offered job protection. Paid leave policies have heterogeneous effects on eldercare and their design and implementation should be carefully considered.

Context: Family caregivers play a critical role in the American long-term care system. However, care responsibilities are known to potentially conflict with paid work, as about half of family caregivers are employed. The federal Family and Medical Leave Act passed by the US Congress in 1993 provides a nonuniversal, unpaid work benefit. In response, several states and localities have adopted the Paid Family Leave policy (PFL) and Paid Sick Leave policy (PSL) over the last two decades. Our objective is to examine the effect of these policies on the probability of personal care provision to older parents.

Methods: This study used longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study (1998-2020). Difference-in-differences regression models were estimated to examine associations between state- and local-level PFL and PSL mandates and personal care provision to older parents. We analyzed heterogeneous effects by the type of paid leave exposure (provision of job protection with PFL and availability of both PSL and PFL [with or without job protection] concurrently). We also examined results for different population subgroups.

Findings: PSL implementation was associated with a four- to five-percentage point increase in the probability of personal care provision. These effects were mainly attributable to respondents in states/periods when PSL and PFL were concurrently offered. The strongest effects were found among adult children who were employed at baseline, women, younger, unpartnered, and college educated. PFL implementation by itself was not associated with care provision to parents except when the policy also offered job protection.

Conclusions: Paid leave policies have heterogeneous impacts on personal care provision, potentially owing to differences in program features, variation in caregiving needs, and respondent characteristics. Overall, the results indicate that offering paid sick leave and paid family leave, when combined with job protection, could support potential family caregivers.

Policy Points Improving health systems requires the pursuit of both patient-centered care and a supportive environment for health professionals. This Quadruple Aim includes improving the experience of care, improving the health of populations, reducing per capita costs of care, and improving the work life of the care providers. We propose expanding a recently defined Fifth Aim of health equity to include health democracy, ensuring that that the health and health care wants, needs, and responsibilities of populations are being met, and also propose adding a Sixth Aim of preserving and improving the health of the environment to create the best health possible. As social tension and environmental changes continue to impact the structure of our society, this "Hexagonal Aim" might provide additional ethical guiderails as we set our health care goals to foster sustainable and improved population health.

Policy Points Artificial intelligence (AI) is disruptively innovating health care and surpassing our ability to define its boundaries and roles in health care and regulate its application in legal and ethical ways. Significant progress has been made in governance in the United States and the European Union. It is incumbent on developers, end users, the public, providers, health care systems, and policymakers to collaboratively ensure that we adopt a national AI health strategy that realizes the Quintuple Aim; minimizes race-based medicine; prioritizes transparency, equity, and algorithmic vigilance; and integrates the patient and community voices throughout all aspects of AI development and deployment.