Health Affairs最新文献

The Medicaid continuous enrollment provision mandated by the Families First Coronavirus Response Act of 2020 effectively prohibited the termination of enrollees from Medicaid during the COVID-19 public health emergency, including people enrolled in Medicaid during pregnancy. Using data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System, we found that the rate of continuous Medicaid enrollment during the twelve months postpartum increased from 59.3 percent for births during March-December 2018 to 90.7 percent for births during March-December 2020, when the public health emergency was in effect. This corresponds to approximately 430,000 fewer people losing Medicaid coverage after pregnancy and an average of more than 2.5 months of additional postpartum enrollment. These findings indicate that states that have extended or that plan to extend pregnancy-related Medicaid eligibility in the postpartum year are likely to experience significant gains in continuity of coverage.

The quality of care experienced by members of racial and ethnic minority groups in Medicare Advantage, which is an increasingly important source of Medicare coverage for these groups, has critical implications for health equity. Comparing gaps in Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare for three quality-of-care outcomes, measured by adverse health events, between minority and non-Hispanic White populations, we found that the relative magnitude of the gaps varied both by racial and ethnic minority group and by quality measure. Hispanic versus non-Hispanic White gaps were smaller in Medicare Advantage than in traditional Medicare for all outcomes: avoidable emergency department use, preventable hospitalizations, and thirty-day hospital readmissions. The gap between non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White populations was larger in Medicare Advantage than in traditional Medicare for avoidable emergency department use but was no different for hospital readmissions and was smaller for preventable hospitalizations. The Asian versus non-Hispanic White gap was similar in Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare for avoidable emergency department use and preventable hospitalizations but was larger in Medicare Advantage for hospital readmissions. As Medicare Advantage enrollment expands, monitoring the quality of care for enrollees who are members of racial and ethnic minority groups will remain important.

Nursing home ownership has become increasingly complicated, partly because of the growth of facilities owned by institutional investors such as private equity (PE) firms and real estate investment trusts (REITs). Although the ownership transparency and accountability of nursing homes have historically been poor, the Biden administration's nursing home reform plans released in 2022 included a series of data releases on ownership. However, our evaluation of the newly released data identified several gaps: One-third of PE and fewer than one-fifth of REIT investments identified in the proprietary Irving Levin Associates and S&P Capital IQ investment data were present in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) publicly available ownership data. Similarly, we obtained different results when searching for the ten top common owners of nursing homes using CMS data and facility survey reports of chain ownership. Finally, ownership percentages were missing in the CMS data for 82.40 percent of owners in the top ten chains and 55.21 percent of owners across all US facilities. Although the new data represent an important step forward, we highlight additional steps to ensure that the data are timely, accurate, and responsive. Transparent ownership data are fundamental to understanding the adequacy of public payments to provide patient care, enable policy makers to make timely decisions, and evaluate nursing home quality.

American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) women experience distinct political and health care environments and possess unique health risks and resources. We tested whether state Medicaid expansions under the Affordable Care Act were associated with health insurance, prenatal care, health conditions, and birth outcomes among AI/AN women. Using data from the 2010-19 American Community Survey and 2010-19 US birth certificates, we used a difference-in-differences study design to compare outcomes among AI/AN women before and after Medicaid expansions. Medicaid expansions increased the proportion of AI/AN women reporting health care coverage from both Medicaid and the Indian Health Service (IHS), with larger effects among women living in areas with relatively high percentages of reservation land. Consistent with prior research on the broader population of women, Medicaid expansions had no effects on first-trimester prenatal care usage or birthweight among AI/AN women. We found mixed evidence of increased rates of prepregnancy chronic conditions after the expansions. Our findings demonstrate the importance of Medicaid, the IHS, and tribal health systems as sources of health care coverage for AI/AN women of childbearing age.

Sixteen states have used Section 1332 waivers to implement reinsurance programs that aim to reduce premiums and increase enrollment in the Affordable Care Act's health insurance Marketplaces. Although reinsurance programs have successfully reduced premiums for unsubsidized enrollees, little is known about how reinsurance affects Marketplace premiums, minimum cost of coverage, and enrollment for the large majority of Marketplace enrollees who receive premium subsidies. Using a difference-in-differences analysis of matched counties straddling Georgia's borders to examine Georgia's 2022 implementation of its reinsurance program, we found that reinsurance increased the minimum cost of enrolling in subsidized Marketplace coverage by approximately 30 percent and decreased enrollment by roughly a third for Marketplace enrollees with incomes of 251-400 percent of the federal poverty level. Marketplace reinsurance programs may have the unintended consequences of increasing the minimum cost of subsidized coverage and reducing enrollment. These outcomes are especially relevant in the present policy context of enhanced subsidies, which have substantially reduced the number of unsubsidized enrollees who would benefit most from reinsurance.

Hospital prices for commercially insured people are high and vary widely, prompting states to seek ways to control hospital price growth. In October 2019, the Oregon state employee health insurance plan instituted a cap on hospital payments. Using 2014-21 data from the Oregon All Payer All Claims Reporting Program database, we performed a difference-in-differences analysis to test the impact of the cap on hospital facility prices for Oregon's state employee plan enrollees. We found that the cap was not associated with a significant reduction in inpatient facility prices across the post period (-$901.9 per admission) but was associated with a significant reduction in the second year after implementation (-$2,774.20). The cap was associated with a significant reduction in outpatient facility prices over the course of the first twenty-seven months of the policy (-$130.50 per procedure). We estimated $107.5 million (or 4 percent of total plan spending) in savings to the state employee plan during the first two years. The hospital payment cap successfully reduced hospital prices for enrollees in that plan.

Private equity (PE) firms have been acquiring physician practices at an increasing rate, raising concerns about such firms' penetration at the physician level into local markets and the impact on health care quality and prices. However, limited knowledge exists about the extent of PE firms' control in local markets. By linking data on PE acquisitions to physician data and using full-time-equivalent physicians as the base of assessment, we estimated the local market share of each PE firm within ten physician specialties at the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) level. PE-acquired physician practice sites increased from 816 across 119 MSAs in 2012 to 5,779 across 307 MSAs in 2021. Single PE firms had significant market share, exceeding 30 percent in 108 MSA specialty markets and exceeding 50 percent in 50 of those markets. The findings raise concerns about competition and call for closer scrutiny by the Federal Trade Commission, state regulators, and policy makers.

Primary care physicians are often the first to screen and identify patients with access-sensitive surgical conditions that should be treated electively. These conditions require surgery that is preferably planned (elective), but, when access is limited, treatment may be delayed and worsening symptoms lead to emergency surgery (for example, colectomy for cancer, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, and incisional hernia repair). We evaluated the rates of elective versus emergency surgery for patients with three access-sensitive surgical conditions living in primary care Health Professional Shortage Areas during 2015-19. Medicare beneficiaries in more severe primary care shortage areas had higher rates of emergency surgery compared with rates in the least severe shortage areas (37.8 percent versus 29.9 percent). They were also more likely to have serious complications (14.9 percent versus 11.7 percent) and readmissions (15.7 percent versus 13.5 percent). When we accounted for areas with a shortage of surgeons, the findings were similar. Taken together, these findings suggest that residents of areas with greater primary care workforce shortages may also face challenges in accessing elective surgical care. As policy makers consider investing in Health Professional Shortage Areas, our findings underscore the importance of primary care access to a broader range of services.

The use of many services is lower in Medicare Advantage (MA) compared with traditional Medicare, generating cost savings for insurers, whereas the quality of ambulatory services is higher. This study examined the role of selective contracting with providers in achieving these outcomes, focusing on primary care physicians. Assessing primary care physician costliness based on the gap between observed and predicted costs for their traditional Medicare patients, we found that the average primary care physician in MA networks was $433 less costly per patient (2.9 percent of baseline) compared with the regional mean, with less costly primary care physicians included in more networks than more costly ones. Favorable selection of patients by MA primary care physicians contributed partially to this result. The quality measures of MA primary care physicians were similar to the regional mean. In contrast, primary care physicians excluded from all MA networks were $1,617 (13.8 percent) costlier than the regional mean, with lower quality. Primary care physicians in narrow networks were $212 (1.4 percent) less costly than those in wide networks, but their quality was slightly lower. These findings highlight the potential role of selective contracting in reducing costs in the MA program.

Housing is tied to neighborhoods. Therefore, to understand how housing affects health and health equity, the role of neighborhood environments must be considered. This article is a critical review of the relationship between neighborhoods and health. We discuss inequality among US neighborhoods and the roots of that inequality. We then explore the ways in which neighborhood environments may shape health, review the evidence about these effects, and discuss policy responses. Many studies document an association between neighborhoods and physical and mental health, and a few studies suggest that some of these relationships are causal. Thus, the evidence suggests that interventions at the neighborhood scale can potentially help advance health equity. Further research on the long-term impacts of neighborhoods on health and more rigorous studies of the impact of particular neighborhood interventions are needed. To advance health equity, policy makers also need to better understand the institutional arrangements and social policies that have created neighborhood inequality and pursue innovative approaches to changing them.