Impact of United States 2017 Immigration Policy changes on missed appointments at two Massachusetts Safety-Net Hospitals

Introduction

Studies have shown mixed findings regarding the impact of immigration policy changes on immigrants’ utilization of primary care.

Methods

We used a difference-in-differences analysis to compare changes in missed primary care appointments over time across two groups: patients who received care in Spanish, Portuguese, or Haitian Creole, and non-Hispanic, white patients who received care in English.

Results

After adjustment for age, sex, race, insurance, hospital system, and presence of chronic conditions, immigration policy changes were associated with an absolute increase in the missed appointment prevalence of 0.74 percentage points (95% confidence interval: 0.34, 1.15) among Spanish, Portuguese and Haitian-Creole speakers. We estimated that missed appointments due to immigration policy changes resulted in lost revenue of over $185,000.

Conclusions

We conclude that immigration policy changes were associated with a significant increase in missed appointments among patients who receive medical care in languages other than English.

     

Nonindicated pelvic examinations during contraceptive encounters: Prevalence and provider variations

ObjectiveDespite evidence that mandatory pelvic examinations deter contraceptive use and are not clinically necessary, survey research suggests that clinicians regularly perform pelvic examinations prior to prescribing contraceptives. This study estimates prevalence of nonindicated pelvic exams during contraceptive encounters, and variation in prevalence by provider specialty.Study designUsing a national sample of commercial claims data, we identified contraceptive encounters without concurrent indication for pelvic examination among females aged 15 to 49 from 2007 to 2017. We first calculated the nonindicated exam rate by provider specialty and patient age. Using data from 2017 and linear probability models with metropolitan statistical area fixed effects, we estimated the differences in adjusted rates of nonindicated pelvic examination by provider specialty. To assess trends by provider specialty, we used all years of data and interacted specialty with year.ResultsOf 7.9 million identified contraceptive encounters, 81.8% had no identified indications for pelvic exam. Exams were billed at 17.7% of these visits (2007–2017), and this rate increased from 13.4% in 2007 to 20.7% in 2017. The largest increase occurred among encounters with an obstetrician-gynecologist. In 2017, obstetrician-gynecologists were 20.3 percentage points (95% CI: 19%–21%) more likely to perform a concurrent pelvic exam compared to family physicians.ConclusionsPelvic examinations during contraceptive visits increased from 2007 to 2017. Increases occurred across all provider specialties, but were largely driven by obstetrician-gynecologists, who oversaw over half of all contraceptive encounters and performed non-indicated pelvic exams at the highest rate.ImplicationsThis research provides real-world evidence that suggests pelvic exams are increasingly performed during contraceptive encounters and that patients regularly undergo a low-value, invasive examination while obtaining contraceptive care. Continuing education, reimbursement reform, and more evidence on the harms of non-indicated pelvic exams will be necessary to change clinical practice.