Access to care and health insurance coverage for workers with disabilities: Outcomes by state-level responses to the ACA

BackgroundStates had flexibility in their implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansions, which may have led to variation in coverage and changes in access to care for workers with disabilities.Objective/hypothesisTo examine differential trends in health insurance coverage and access to care among workers with disabilities by states’ decisions about expanding Medicaid under the ACA.MethodsWe aggregated data from the National Health Interview Survey into groups by time period relative to ACA implementation: pre-ACA (2006–2009), early ACA (2010–2013), and later ACA (2014–2017). We produced health insurance and access statistics for each time period, by state-level Medicaid expansion status.ResultsUninsurance rates decreased after 2014 in all states, regardless of the state’s decision whether to expand Medicaid. There was a substantial increase after 2014 in the share of workers with disabilities covered by Medicaid in states that expanded in that year; in other states, workers with disabilities experienced larger increases in privately purchased coverage. At the same time, the share of workers with disabilities reporting cost-related barriers to care declined markedly in 2014 Medicaid expansion states, but it increased slightly in the non-expansion states. Structural barriers to accessing care increased in all states, with the smallest increase in 2014 expansion states.ConclusionsMedicaid coverage and cost-related access to care improved significantly among workers with disabilities in 2014 Medicaid expansion states, both overall and relative to workers with disabilities in non-expansion states.     

Insurance coverage and access to care for workers with disabilities, 2001–2017

BackgroundWorkers with disabilities have different options than their peers for obtaining health insurance, and face unique barriers in accessing care. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) led to sweeping changes in the availability and affordability of health insurance in the United States beginning in 2010, and may have had important effects for workers with disabilities.Objective/HypothesisDocument how the ACA changed insurance coverage and access to care for workers with disabilities, and compare those changes to changes among other groups.MethodsWe document health insurance coverage and access to care among workers with disabilities using the 2001–2017 National Health Interview Survey.ResultsThe share of insured workers with disabilities increased from 79.9% in 2009 to 87.8% in 2017. This gain resulted from an 11 percentage point (pp) increase in the share with Medicaid coverage in 2014–2017 compared with 2001–2009 and a 5 pp increase in privately purchased coverage over those periods. These were accompanied by an 11 pp decline in the share with employer-sponsored coverage. Despite coverage gains, cost-related barriers to accessing medical care did not change much after the ACA, for any group. Workers with disabilities experienced an increase in structural access barriers, from 18.4% before the ACA to 24.8% after.ConclusionsThe gain in insurance coverage for workers with disabilities is an important benefit of the ACA, but more investigation and monitoring should be considered to understand whether such coverage will translate into improvements in access to needed health care.     

Changes in health insurance coverage and health care access as teens with disabilities transition to adulthood

BackgroundPre-ACA, less than 6% of children with disabilities were uninsured, compared with more than 42% of young adults with disabilities ages 19–25. Individuals with disabilities face greater barriers to health care access upon transition into adulthood.ObjectivesWe examined whether the ACA dependent coverage provision and Medicaid expansion improved the transition from pediatric to adult healthcare systems by reducing the gap in insurance coverage and access to care between teens and young adults with disabilities.MethodsUsing cross-sectional data from the 2006–2009 and 2011–2015 National Health Interview Survey (n = 10,136), we estimate the change in insurance coverage and access to care from pre-to post-ACA time periods for teens (ages 13–18) and young adults (ages 19–25) with disabilities in a difference-in-differences model. We completed the same analyses for these groups in Medicaid expansion and non-expansion states.ResultsBoth teens and young adults with disabilities made significant gains in insurance coverage (4.55 and 8.96% point gains respectively, p < .001) and access to care (4.01 and 3.14% points decline in delayed care due to cost, p < .05) under the dependent coverage provision and Medicaid expansion.ConclusionsMedicaid expansion had a greater impact on both insurance coverage and on access to care than did the dependent coverage provision. The benefits of these changes flowed primarily to young adults with disabilities, reducing the gaps in insurance coverage between teens and young adults, and expanding access to care for both groups, providing a more seamless transition from pediatric to adult health care systems, post-ACA.     

Insurance + access not equal to health care: typology of barriers to health care access for low-income families

PURPOSE Public health insurance programs have expanded coverage for the poor, and family physicians provide essential services to these vulnerable populations. Despite these efforts, many Americans do not have access to basic medical care. This study was designed to identify barriers faced by low-income parents when accessing health care for their children and how insurance status affects their reporting of these barriers.     

Health care access and the Americans with Disabilities Act: A mixed methods study

BackgroundThe Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that health care entities provide full and equal access to people with disabilities. However, results of previous studies have indicated that the ADA has been largely ineffective at creating systemic change in the delivery of health care.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to examine the current barriers to health care access experienced by people with disabilities under Titles II and III of the ADA.MethodsThis study utilized a mixed methods multiphase design. In phase one, a survey and focus groups were conducted with individuals with disabilities who experienced barriers to health care access. In phase two, key informant interviews were conducted with individuals who had a role in ensuring equal access to health care for people with disabilities.ResultsIn the current context of health care reform, people with disabilities continue to experience multiple barriers to health care access under Titles II and III of the ADA. However, a notable result is that several provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) have likely bolstered existing directives implementing requirements for health care access under the ADA.ConclusionsThe results of this study provide additional support for a comprehensive examination of both the national standards for accessible health care and the enforcement of laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability.     

State-sponsored price transparency programs for ophthalmic services

ObjectivesTo characterize the information provided by state-sponsored price transparency programs and describe price variation for ophthalmic services.MethodsWe searched for state-sponsored price transparency programs and reviewed all available information on ophthalmic services.ResultsIn total, 55% (6/11) of state-sponsored price transparency programs included ophthalmic services. Three provided nonfinancial value metrics, five provided prices by clinician organization, and none reported out-of-pocket costs, insurance costs, or prices by insurers for ophthalmic services. The median within-state price ratio was 3.65 (interquartile ratio [IQR]: 2.04–7.91). Mean prices for cataract surgery ranged from $2575 to $5097 and from $873 and $27,801.66 for retinal detachment repair.DiscussionMost of the eleven state-sponsored price transparency programs included pricing information for ophthalmic services. No programs provided specific out-of-pocket costs, insurance costs, or prices by insurers for ophthalmic services. There was substantial variation in prices for all included ophthalmic services within and between states.     

Preexisting Condition Protections Under the Affordable Care Act: Changes in Insurance Coverage,Premium Contributions,and Out-of-Pocket Spending

ObjectivesIn January 2014, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) preexisting condition protections prohibited coverage denials, premium increases, and claim denials on the basis of preexisting conditions. This study aimed to examine changes in coverage and premiums and out-of-pocket spending after the implementation of the preexisting condition protections under the ACA.MethodsWe identified adults aged 18 to 64 years with (n = 59 041) and without preexisting conditions (n = 61 970) from the 2011-2013 and 2015-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. We used a difference-in-differences and a difference-in-difference-in-differences approach to assess the associations of preexisting condition protections and changes in insurance coverage, premium contributions, and out-of-pocket spending after the ACA. Simple and multivariable logistic or multivariable 2-part models were fitted for the full sample and stratified by family income (low ≤138% federal poverty level [FPL]; middle 139%-400% FPL; and high > 400 FPL).ResultsThe ACA increased nongroup insurance coverage to a similar extent for individuals with or without preexisting conditions at all income levels. Decreases in premium contributions were observed to a similar extent among families with nongroup private coverage regardless of declinable preexisting condition status, whereas no significant changes were observed among families with group coverage. We found greater decreases in out-of-pocket spending for individuals with preexisting conditions than those without conditions among both individuals covered by nongroup and group insurance, and a greater difference was observed among those covered by nongroup insurance (difference-in-difference-in-differences ?$279; 95% confidence interval ?$528 to ?$29).ConclusionsThe ACA protections were associated with decreases in out-of-pocket spending among adults with preexisting conditions.     

The Impact of Poverty,Chronic Illnesses,and Health Insurance Status on Out-of-Pocket Health Care Expenditures in Later Life

This study aims to examine poverty, chronic illnesses, health insurance, and health care expenditures, within the context of a political economy of aging perspective. Subsamples of 1,773 older adults from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey were selected for analyses. The results showed that chronic illnesses influenced out-of-pocket health care costs. Older persons with more than one health insurance spent less on out-of-pocket health care costs. The results have implications for health care social workers concerned with the growing costs of chronic illnesses, implementing integrated care, and advocating for extending public health insurance coverage especially for our most impoverished older adults.     

Effects of the Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act on health insurance coverage,health care access,and use for people with disabilities

BackgroundPeople with disabilities have higher health care needs, service utilization, and expenditures. They are also more likely to lack insurance and experience unmet need for medical care. There has been limited research on the effects of the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion on people with disabilities.ObjectiveTo examine the effects of the Medicaid expansion on health insurance coverage, access, and service use for working-age adults with disabilities.MethodsA retrospective study using 11 years (2007–2017) of data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey - Household Components, linked to Area Health Resource Files and Local Area Unemployment Statistics (N = 40,995). Difference-in-differences multinomial logistic and linear probability models with state and year fixed-effects were used to estimate the effects.ResultsWe found strong evidence of increased Medicaid coverage in expansion states (3.2 to 5.0 percentage points), reasonably strong evidence of reduced private insurance coverage (?2.2 to ?2.5 percentage points), and some evidence of reduced uninsured rate (from no effect to ?3.7 percentage points). Results suggest that the increase in Medicaid coverage was due at least in part to the “crowd-out” of private insurance in expansion states. No statistically significant effects were detected for access and use outcomes.ConclusionsFindings suggest that state Medicaid expansions led to an increase in Medicaid coverage and a decrease in private insurance coverage as well as the uninsured. However, no evidence was found for health care access and use outcomes. Further research into access and use is needed when more data become available for the post-expansion period.     

“We’ve got rights and yet we don’t have access”: Exploring patient experiences accessing medication abortion in Australia

ObjectivesAcross Australia, multiple strategies have emerged to decentralize abortion care and increase access to mifepristone, including incorporating medication abortion into primary care and offering the mifepristone and misoprostol regimen via telemedicine. We aimed to explore the experiences of patients accessing medication abortion care across these different health service delivery formats and different geographic areas.Study designWe conducted in-depth interviews with 22 people from across Australia who had used mifepristone for abortion. We audio-recorded and transcribed all interviews and managed our data with ATLAS.ti. We used deductive and inductive techniques to analyze these data for content and themes.ResultsAlthough participants were generally satisfied with the abortion care they received, many described medication abortion care in Australia as inaccessible and confusing to find. Our participants incurred variable and often significant financial costs when obtaining their abortion and many reported that their interactions with general practitioners when trying to locate an abortion provider were uninformative and stigmatizing. Participants were enthusiastic about obtaining medication abortion through a variety of service delivery modalities, including telemedicine, and believed these strategies could increase equitable and affordable access.ConclusionsBarriers to finding and accessing abortion care persist across Australia. Efforts to challenge the over-regulation of mifepristone, increase the affordability of medication abortion, and enhance training opportunities to educate a variety of clinicians about medication abortion and support provision from a range of providers appear warranted.ImplicationsThe continued over regulation of mifepristone creates barriers for incorporating medication abortion into primary care settings and has significant implications for patient access and abortion stigma. Regulatory reform and provider education and training have the potential to improve abortion patients’ experiences with medication abortion.     

‘Just doing the best we can’: health care providers’ perceptions of barriers to providing care to Marshallese patients in Arkansas

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Marshallese migrating to the United States encounter challenges in accessing health care. Previous literature has investigated Marshallese participants’ perceptions of the barriers they face in accessing health care. For this study, health care providers managing the care of Marshallese patients were interviewed to understand the providers’ perception of barriers that their Marshallese patients encounter.

Methods: A qualitative research design was utilized to explore health care providers’ perceptions of and experiences with the barriers faced by their Marshallese patients when accessing the US health care system.

Results: The primary barriers identified were: (1) economic barriers; (2) communication challenges; (3) difficulty understanding and navigating the western health care system; and (4) structural and system barriers.

Conclusion: This study provides insight on the barriers Marshallese patients face in accessing health care as well as the barriers providers face in delivering care to Marshallese patients. A better understanding of these barriers can help health care providers and educators to begin initiating improvements in the delivery of care to Marshallese patients.     

Identification of targets for improving access to care in persons with long term physical disabilities

BackgroundPeople with long-term physical disability (LTPD) continue to experience difficulties in accessing health care despite the focus of highlighting disparities in the last two decades.ObjectivesTo describe health care utilization, accommodations and barriers experienced while accessing health care, and reasons why individuals delay or skip health care among people with LTPD.MethodsThe current study was a part of a larger longitudinal survey administered to individuals with physical disability associated with one of four long-term conditions (MS; SCI; PPS; MD). Measures included demographics, health care utilization, barriers to health care, and reasons for delaying or skipping medical care from the sixth wave of data from 2015 to 2016.ResultsRoughly 90% of all participants (N = 1159) saw at least one medical provider within 12 months. The most encountered barrier participants reported experiencing within that time was an office that did not have a safe transfer device to move them to an exam table (69%). Participants’ physical function, quality of life, status of living with a spouse, diagnostic condition, and sex (male) were significantly associated with endorsing a barrier in accessing health care. The inability to afford out of pocket expenses was the highest reported reason for delaying health care.ConclusionsPeople with LTPD access a variety of health care, including rehabilitation services, and continue to experience barriers when doing so. While understanding barriers individuals experience when accessing health care is important, it is equally important to document the type of care they delay or skip due to barriers.