How Well Does Medicaid Work in Improving Access to Care?

OBJECTIVE: To provide an assessment of how well the Medicaid program is working at improving access to and use of health care for low-income mothers. DATA SOURCE/STUDY SETTING: The 1997 and 1999 National Survey of America's Families, with state and county information drawn from the Area Resource File and other sources. STUDY DESIGN: Estimate the effects of Medicaid on access and use relative to private coverage and being uninsured, using instrumental variables methods to control for selection into insurance status. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHOD: This study combines data from 1997 and 1999 for mothers in families with incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We find that Medicaid beneficiaries' access and use are significantly better than those obtained by the uninsured. Analysis that controls for insurance selection shows that the benefits of having Medicaid coverage versus being uninsured are substantially larger than what is estimated when selection is not accounted for. Our results also indicate that Medicaid beneficiaries' access and use are comparable to that of the low-income privately insured. Once insurance selection is controlled for, access and use under Medicaid is not significantly different from access and use under private insurance. Without controls for insurance selection, access and use for Medicaid beneficiaries is found to be significantly worse than for the low-income privately insured. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the Medicaid program improved access to care relative to uninsurance for low-income mothers, achieving access and use levels comparable to those of the privately insured. Our results also indicate that prior research, which generally has not controlled for selection into insurance coverage, has likely understated the gains of Medicaid relative to uninsurance and overstated the gains of private coverage relative to Medicaid.     

Reconsidering the effect of Medicaid on health care services use.

OBJECTIVE: Our research compares health care use by Medicaid beneficiaries with that of the uninsured and the privately insured to measure the program's effect on access to care. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Data include the 1987 National Medical Expenditure Survey and the Survey of Income and Program Participation for 1984-1988. STUDY DESIGN: We predict annual use of ambulatory care and inpatient hospital care for Medicaid beneficiaries receiving AFDC cash assistance and compare it to what their use would be if uninsured or if covered by private insurance. Comparisons are based on multivariate models of health care use that control for demographic and economic characteristics and for health status. Our model distinguishes among Medicaid beneficiaries on the basis of eligibility to account for the poor health of beneficiaries in some eligibility groups. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: AFDC Medicaid beneficiaries use considerably more ambulatory care and inpatient care than they would if they remained uninsured. Use among the AFDC Medicaid population is about the same as use among otherwise similar, privately insured persons. Use rates differ substantially among different Medicaid beneficiary groups, supporting the expectation that some beneficiary groups are in poor health. CONCLUSIONS: Although Medicaid has increased access to health care services for beneficiaries to rates now comparable to those for the privately insured population, because of lower cost sharing in Medicaid we would expect higher service use than we are finding. This suggests possible barriers to Medicaid patients in receiving the care they demand. Enrollment of less healthy individuals into some Medicaid beneficiary groups suggests that pooled purchasing arrangements that include Medicaid populations must be designed to ensure adequate access for the at-risk populations and, at the same time, to ensure that private employers do not opt out because of high community-rated premiums.     

Low-income Californians' experiences with health insurance and managed care.

California is rapidly implementing mandatory managed care for most of its Medicaid (Medi-Cal) beneficiaries. To assess the impact of this delivery system change, the authors analyzed a 1996 statewide population-based random-sample telephone survey of 3,563 adults between the ages of 18 and 64. Respondents with Medi-Cal managed care and Medi-Cal fee-for-service rated access to care and quality of care significantly higher than uninsured respondents yet lower than low-income privately insured individuals. While the authors did not find a difference in health care access and quality among Medi-Cal managed care enrollees compared with Medi-Cal fee-for-service enrollees, they also did not find that managed care provided any observed advantages to Medi-Cal recipients.     

Medicaid expansion under health reform may increase service use and improve access for low-income adults with diabetes

Medicaid's key role in financing diabetes care will grow when many low-income uninsured people with diabetes gain eligibility to the program in 2014 under the Affordable Care Act. Using a national data set to describe current health care use and spending among the nonelderly, low-income adult population, we found that adult Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes had total annual per capita health expenditures more than three times higher ($14,229 versus $4,568) than those of adult beneficiaries without diabetes. At the same time, Medicaid facilitates financial protection and care access among beneficiaries with diabetes. Low-income adults with diabetes who were uninsured used fewer services, spent more out of pocket, and reported worse access than did their peers who were covered by Medicaid. Uninsured adults with diabetes who gain Medicaid coverage under health reform are likely to enter the program with unmet needs, and coverage is likely to result in both improved access and increased use of health care.     

Access to maternity care in rural Washington: its effect on neonatal outcomes and resource use.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to ascertain the effects of poor local access to obstetric care on the risks of having a neonate diagnosed as non-normal, a long hospital stay, and/or high hospital charges. METHODS: Washington State birth certificates linked with hospital discharge abstracts of mothers and neonates were used to study 29809 births to residents of rural areas. Births to women from rural areas where more than two thirds of the women left for care were compared with births to women from rural areas where fewer than one third left for care. RESULTS: Poor local access to providers of obstetric care was associated with a significantly greater risk of having a non-normal neonate for both Medicaid and privately insured patients. However, poor local access to care was consistently associated with higher charges and increased hospital length of stay only if the patient was privately insured. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that local maternity services may help prevent non-normal births to rural women and, among privately insured women, might decrease use of neonatal resources.     

Payment levels, resource use, and insurance risk of medicaid versus private insured in three states.

Concerns with access and costs in the Medicaid program often lead policy makers to consider alternatives. These include subsidizing poor persons' purchases of health insurance in private markets or integrating Medicaid beneficiaries into commercial managed care systems. As policy makers consider such alternatives, a persistent question is, apart from the disabled within Medicaid, do younger Medicaid enrollees represent a different insurance risk than people of similar age and sex within private insurance pools? We use 1994 data from Georgia, Mississippi, and California to assess relative payment levels, resource use/costs, and risk-adjusted utilization of fee-for-service (FFS) Medicaid enrollees versus privately insured people. When resources are valued at private prices, the use by Medicaid enrollees represents a higher cost. After risk adjustment, Medicaid enrollee resource use appears higher than expected for the privately insured only for outpatient facility visits in the southern states and for inpatient days by pregnant women in California Medi-Cal. Indeed, we find evidence that Medicaid enrollees are underserved relative to their health needs. Given the higher dollar value of their resource usage, apparently obtained under FFS at discounted provider rates, and the lack of evidence on significant overuse relative to need, their integration into private provider systems appears challenging.     

Health care access and use among low-income children: who fares best?

In this paper we assess how access to care and use of services among low-income children vary by insurance status. Although 40 percent of low-income children rely on private health insurance, little is known about how this coverage compares with Medicaid coverage in meeting their health care needs. We find that Medicaid and privately insured low-income children appear to have fairly comparable access but that Medicaid-covered children are more likely to receive services and to have more visits when they receive care. Expanding public coverage may not be sufficient to ensure that all low-income children have access to comprehensive and high-quality care. It may require improvements in preventive and dental care for children with private coverage, an area in which states have limited influence.     

Midwifery and Birth Centers Under State Medicaid Programs: Current Limits to Beneficiary Access to a High-Value Model of Care

Policy Points

• Birth center services must be covered under Medicaid per federal mandate, but reimbursement and other policy barriers prevent birth centers from serving more Medicaid patients.
• Midwifery care provided through birth centers improves maternal and infant outcomes and lowers costs for Medicaid beneficiaries. Birth centers offer an array of birth options and have resources to care for patients with medical and psychosocial risks.
• Addressing the barriers identified in this study would promote birth centers’ participation in Medicaid, leading to better outcomes for Medicaid‐covered mothers and newborns and significant savings for the Medicaid program.

ContextMidwifery care, particularly when offered through birth centers, has shown promise in both improving pregnancy outcomes and containing costs. The national evaluation of Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns II, an initiative that tested enhanced prenatal care models for Medicaid beneficiaries, found that women receiving prenatal care at Strong Start birth centers experienced superior birth outcomes compared to matched and adjusted counterparts in typical Medicaid care. We use qualitative evaluation data to investigate birth centers’ experiences participating in Medicaid, and identify policies that influence Medicaid beneficiaries’ access to midwives and birth centers.MethodsWe analyzed data from more than 200 key informant interviews and 40 focus groups conducted during four case study rounds; a phone‐based survey of Medicaid officials in Strong Start states; and an Internet‐based survey of birth center sites. We identified themes related to access to midwives and birth centers, focusing on influential Medicaid policies.FindingsMedicaid beneficiaries chose birth center care because they preferred midwife providers, wanted a more natural birth experience, or in some cases sought certain pain relief methods or birth procedures not available at hospitals. However, Medicaid enrollees currently have less access to birth centers than privately insured women. Many birth centers have difficulty contracting with managed care organizations and participating in Medicaid value‐based delivery system reforms, and birth center reimbursement rates are sometimes too low to cover the actual cost of care. Some birth centers significantly limit Medicaid business because of low reimbursement rates and threats to facility sustainability.ConclusionsMedicaid beneficiaries do not have the same access to maternity care providers and birth settings as their privately insured counterparts. Medicaid policy barriers prevent some birth centers from serving more Medicaid patients, or threaten the financial sustainability of centers. By addressing these barriers, more Medicaid beneficiaries could access care that is associated with positive birth outcomes for mothers and newborns, and the Medicaid program could reap significant savings.     

Low-income persons' access to health care: NMCUES Medicaid data

Data from the National Medical Care Utilization and Expenditure Survey (NMCUES) are presented on access to medical care for low-income people in 1980. NMCUES was a national probability household survey jointly sponsored by the National Center for Health Statistics and the Health Care Financing Administration. NMCUES also included four State Medicaid Household Surveys. Data from both the national sample, for all low-income people, and from the four State surveys, for Medicaid people, were included in this analysis. The NMCUES data provided several measures which were previously unavailable on Medicaid experience, in particular, detailed Medicaid eligibility information in combination with income, health status, and health care use. This information can provide a comparison between access to care for those covered by Medicaid, and other low-income persons. In 1980 Medicaid covered a minority of poor and low-income people, only 44 percent of the poor younger than 65 years of age and 38 percent of poor people 65 years of age and older. While almost all elderly had Medicare coverage, about 25 percent of younger low-income people had no form of health insurance, compared with only 9 percent of nonpoor persons who were uninsured. Another measure of access is a regular source of care, the "place where a person goes for health care when sick." In 1980, 15 percent of people younger than 65 who were covered by Medicaid had no regular source of care. This is similar to the rate for the privately insured. However, the types of providers that were cited as the regular source of care differed.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Access to care for low-income women: the impact of Medicaid

This study was undertaken to assess how low-income women with Medicaid, private insurance, or no insurance vary with regard to personal characteristics, health status, and health utilization. Data are from a telephone interview survey of a representative cross-sectional sample of 5,200 low-income women in Minnesota, Oregon, Tennessee, Florida, and Texas. On the whole, low-income women were found to experience considerable barriers to care; however, uninsured low-income women have significantly more trouble obtaining care, receive fewer recommended services, and are more dissatisfied with the care they receive than their insured counterparts. Women on Medicaid had access to care that was comparable with their low-income privately insured counterparts, but in general had significantly lower satisfaction with their providers and their plans. Future federal and state efforts should focus on expanding efforts to improve the scope and reach of health care coverage to low-income women through public or private means.     

Service Use of Rural and Urban Medicaid Beneficiaries Suffering From Depression: The Role of Supply

Despite the prevalence and consequence of depression in rural areas, the literature on treating depression in rural areas is relatively scarce and inconclusive. The use of mental health services by rural people suffering from depression and the role that supply may play in explaining these differences are not well understood. Understanding these issues for rural Medicaid beneficiaries is important as Medicaid managed carefor physical and behavioral health care is expanded to rural areas. This study compares the mental health service use of rural and urban Medicaid beneficiaries, ages 18 to 64, in Maine suffering from depression and examines what influence mental health and primary care supply have in explaining observed differences. Two models are used to estimate the use of ambulatory mental health services: (1) a logit likelihood estimate of whether a beneficiary uses any outpatient mental health services for depression; (2) an ordinary least squares regression estimating the number of annualized ambulatory mental health care visits among users. Rural beneficiaries suffering from depression have lower utilization than urban beneficiaries. Rural and urban Aid for Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)--and Supplemental Security Income (SSI)--beneficiaries suffering from depression rely more on mental health than on general health care providers to receive ambulatory mental health care. Rural beneficiaries (AFDC and SSI) rely relatively more on general health care providers than urban beneficiaries. Multivariate analysis suggests that mental health supply and patient-level factors, but not primary care supply, account for utilization differences. This article describes the need to better understand factors limiting participation of primary care providers and to study the role of supply across multiple states.     

Access of rural AFDC Medicaid beneficiaries to mental health services

This article examines geographic differences in the use of mental health services among Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)-eligible Medicaid beneficiaries in Maine. Findings indicate that rural AFDC beneficiaries have significantly lower utilization of mental health services than urban beneficiaries. Specialty mental health providers account for the majority of ambulatory visits for both rural and urban beneficiaries. However, rural beneficiaries rely more on primary-care providers than do urban beneficiaries. Differences in use are largely explained by variations in the supply of specialty mental health providers. This finding supports the long-held assumption that lower supply is a barrier to access to mental health services in rural areas.     

Insurance status and access to primary health care:disparate outcomes for potentially preventable hospitalization

This study examines associations between hospitalization for ambulatory care sensitive (ACS) conditions and insurance status for working age adults, and for people age 65 and older. ACS hospitalization is a recognized indicator of access to primary care. Using data from the 1997 U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample and the U.S. Census, we calculate population-based rates of ACS hospitalization. We also use the 1997 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to calculate the prevalence of ACS conditions in the groups studied. Among working age adults, those receiving Medicaid and the uninsured had higher ACS hospitalization rates than insured individuals, even after adjusting for the prevalence of ACS conditions. Among Medicare beneficiaries, those who also received Medicaid benefits had higher ACS hospitalization rates than others, again after adjusting for the prevalence of ACS conditions; those with private insurance supplementing Medicare had lower ACS hospitalization rates.     

Accounting for uncertainty in policy decision making: Improving access to pediatric dental care

ObjectiveTo introduce a statistical inference framework for policy decision making on access to pediatric dental care.Data SourcesSecondary data were collected for the state of Colorado for year 2019.Study DesignThe access model was an optimization model, matching the demand (patients) and supply (providers) of dental care. Sampling distributions of model inputs were specified using hierarchical Bayesian models, with hyperparameters informed by prior information derived from multiple data sources. Simultaneous inference was applied to identify areas for access improvement. The model was applied to make inference on the pediatric dental care in Colorado, accounting for financial access, differentiated into public (Medicaid and CHIP), private (commercial and out‐of‐pocket), and without financial access.Data Collection/Extraction MethodsMultiple data sources informed the access measurement approach including: 2017 American Community Survey, 2019 Colorado Dental Board, and 2019 National Provider Plan and Enumeration System, 2019 InsureKidsNow.gov among others.Principal FindingsThe median access measure (travel distance) was greater than the Colorado access standards in 16.9% and 65.1% of census tracts for children with private financial access and publicly insured, respectively. Accounting for uncertainty (confidence level 99%), these percentages decreased to 14.6% and 25.6%, respectively, with mostly suburban and rural tracts failing to meet the standards. The median disparity for Medicaid and CHIP versus private financial access was greater than 5 miles in 84.5% and 81.6% of census tracts, respectively. Accounting for uncertainty (confidence level 99%), these percentages declined to 19.5% and 10.5%, respectively, with significant disparities around the metropolitan areas.ConclusionsWhile many communities failed to meet access standards, when accounting for uncertainty, most urban ones did not fail. Disparities in spatial access between publicly and privately insured were most acute in urban communities. Medicaid insured experienced higher disparities than CHIP insured; those differences were not identified when not accounting for uncertainty.     

Unmet Need Among Rural Medicaid Beneficiaries in Minnesota

Given the vulnerabilities of rural residents and the health care issues faced by the Medicaid population generally, the combined effects of being on Medicaid and living in a rural area raise important questions about access to health care services. This study looks at a key dimension of health care access: unmet needfor health care services. The study relies on data from a 1998 survey of rural Minnesota Medicaid beneficiaries. An overall response rate of 70% was obtained. For this study, the sample is limited to women who were on Medicaid for the full 12 months prior to the survey, resulting in 900 respondents. The study finds that the rural Medicaid beneficiaries face high levels of unmet need: more than 1 in 3 reported either delaying or not getting doctor, hospital, or specialist care that theyfelt they needed. Although the study lacks direct measures of the consequences of the high levels of unmet need, there is evidence that greater emergency room use is associated with unmet need. The survey data cannot necessarily be generalized to other rural areas, and like all surveys, this one is subject to nonresponse bias as well as potential biases because of respondent recall and self-assessment of medical needs. Nevertheless, thesefindings are suggestive of negative consequences of unmet need for both Medicaid beneficiaries and program costs.     

The effect of Medicaid payment generosity on access and use among beneficiaries

OBJECTIVE: This study examines the effects of Medicaid payment generosity on access and care for adult and child Medicaid beneficiaries. DATA SOURCE: Three years of the National Surveys of America's Families (1997, 1999, 2002) are linked to the Urban Institute Medicaid capitation rate surveys, the Area Resource File, and the American Hospital Association survey files. STUDY DESIGN: In order to identify the effect of payment generosity apart from unmeasured differences across areas, we compare the experiences of Medicaid beneficiaries with groups that should not be affected by Medicaid payment policies. To assure that these groups are comparable to Medicaid beneficiaries, we reweight the data using propensity score methods. We use a difference-in-differences model to assess the effects of Medicaid payment generosity on four categories of access and use measures (continuity of care, preventive care, visits, and perceptions of provider communication and quality of care). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Higher payments increase the probability of having a usual source of care and the probability of having at least one visit to a doctor and other health professional for Medicaid adults, and produce more positive assessments of the health care received by adults and children. However, payment generosity has no effect on the other measures that we examined, such as the probability of receiving preventive care or the probability of having unmet needs. CONCLUSIONS: Higher payment rates can improve some aspects of access and use for Medicaid beneficiaries, but the effects are not dramatic.     

Access to Care for Rural Medicare Beneficiaries

This paper examines variations between urban and rural Medicare beneficiaries in three measures of access to care: self-reported access to care, satisfaction with care received and use of services. The assessment focuses on these measures and their relationship to adjacency to metropolitan areas. Comparisons are also provided for the relative effects of adjacency versus broader access barriers such as income. Data from the 1993 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey are used. The analyses offer several new perspectives on access in rural areas. First, as perceived by respondents, rural residence does not indicate access problems; instead, Medicare beneficiaries in rural counties that are adjacent to urban areas and that have their own city of at least 10,000 people report higher levels of satisfaction and fewer self-reported access problems than do residents of urban counties. These results may stem either from differences in rural residents' expectations regarding access or willingness to accept appropriate substitutions. Preventive vaccination rates in rural areas are on par with or better than rates by beneficiaries in urban areas. The only services where utilization in rural areas was limited relative to urban areas were preventive cancer screening for women and dental care. Development of policies to address these specific service gaps may be warranted. Low income has a more pervasive and problematic relationship to self-reported access, satisfaction and utilization than does rural residence per se.     

The impact of Medicaid on physician use by low-income children.

This study evaluated the determinants of physician use by low-income children, with an emphasis on the effect of Medicaid. Data are from the 1980 National Medical Care Utilization and Expenditure Survey. Regression analysis revealed that Medicaid children were more likely than both privately insured and uninsured children to visit an office-based physician. Also, Medicaid children with at least one visit to any setting had a higher number of visits than uninsured children. Such factors as age, health status, number of children in the family, educational status, and income also accounted for differences within the low-income population. The results suggest that access to physicians' services (including office-based physicians) can be increased by expanding Medicaid eligibility to uninsured low-income children and by improving private health insurance benefits among the underinsured.