Person:

Sommers, Benjamin

Background: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) established nationwide eligibility for young adults 19 to 25 years of age to retain coverage under their parents’ private health plans. We conducted a study to determine how the implementation of this provision changed rates of insurance coverage for young adults seeking medical care for major emergencies. Methods: We evaluated more than 480,000 nondiscretionary visits made to emergency departments from 2009 through 2011, as recorded in a large, geographically diverse data set of hospital claims, to estimate how the ACA provision affected private insurance coverage of such visits by young adults (19 to 25 years of age). To adjust for underlying trends in insurance coverage, we compared changes in the target age group with changes among adults 26 to 31 years of age, who were unaffected by the provision (control group). Results: After the ACA provision took effect, private coverage of nondiscretionary visits to emergency departments by young adults increased by 3.1 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3 to 3.9; relative increase, 5.2%; P<0.001), as compared with similar visits in the control group. The percentage of visits by uninsured young adults also fell significantly (−1.7 percentage points; 95% CI, −2.8 to −0.7; relative decrease, 9.1%; P<0.001). The rates of nondiscretionary visits that were covered by Medicaid or other nonprivate insurers remained relatively steady throughout the study period. The coverage expansion led to an estimated 22,072 visits to emergency departments by newly insured young adults and $147 million in associated costs that were covered by private insurance plans during a 1-year period. Conclusions: Enactment of the dependent-coverage provision was associated with a significant increase in the proportion of young adults who were protected from the financial consequences of a serious medical emergency. (Funded by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services.)

This perspectives article considers the potential implications an affirmative action ban would have on patient care in the US. A physician’s race and ethnicity are among the strongest predictors of specialty choice and whether or not a physician cares for Medicaid and uninsured populations. Taking this into account, research suggests that an affirmative action ban in university admissions would sharply reduce the supply of primary care physicians to Medicaid and uninsured populations over the coming decade. Our article compares current conditions to the potential effect of an affirmative action ban by projecting how many future medical students will become primary care physicians for Medicaid and uninsured patients by 2025. Based on previous evidence and current medical student training patterns, we project that a ban could deny primary care access for 1.25 million of our nation’s most vulnerable patients, considerably worsening existing healthcare disparities. More broadly, we argue that the effects of eliminating affirmative action would be fundamentally contrary to the Association of American Medical Colleges’ stated goal of medical education—“to improve the health of all.”

Background: The Massachusetts 2006 health care reform has been called a model for the Affordable Care Act. The law attained near-universal insurance coverage and increased access to care. Its effect on population health is less clear.

Objective: To determine whether the Massachusetts reform was associated with changes in all-cause mortality and mortality from causes amenable to health care.

Design: Comparison of mortality rates before and after reform in Massachusetts versus a control group with similar demographics and economic conditions.

Setting: Changes in mortality rates for adults in Massachusetts counties from 2001 to 2005 (prereform) and 2007 to 2010 (postreform) were compared with changes in a propensity score–defined control group of counties in other states.

Participants: Adults aged 20 to 64 years in Massachusetts and control group counties.

Measurements: Annual county-level all-cause mortality in age-, sex-, and race-specific cells (n = 146 825) from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Compressed Mortality File. Secondary outcomes were deaths from causes amenable to health care, insurance coverage, access to care, and self-reported health.

Results: Reform in Massachusetts was associated with a significant decrease in all-cause mortality compared with the control group (−2.9%; P = 0.003, or an absolute decrease of 8.2 deaths per 100 000 adults). Deaths from causes amenable to health care also significantly decreased (−4.5%; P < 0.001). Changes were larger in counties with lower household incomes and higher prereform uninsured rates. Secondary analyses showed significant gains in coverage, access to care, and self-reported health. The number needed to treat was approximately 830 adults gaining health insurance to prevent 1 death per year.

Limitations: Nonrandomized design subject to unmeasured confounders. Massachusetts results may not generalize to other states.

Conclusion: Health reform in Massachusetts was associated with significant reductions in all-cause mortality and deaths from causes amenable to health care.

Primary Funding Source: None.

Medicaid provides health insurance for 54 million Americans. Using the Census Bureau's Supplemental Poverty Measure (which subtracts out-of-pocket medical expenses from family resources), we estimated the impact of eliminating Medicaid. In our counterfactual, Medicaid beneficiaries would become uninsured or gain other insurance. Counterfactual medical expenditures were drawn stochastically from propensity-score-matched individuals without Medicaid. While this method captures the importance of risk protection, it likely underestimates Medicaid's impact due to unobserved differences between Medicaid and non-Medicaid individuals. Nonetheless, we find that Medicaid reduces out-of-pocket medical spending from $871 to $376 per beneficiary, and decreases poverty rates by 1.0% among children, 2.2% among disabled adults, and 0.7% among elderly individuals. When factoring in institutionalized populations, an additional 500,000 people were kept out of poverty. Overall, Medicaid kept at least 2.6 million—and as many as 3.4 million—out of poverty in 2010, making it the U.S.’s third largest anti-poverty program.