Both The 'Private Option And Traditional Medicaid Expansions Improved Access To Care For Low-Income Adults

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Both The 'Private Option And Traditional Medicaid Expansions Improved Access To Care For Low-Income Adults

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Sommers, Benjamin Daniel
dc.contributor.author Blendon, Robert J.
dc.contributor.author Orav, E. John
dc.date.accessioned 2016-02-10T21:58:25Z
dc.date.issued 2016
dc.identifier.citation Sommers, B. D., R. J. Blendon, and E. J. Orav. 2016. “Both The ’Private Option And Traditional Medicaid Expansions Improved Access To Care For Low-Income Adults.” Health Affairs 35 (1) (January 1): 96–105. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2015.0917. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0278-2715 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:25156227
dc.description.abstract Under the Affordable Care Act, thirty states and the District of Columbia have expanded eligibility for Medicaid, with several states using Medicaid funds to purchase private insurance (the “private option”). Despite vigorous debate over the use of private insurance versus traditional Medicaid to provide coverage to low-income adults, there is little evidence on the relative merits of the two approaches. We compared the first-year impacts of traditional Medicaid expansion in Kentucky, the private option in Arkansas, and nonexpansion in Texas by conducting a telephone survey of two distinct waves of low-income adults (5,665 altogether) in those three states in November–December 2013 and twelve months later. Using a difference-in-differences analysis, we found that the uninsurance rate declined by 14 percentage points in the two expansion states, compared to the nonexpansion state. In the expansion states, again compared to the nonexpansion state, skipping medications because of cost and trouble paying medical bills declined significantly, and the share of individuals with chronic conditions who obtained regular care increased. Other than coverage type and trouble paying medical bills (which decreased more in Kentucky than in Arkansas), there were no significant differences between Kentucky’s traditional Medicaid expansion and Arkansas’s private option, which suggests that both approaches improved access among low-income adults. en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher Health Affairs (Project Hope) en_US
dc.relation.isversionof doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2015.0917 en_US
dash.license OAP
dc.title Both The 'Private Option And Traditional Medicaid Expansions Improved Access To Care For Low-Income Adults en_US
dc.type Journal Article en_US
dc.description.version Accepted Manuscript en_US
dc.relation.journal Health Affairs en_US
dash.depositing.author Sommers, Benjamin Daniel
dc.date.available 2016-02-10T21:58:25Z
dash.funder.name Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality en_US
dash.funder.name Commonwealth Fund en_US
dash.funder.award K02HS021291 en_US

Files in this item

Files Size Format View
Medicaid D-in-D Health Affairs DASH 1-2016.pdf 367.3Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters