Suppr超能文献

低收入社区将如何优先考虑医疗补助支出?

How Would Low-Income Communities Prioritize Medicaid Spending?

机构信息

University of Minnesota.

University of Michigan.

出版信息

J Health Polit Policy Law. 2020 Jun 1;45(3):373-418. doi: 10.1215/03616878-8161024.

Abstract

CONTEXT

Medicaid plays a critical role in low-income, minority, and medically underserved communities, particularly in states that have expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. Yet, the voices of underresourced communities are often unheard in decisions about how to allocate Medicaid's scarce resources, and traditional methods of public engagement are poorly suited to gathering such input. We argue that deliberative public engagement can be a useful tool for involving communities in setting Medicaid priorities.

METHOD

We engaged 209 residents of low-income, medically underserved Michigan communities in discussions about Medicaid spending priorities using an exercise in informed deliberation: CHAT (CHoosing All Together). Participants learned about Medicaid, deliberated in small groups, and set priorities both individually and collectively.

FINDINGS

Participants prioritized broad eligibility consistent with the ACA expansion, accepted some cost sharing, and prioritized spending in areas-including mental health-that are historically underfunded. Participants allocated less funding beyond benefit coverage, such as spending on healthy communities. Participants perceived the deliberative process as fair and informative, and they supported using it in the policy-making process.

CONCLUSION

The choices of participants from low-income, medically underserved communities reflect a unique set of priorities and suggest that engaging low-income communities more deeply in Medicaid policy making might result in different prioritization decisions.

摘要

背景

医疗补助计划在低收入、少数族裔和医疗服务不足的社区中发挥着至关重要的作用,特别是在那些根据《平价医疗法案》扩大了医疗补助计划的州。然而,在如何分配医疗补助计划稀缺资源的决策中,资源匮乏社区的声音往往被忽视,而且传统的公众参与方法也不适合收集此类意见。我们认为,协商式公众参与可以成为一种有用的工具,使社区参与制定医疗补助计划的优先事项。

方法

我们使用知情审议的一种练习,即 CHAT(一起选择),让密歇根州低收入、医疗服务不足的 209 名社区居民参与讨论医疗补助支出的优先事项。参与者了解了医疗补助计划,在小组中进行了审议,并分别和集体确定了优先事项。

发现

参与者优先考虑符合 ACA 扩张的广泛资格,接受了一些费用分担,并优先考虑在历史上资金不足的领域(包括心理健康)支出。参与者在福利覆盖范围之外分配的资金较少,例如在健康社区的支出。参与者认为审议过程公平且有启发性,并支持在决策过程中使用它。

结论

来自低收入、医疗服务不足社区的参与者的选择反映了一系列独特的优先事项,并表明更深入地让低收入社区参与医疗补助政策制定可能会导致不同的优先事项决策。

相似文献

1
How Would Low-Income Communities Prioritize Medicaid Spending?低收入社区将如何优先考虑医疗补助支出?
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2020 Jun 1;45(3):373-418. doi: 10.1215/03616878-8161024.
8
Medicaid's Post-ACA Paradoxes.《ACA 后的医疗补助悖论》。
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2020 Aug 1;45(4):617-632. doi: 10.1215/03616878-8255541.

本文引用的文献

1
Evaluating community deliberations about health research priorities.评估关于健康研究重点的社区审议。
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):772-784. doi: 10.1111/hex.12931. Epub 2019 Jun 28.
4
Medicaid retrenchment politics: fragmented or unified?医疗补助紧缩政治:碎片化还是统一化?
J Aging Soc Policy. 2018 May-Jun;30(3-4):372-399. doi: 10.1080/08959420.2018.1462675. Epub 2018 May 3.
7
The State as Community in Community-Based Participatory Research.基于社区的参与性研究中的国家作为社区
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2016;10(4):515-522. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2016.0059.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验