Columbia University School of Social Work, New York, New York.
Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Dec 1;4(12):e2137383. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.37383.
Policy makers are considering insurance expansions to improve maternal health. The tradeoffs between expanding Medicaid or subsidized private insurance for maternal coverage and care are unknown.
To compare maternal coverage and care by Medicaid vs marketplace eligibility.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort study using a difference-in-difference research design was conducted from March 14, 2020, to April 22, 2021. Maternal coverage and care use were compared among women with family incomes 100% to 138% of the federal poverty level (FPL) residing in 10 Medicaid expansion sites (exposure group) who gained Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act and in 5 nonexpansion sites (comparison group) who gained marketplace eligibility before (2011-2013) and after (2015-2018) insurance expansion implementation. Participants included women aged 18 years or older from the 2011-2018 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System survey.
Eligibility for Medicaid or marketplace coverage under the Affordable Care Act.
Outcomes included coverage in the preconception and postpartum periods, early and adequate prenatal care, and postpartum checkups and effective contraceptive use.
The study population included 11 432 women age 18 years and older (32% age 18-24 years, 33% age 25-29 years, 35% age ≥30 years) with incomes 100% to 138% FPL: 7586 in a Medicaid state (exposure group) and 3846 in a nonexpansion marketplace state (comparison group). Women in marketplace states were younger, had higher educational level and marriage rates, and had less racial and ethnic diversity. Medicaid relative to marketplace eligibility was associated with increased Medicaid coverage (20.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 12.8 to 30.0 percentage points), decreased private insurance coverage (-10.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -13.3 to -7.5 percentage points), and decreased uninsurance (-8.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -20.1 to -0.1 percentage points) in the preconception period, increased postpartum Medicaid (17.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.7 to 34.3 percentage points) and increased adequate prenatal care (4.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 11.0 percentage points) in difference-in-difference models. No evidence of significant differences in early prenatal care, postpartum check-ups, or postpartum contraception was identified.
In this cohort study, eligibility for Medicaid was associated with increased Medicaid, lower preconception uninsurance, and increased adequate prenatal care use. The lower rates of preconception uninsurance among Medicaid-eligible women suggest that women with low incomes were facing barriers to marketplace enrollment, underscoring the potential importance of reducing financial barriers for the population with low incomes.
政策制定者正在考虑扩大保险范围以改善孕产妇健康。扩大医疗补助计划或补贴私人保险以扩大孕产妇保险和护理范围的权衡取舍尚不清楚。
比较医疗补助计划与市场准入资格对孕产妇保险和护理的影响。
设计、地点和参与者:这是一项回顾性队列研究,采用差异中的差异研究设计,于 2020 年 3 月 14 日至 2021 年 4 月 22 日进行。在 10 个医疗补助计划扩张点(暴露组)中,比较了家庭收入在联邦贫困线(FPL)的 100%至 138%之间的妇女的孕产妇保险和护理使用情况,这些妇女根据《平价医疗法案》获得了医疗补助资格,在 5 个非扩张点(对照组)中,这些妇女在保险扩张实施之前(2011-2013 年)和之后(2015-2018 年)获得了市场准入资格。参与者包括来自 2011-2018 年妊娠风险评估监测系统调查的年龄在 18 岁及以上的妇女。
根据《平价医疗法案》获得医疗补助或市场保险的资格。
结果包括受孕前和产后期间的保险覆盖范围、早期和充分的产前护理以及产后检查和有效避孕的使用。
研究人群包括 11432 名年龄在 18 岁及以上的妇女(32%年龄在 18-24 岁,33%年龄在 25-29 岁,35%年龄在 30 岁及以上),收入在 FPL 的 100%至 138%之间:7586 人在医疗补助州(暴露组),3846 人在非扩张市场州(对照组)。市场州的妇女年龄更小,受教育程度和结婚率更高,种族和民族多样性也更少。与市场资格相比,医疗补助资格与以下情况相关:受孕前医疗补助保险增加(20.3 个百分点;95%置信区间,12.8 至 30.0 个百分点),私人保险减少(-10.8 个百分点;95%置信区间,-13.3 至-7.5 个百分点),未保险减少(-8.7 个百分点;95%置信区间,-20.1 至-0.1 个百分点);产后医疗补助保险增加(17.4 个百分点;95%置信区间,1.7 至 34.3 个百分点)和充分的产前护理增加(4.4 个百分点;95%置信区间,0.1 至 11.0 个百分点)。差异模型未发现早期产前护理、产后检查或产后避孕方面有显著差异。
在这项队列研究中,获得医疗补助资格与增加医疗补助、降低受孕前未保险率以及增加充分产前护理使用率有关。有医疗补助资格的妇女中较低的受孕前未保险率表明,低收入妇女在市场准入方面面临障碍,这突出表明需要为低收入人群减少经济障碍。