Zuniga Carmela, Hernandez Valeria, Stulberg Debra, Hasselbacher Lee, McHugh Ashley, Young Danielle, Dismer Hanz, Thompson Terri-Ann
Ibis Reproductive Health, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Department of Family Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
BMJ Public Health. 2025 Apr 17;3(1):e001966. doi: 10.1136/bmjph-2024-001966. eCollection 2025 Jan.
In 2018, Illinois implemented House Bill 40 (HB-40), allowing state funds to provide Medicaid coverage for abortion. This study aimed to quantitatively measure changes in access among Illinois residents after the law's implementation, with a focus on changes experienced by Medicaid versus non-Medicaid patients.
We conducted a retrospective analysis using 67 462 abortion visits across 18 health centres comparing service delivery patterns 1 year before and 3 years after HB-40 implementation. We used a t-test and difference-in-differences regression to assess the policy's effect on mean gestational age at the time of abortion among Medicaid patients and non-Medicaid patients. We used χ tests to capture differences in insurance type used for payment, as well as differences between Medicaid and non-Medicaid patients in presenting at ≤11 weeks gestation, abortion method provided and time between scheduling and getting an abortion.
From 2017 to 2020, the overall volume of abortions increased by 27% and the share of abortions paid for with Medicaid increased from 15% to 49%. Compared with non-Medicaid patients, Medicaid patients experienced a significant decrease in average gestational age at the time of abortion post-HB-40 (incidence rate ratio (IRR)=0.93, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.95, p<0.001). The proportion of Medicaid patients ≤11 weeks gestation increased post-HB-40 (76% to 83%; p<0.001) but did not change among non-Medicaid patients (89% to 90%; p=0.62). By 2020, the 13%-point gap that existed between the two groups in 2017 (76% and 89%) was reduced to 4 (86% and 90%). The proportion of medication abortions increased substantially for Medicaid patients post-HB-40 (27% to 46%; p<0.001) and increased slightly for non-Medicaid patients (51% to 53%; p=0.001), resulting in decreased gaps in medication abortions received between the two groups.
Medicaid coverage of abortion reduced insurance-related disparities for Medicaid patients, as shown by decreased gaps in average gestational age among Medicaid and non-Medicaid patients. It was also associated with increased medication abortions among Medicaid patients.
2018年,伊利诺伊州实施了众议院第40号法案(HB - 40),允许州资金为堕胎提供医疗补助保险。本研究旨在定量衡量该法律实施后伊利诺伊州居民在获得堕胎服务方面的变化,重点关注医疗补助保险患者与非医疗补助保险患者所经历的变化。
我们进行了一项回顾性分析,使用了18个医疗中心的67462次堕胎就诊数据,比较了HB - 40实施前1年和实施后3年的服务提供模式。我们使用t检验和差分回归来评估该政策对医疗补助保险患者和非医疗补助保险患者堕胎时平均孕周的影响。我们使用χ检验来找出支付所用保险类型的差异,以及医疗补助保险患者与非医疗补助保险患者在妊娠≤11周时就诊、所提供的堕胎方法以及预约与堕胎之间的时间差异。
从2017年到2020年,堕胎总量增加了27%,使用医疗补助保险支付的堕胎比例从15%增至49%。与非医疗补助保险患者相比,HB - 40实施后,医疗补助保险患者堕胎时的平均孕周显著下降(发病率比(IRR)=0.93,95%置信区间0.91至0.95,p<0.001)。HB - 40实施后,妊娠≤11周医疗补助保险患者的比例增加(从76%增至83%;p<0.001),而非医疗补助保险患者这一比例未变(从89%增至90%;p = 0.62)。到2020年,两组在2017年存在的13个百分点的差距(76%和89%)缩小至4个百分点(86%和90%)。HB - 40实施后,医疗补助保险患者药物流产的比例大幅增加(从27%增至46%;p<0.001);非医疗补助保险患者药物流产比例略有增加(从51%增至53%;p = 0.001),导致两组在接受药物流产方面的差距缩小。
堕胎的医疗补助保险覆盖减少了医疗补助保险患者与保险相关的差异,这体现在医疗补助保险患者与非医疗补助保险患者平均孕周差距的缩小上。这也与医疗补助保险患者药物流产的增加有关。