Search

Context: Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) is the most effective reversible method to prevent unplanned pregnancies. Variability in state-level policies and the high cost of LARC could create substantial inconsistencies in Medicaid coverage, despite federal guidance aimed at enhancing broad access. This study surveyed state Medicaid payment policies and outreach activities related to LARC to explore the scope of services covered., Methods: Using publicly available information, we performed a content analysis of state Medicaid family planning and LARC payment policies. Purposeful sampling led to a selection of nine states with diverse geographic locations, political climates, Medicaid expansion status, and the number of women covered by Medicaid., Results: All nine states' Medicaid programs covered some aspects of LARC. However, only a single state's payment structure incorporated all core aspects of high-quality LARC service delivery, including counseling, device, insertion, removal, and follow-up care. Most states did not explicitly address counseling, device removal, or follow-up care. Some states had strategies to enhance access, including policies to increase device reimbursement, stocking and delivery programs to remove cost barriers, and covering devices and insertion after an abortion., Conclusions: Although Medicaid policy encourages LARC methods, state payment policies frequently fail to address key aspects of care, including counseling, follow-up care, and removal, resulting in highly variable state-level practices. Although some states include payment policy innovations to support LARC access, significant opportunities remain., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Section 1115 of the Social Security Act allows the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and states to test innovations in Medicaid and other public welfare programs without formal legislative action. Six states currently operate their Medicaid expansions as demonstrations and several more are expected to seek permission to do so. While the current Medicaid expansion demonstrations vary, they share a major focus: increasing beneficiaries' financial responsibility for the cost of coverage and care. Demonstrations include requirements that Medicaid beneficiaries pay enrollment fees and cost-sharing that exceed traditional Medicaid limits. Others propose tying beneficiaries' financial responsibility to behavioral changes in health and wellness, while still others impose penalties for nonpayment of enrollment fees. Evaluations must consider the impact of these requirements on access, use of care, and health status, as well as the feasibility of demonstration reforms and their impact on administrative efficiency, providers, and health plans.

Thirty-eight percent of US children depend on publicly financed health insurance, reflecting both its expansion and the steady erosion of employment-based coverage. Continued funding for the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) is an immediate priority. But broader reforms aimed at improving the quality of coverage for all insured children, with a special emphasis on children living in low-income families, are also essential. This means addressing the "family glitch," which bars premium subsidies for children whose parents have access to affordable self-only employer-sponsored benefits. It also means addressing the quality of health plans sold in the individual and small-group markets-whether or not purchased through the state and federal exchanges-that are governed by the "essential health benefit" standard of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In this article we examine trends in coverage and the role of Medicaid and CHIP. We also consider how the ACA has shaped child health financing, and we discuss critical issues in the broader insurance market and the need to ensure plan quality, including the scope of coverage, use of a pediatric medical necessity standard that emphasizes growth and development, the structure of pediatric provider networks, and attention to the quality of pediatric health care., (Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.)

Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), changes in income and family circumstances are likely to produce frequent transitions in eligibility for Medicaid and health insurance Marketplace coverage for low- and middle-income adults. We provide state-by-state estimates of potential eligibility changes ("churning") if all states expanded Medicaid under health reform, and we identify predictors of rates of churning within states. Combining longitudinal survey data with state-specific weighting and small-area estimation techniques, we found that eligibility changes occurred frequently in all fifty states. Higher-income states and states that had more generous Medicaid eligibility criteria for nonelderly adults before the ACA experienced more churning, although the differences were small. Even in states with the least churning, we estimated that more than 40 percent of adults likely to enroll in Medicaid or subsidized Marketplace coverage would experience a change in eligibility within twelve months. Policy options for states to reduce the frequency and impact of coverage changes include adopting twelve-month continuous eligibility for adults in Medicaid, creating a Basic Health Program, using Medicaid funds to subsidize Marketplace coverage for low-income adults, and encouraging the same health insurers to offer plans in Medicaid and the Marketplaces.

We review the evolution of federal financing for child health care over the past 40 years. The Social Security Amendments of 1967 established the program of early and periodic screening, diagnosis and treatment (EPSDT) as a required Medicaid benefit. The EPSDT amendments directed agencies to cover "early and periodic" screening and diagnostic services to ascertain "defects" and "chronic conditions" in children, as well as health care and treatment needed to "correct or ameliorate" such defects and conditions discovered during the screening examinations. The 1997 enactment of the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) shifted federal policy from the use of an early coverage standard to one that gives insurers much more discretion to define medical necessity and coverage exclusions. CHIP programs offer coverage that is narrower than the benefits available under Medicaid. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires significantly more classes of care to be covered than does CHIP but well below the level of coverage under Medicaid. Implementation of the ACA to date suggests that the US Department of Health and Human Services will only demand pediatric coverage pegged to the commercial insurance market standards, rather than Medicaid's unique pediatric coverage standard. Although EPSDT's emphasis on early, developmental, and ameliorative services might result in more comprehensive benefits for children, particularly those with special health needs, one might still describe the ACA coverage as providing a basic, minimal level of services from a distributive justice perspective. It may, however, vary from state to state. States have the authority to decide whether to use an EPSDT-style approach or to follow the more restrictive approach of commercial insurance plans. Advocacy at the state level will determine which approach different states take.

In establishing minimum coverage standards for health insurance plans, the Affordable Care Act includes an "essential health benefits" statute that directs the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services not to make coverage decisions, determine reimbursement rates, establish incentive programs, or design benefits in ways that discriminate against individuals because of their age, disability, or expected length of life. This issue brief examines how this statute will help Americans with disabilities, who currently are subject to discrimination by insurers based on health status and health care need. The authors also discuss the complex issues involved in implementing the essential benefits provision and offer recommendations to federal policymakers for ensuring that people with disabilities receive the full insurance benefits to which they are entitled.

The Affordable Care Act will extend health insurance coverage by both expanding Medicaid eligibility and offering premium subsidies for the purchase of private health insurance through state health insurance exchanges. But by definition, eligibility for these programs is sensitive to income and can change over time with fluctuating income and changes in family composition. The law specifies no minimum enrollment period, and subsidy levels will also change as income rises and falls. Using national survey data, we estimate that within six months, more than 35 percent of all adults with family incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level will experience a shift in eligibility from Medicaid to an insurance exchange, or the reverse; within a year, 50 percent, or 28 million, will. To minimize the effect on continuity and quality of care, states and the federal government should adopt strategies to reduce the frequency of coverage transitions and to mitigate the disruptions caused by those transitions. Options include establishing a minimum guaranteed eligibility period and "dually certifying" some plans to serve both Medicaid and exchange enrollees.

This article examines the current state of disease surveillance and reporting in the United States and seeks to answer two central questions: first, whether the increasing emphasis on the global importance of public health policies compels a fundamental reexamination of the long-standing deferential approach to state power where matters of population health surveillance are concerned and, second, how the nation's long-standing deferential legal customs might be modified to address the growing emphasis on global public health policy that is undergirded by technological advances. We examine the International Health Regulations, or IHR (2005), and suggest that these regulations offer a powerful impetus for reevaluating U.S. legal custom concerning the policy and practice of population health surveillance, not only as a matter of U.S. law but also as a core dimension of U.S. legal obligations to other nations, as embodied in international agreements and treaties. We find that if the political will exists to change the domestic disease surveillance and reporting system, the federal government has the power to act. Questions remain, however, about whether the public health and legislative communities are willing to challenge current customs or even if they desire to do so.

The evolution of US law has had an enormous influence on medicine as a profession, and much of this legal evolution can be attributed to changes in the science and practice of medicine. This changing legal framework and its intersection with medicine has many facets. Three of the most important facets concern the evolution of the no duty-to-treat principle and the role of modern health care financing and civil rights law in altering this rule, the manner in which advances in medicine led courts and legislatures to change the standards against which professional medical liability is measured, and the basic loss of highly preferential treatment under US laws aimed at preventing anticompetitive conduct by businesses. However, despite the impact on the profession of an evolving legal system, concern over the integrity of medical professionalism continues to significantly influence both laws and lawmakers, including legislatures, regulatory agencies, and the courts.

This issue brief examines the concept of fundamental alteration under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); specifically it considers when proposed modifications of public programs under Title II of the ADA will be considered to amount to the type of fundamental alteration that lies beyond judicial power to compel. The issue of when a program change constitutes a fundamental alteration is important in state community integration planning efforts, since these types of changes will require legislative action.

Background/objective: Asthma is increasingly being recognized as an important public health concern for children in the United States. Effective management of childhood asthma may require not only improving guideline-based therapeutic interventions, but also addressing social and physical environmental risk factors. The objective of this project was to create a blueprint for improvement of national policy in this area., Design/methods: A nominal group process with nationally recognized experts and leaders (referred to as "the committee") in childhood asthma., Results: The committee identified 11 policy recommendations (numbered in order below) in 2 broad categories: Improving Health Care Delivery and Financing, and Strengthening the Public Health Infrastructure. Recommendations regarding Improving Health Care Delivery and Financing include the development and implementation of quality-of-care standards in 1) primary care, 2) self-management education, and 3) case-management interventions, and the expansion of insurance coverage and benefit design by 4) extending continuous health insurance coverage for all children, 5) developing model insurance benefits packages for essential childhood asthma services, and 6) educating health care purchasers in how to use them. Recommendations for Strengthening the Public Health Infrastructure include public funding of asthma services that fall outside the insurance system through establishing 7) public health grants to foster asthma-friendly communities and 8) school-based asthma initiatives. 9) Launching a national asthma public education campaign, 10) developing a national asthma surveillance system, and 11) establishing a national agenda for asthma prevention research, with an emphasis on epidemiologic and behavioral sciences, are also recommended., Conclusions: Implementing these recommendations will require coordination of activities at the national, state, and local community level, and within and outside the health care delivery system. With a further commitment of national and local resources, implementation of these recommendations will likely lead to improved child and family asthma outcomes in the United States. childhood asthma, health care policy, health care services.

Context: The racial health equity implications of the Trump administration's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We focus on four key health care policy decisions made by the administration in response to the public health emergency: rejecting a special Marketplace enrollment period. failing to use its full powers to enhance state Medicaid emergency options, refusing to suspend the public charge rule, and failing to target provider relief funds to providers serving the uninsured. Findings: In each case, the administration's policy choices intensified. rather than mitigated, racial health inequality. Its choices had a disproportionate adverse impact on minority populations and patients who are more likely to depend on public programs, be poor, experience pandemic- related job loss, lack insurance, rely on health care safety net providers, and be exposed to public charge sanctions. Conclusions: Ending structural racism in health care and promoting racial health care equity demands an equity-mindful approach to the pursuit of policies that enhance-rather than undermine-health care accessibility and effectiveness and resources for the poorest communities and the providers that serve them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]