Search

Alternative approaches in Medicaid are proliferating under the Trump administration. Using a novel telephone survey, we assessed views on health savings accounts, work requirements, and Medicaid expansion. Our sample consisted of 2,739 low-income nonelderly adults in three Midwestern states: Ohio, which expanded eligibility for traditional Medicaid; Indiana, which expanded Medicaid using health savings accounts called POWER accounts; and Kansas, which has not expanded Medicaid. We found that coverage rates in 2017 were significantly higher in the two expansion states than in Kansas. However, cost-related barriers were more common in Indiana than in Ohio. Among Medicaid beneficiaries eligible for Indiana's waiver program, 39 percent had not heard of POWER accounts, and only 36 percent were making required payments, which means that nearly two-thirds were potentially subject to loss of benefits or coverage. In Kansas, 77 percent of respondents supported expanding Medicaid. With regard to work requirements, 49 percent of potential Medicaid enrollees in Kansas were already employed, 34 percent were disabled, and only 11 percent were not working but would be more likely to look for a job if required by Medicaid. These findings suggest that current Medicaid innovations may lead to unintended consequences for coverage and access.

We examined income gaps in the period 2011-13 in self-assessments of personal health and health care across thirty-two middle- and high-income countries. While high-income respondents were generally more positive about their health and health care in most countries, the gap between them and low-income respondents was much bigger in some than in others. The United States has among the largest income-related differences in each of the measures we studied, which assessed both respondents' past experiences and their confidence about accessing needed health care in the future. Relatively low levels of moral discomfort over income-based health care disparities despite broad awareness of unmet need indicate more public tolerance for health care inequalities in the United States than elsewhere. Nonetheless, over half of Americans felt that income-based health care inequalities are unfair, and these respondents were significantly more likely than their compatriots to support major health system reform-differences that reflect the country's political divisions. Given the many provisions in the Affordable Care Act that seek to reduce disparities, any replacement would also require attention to disparities or risk taking a step backward in an area where the United States is in sore need of improvement., (Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.)

Objective: To examine the life experiences of African American and Hispanic adults whose personal chronic illness and/or that of a family member is the biggest health problem for their families., Data Source: Telephone (landline and cell phone) interviews of random, nationally representative samples of 1081 African-American and 1478 Hispanic adults, age 18 and older. We evaluated the responses of 757 African-American and 697 Hispanic participants who reported a chronic illness as the biggest health problem in their families., Methods: Weighted analysis of cross-sectional survey responses from African-American and Hispanic adults., Results: African Americans and Hispanics with chronic illness in their families reported experiencing challenges with the health care delivery system, with financial/economic insecurity, and with their communities that may influence how they live with chronic disease., Discussion: Policymakers and clinicians should be aware that some African-American and Hispanic patients face obstacles within and beyond the health care system that are relevant to how they live with chronic conditions affecting their families. Additional tools and supports may need to be identified and supplied to effectively manage chronic illness in these communities. The payment system for physicians should account for the supplementary supports and services these patients might require., (© The Author(s) 2016.)

Importance: Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), more than 30 states have expanded Medicaid, with some states choosing to expand private insurance instead (the "private option"). In addition, while coverage gains from the ACA's Medicaid expansion are well documented, impacts on utilization and health are unclear., Objective: To assess changes in access to care, utilization, and self-reported health among low-income adults in 3 states taking alternative approaches to the ACA., Design, Setting, and Participants: Differences-in-differences analysis of survey data from November 2013 through December 2015 of US citizens ages 19 to 64 years with incomes below 138% of the federal poverty level in Kentucky, Arkansas, and Texas (n = 8676). Data analysis was conducted between January and May 2016., Exposures: Medicaid expansion in Kentucky and use of Medicaid funds to purchase private insurance for low-income adults in Arkansas (private option), compared with no expansion in Texas., Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported access to primary care, specialty care, and medications; affordability of care; outpatient, inpatient, and emergency utilization; receiving glucose and cholesterol testing, annual check-up, and care for chronic conditions; quality of care, depression score, and overall health., Results: Among the 3 states included in the study, Arkansas (n=2890), Kentucky (n=2898, and Texas (n=2888), there were no differences in sex, income, or marital status. Respondents from Texas were younger, more urban, and disproportionately Latino compared with those in Arkansas and Kentucky. Significant changes in coverage and access were more apparent in 2015 than in 2014. By 2015, expansion was associated with a 22.7 percentage-point reduction in the uninsured rate compared with nonexpansion (P < .001). Expansion was associated with significantly increased access to primary care (12.1 percentage points; P < .001), fewer skipped medications due to cost (-11.6 percentage points; P < .001), reduced out-of-pocket spending (-29.5%; P = .02), reduced likelihood of emergency department visits (-6.0 percentage points, P = .04), and increased outpatient visits (0.69 visits per year; P = .04). Screening for diabetes (6.3 percentage points; P = .05), glucose testing among patients with diabetes (10.7 percentage points; P = .03), and regular care for chronic conditions (12.0 percentage points; P = .008) all increased significantly after expansion. Quality of care ratings improved significantly (-7.1 percentage points with "fair/poor quality of care"; P = .03), as did the share of adults reporting excellent health (4.8 percentage points; P = .04). Comparisons of Arkansas vs Kentucky showed increased private coverage in the former (21.7 percentage points; P < .001), increased Medicaid in the latter (21.3 percentage points; P  < .001), and higher diabetic glucose testing rates in Kentucky (11.6 percentage points; P = .04), but no other statistically significant differences., Conclusions and Relevance: In the second year of expansion, Kentucky's Medicaid program and Arkansas's private option were associated with significant increases in outpatient utilization, preventive care, and improved health care quality; reductions in emergency department use; and improved self-reported health. Aside from the type of coverage obtained, outcomes were similar for nearly all other outcomes between the 2 states using alternative approaches to expansion.

For decades, public satisfaction with the health care system has been lower in the United States than in other high-income countries. To better understand the distinctive nature of US health system satisfaction, we compared the determinants of satisfaction with the health system in the United States to those in seventeen other high-income countries by applying regression decomposition methods to survey data collected in the period 2011-13. We found that concerns related to "accessing most-preferred care" (the extent to which people feel that they can access their top preferences at a time of need) were more important to satisfaction in the United States than in other high-income countries, while the reverse was true for satisfaction with recent interactions with the health system. Differences among US socioeconomic groups in survey responses regarding access to most-preferred care suggest that wide variation in insurance coverage and generosity may play a role in these differences. While reductions in the uninsured population and the movement toward minimum health plan standards could help address some concerns about access to preferred care, our results raise the possibility of public backlash as market forces push plans toward more restricted access and higher cost sharing., (Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.)

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., (Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.)

Background: Elimination of poliovirus from endemic countries is a crucial step in eradication; however, vaccination programmes in these areas face challenges, especially in regions with conflict. We analysed interviews with caregivers of children living in two polio-endemic countries to assess whether these challenges are largely operational or also driven by resistance or misinformation in the community., Methods: We designed and analysed polls based on face-to-face interviews of a random sample of parents and other caregivers of children younger than 5 years in regions of Pakistan and Nigeria at high risk for polio transmission. In both countries, the sample was drawn via a stratified multistage cluster design with random route household selection. The questionnaire covered awareness, knowledge, and attitudes about polio and oral polio vaccine (OPV), trust in vaccination efforts, and caregiver priorities for government action. We assessed experiences of caregivers in accessible higher-conflict areas and compared their knowledge and attitudes with those in lower-conflict areas. Differences were tested with two-sample t tests., Findings: The poll consisted of 3396 caregivers from Pakistan and 2629 from Nigeria. About a third of caregivers who responded in higher-conflict areas of Pakistan (Federally Administered Tribal Areas [FATA], 30%) and Nigeria (Borno, 33%) were unable to confirm that their child was vaccinated in the previous campaign. In FATA, 12% of caregivers reported that they were unaware of polio, and in Borno 12% of caregivers reported that vaccinators visited but their child did not receive the vaccine or they did not know whether the child was vaccinated. Additionally, caregivers in higher-conflict areas are less likely to hold beliefs about OPV that could motivate acceptance and are more likely to hold concerns than are caregivers in lower-conflict areas., Interpretation: Beyond the difficulties in reaching homes with OPV, challenges for vaccination programmes in higher-conflict areas extend to limited awareness, negative attitudes, and gaps in trust. Vaccination efforts might need to address underlying attitudes of caregivers through direct communications and the selection and training of local vaccinators., Funding: Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health and UNICEF., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: As public health leaders prepare for possible future influenza pandemics, the rapid spread of 2009 H1N1 influenza highlights the need to focus on measures the public can adopt to help slow disease transmission. Such measures may relate to hygiene (e.g., hand washing), social distancing (e.g., avoiding places where many people gather), and pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., vaccination). Given the disproportionate impact of public health emergencies on minority communities in the United States, it is important to understand whether there are differences in acceptance across racial/ethnic groups that could lead to targeted and more effective policies and communications., Objectives: This study explores racial/ethnic differences in the adoption of preventive behaviors during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic., Patients/methods: Data are from a national telephone poll conducted March 17 to April 11, 2010, among a representative sample of 1123 white, 330 African American, 317 Hispanic, 268 Asian, and 262 American Indian/Alaska Native adults in the USA., Results: People in at least one racial/ethnic minority group were more likely than whites to adopt several behaviors related to hygiene, social distancing, and healthcare access, including increased hand washing and talking with a healthcare provider (P-values <0.05). Exceptions included avoiding others with influenza-like illnesses and receiving 2009 H1N1 and seasonal influenza vaccinations. After we controlled the data for socioeconomic status, demographic factors, healthcare access, and illness- and vaccine-related attitudes, nearly all racial/ethnic differences in behaviors persisted., Conclusions: Minority groups appear to be receptive to several preventive behaviors, but barriers to vaccination are more pervasive., (© 2015 The Authors. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The partisan split in Congress over health reform may reflect a broader divide among the public in attitudes toward the uninsured. Despite expert consensus over the harms suffered by the uninsured as a group, Americans disagree over whether the uninsured get the care they need and whether reform legislation providing universal coverage is necessary. We examined public perceptions of health care access and quality for the uninsured over time, and we found that Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to believe that the uninsured have difficulty gaining access to care. Senior citizens are less aware than others of the problems faced by the uninsured. Even among those Americans who perceive that the uninsured have poor access to care, Republicans are significantly less likely than Democrats to support reform. Thus, our findings indicate that even if political obstacles are overcome and health reform is enacted, future political support for ongoing financing to cover the uninsured could be uncertain.

National survey data reveal that while public awareness of healthcare inequalities in the USA has increased, the public have become less supportive of federal responsibility to address healthcare inequalities. Agenda setting literature suggests that news coverage may have an impact on both public awareness of an issue and public support for government responsibility to address that issue, particularly in relation to racial inequalities. This research examines the prominence and content of news coverage on racial healthcare disparities in the USA between 1994 and 2004 in order to disentangle the messages that may affect public views of who should be responsible for reducing racial disparities. Even among those who are aware of healthcare disparities, these data show that support for federal responsibility has significantly decreased. Results show that the prominence of coverage of racial healthcare inequalities increased over the period. Journalists increasingly used academics, academic reports, experts, advocacy groups, and Republican politicians, as sources of information. Mentions of actors responsible for causing healthcare inequalities were mixed, with a plurality of stories describing no responsible causal agent. Further, we found that approximately half of the articles in almost every time period studied did not report actors who are working to ameliorate healthcare inequalities, nor did a majority of stories call on any actor to address disparities. As a political agenda to reduce racial healthcare inequalities advances, public support for federal government responsibility will be needed to develop sustainable public policy. This research helps us to understand the messages that the public may be receiving in order to motivate public will to support federal responsibility for reducing racial healthcare inequalities.

Objectives: To shed light on how the public health community can promote the recovery of Hurricane Katrina victims and protect people in future disasters, we examined the experiences of evacuees housed in Houston area shelters 2 weeks after the hurricane., Methods: A survey was conducted September 10 through 12, 2005, with 680 randomly selected respondents who were evacuated to Houston from the Gulf Coast as a result of Hurricane Katrina. Interviews were conducted in Red Cross shelters in the greater Houston area., Results: Many evacuees suffered physical and emotional stress during the storm and its aftermath, including going without adequate food and water. In comparison with New Orleans and Louisiana residents overall, disproportionate numbers of this group were African American, had low incomes, and had no health insurance coverage. Many had chronic health conditions and relied heavily on the New Orleans public hospital system, which was destroyed in the storm., Conclusions: Our results highlight the need for better plans for emergency communication and evacuation of low-income and disabled citizens in future disasters and shed light on choices facing policymakers in planning for the long-term health care needs of vulnerable populations.

For more than two decades, polls have shown that Americans are dissatisfied with their current health care system. However, the public's views on how to change the current system are more conflicted than often suggested by individual poll results. At the same time, Americans are both dissatisfied with the current health care system and relatively satisfied with their own health care arrangements. As a result of the conflict between these views and the public's distrust of government, there often is a wide gap between the public's support for a set of principles concerning what needs to be done about the overall problems facing the nation's health care system and their support for specific policies designed to achieve those goals.

This paper reports the results of a comparative survey in five nations: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The survey finds a high level of citizen dissatisfaction with the health care systems in all five countries. Citizens with incomes below the national median were more likely than were those with higher incomes to be dissatisfied. In contrast, relatively few citizens reported problems getting needed health care. Low-income U.S. citizens reported more problems getting care than did their counterparts in the other four countries.

Ten years after its enactment, public support for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) still only reaches a scant majority. Candidates for the presidency--and the sitting president--have endorsed health reforms that would radically transition US health care away from the current system upon which the ACA was built. Few opinion surveys to date have captured dominant preferences among alternative health reform policies or characterized attitudes and experiences that might be associated with policy preferences. Using a 2019 nationally representative telephone survey, this article considers how variations in political values, attitudes toward government, and experiences with the health care system relate to competing health reform preferences. Differences between those who favor Medicare for All over building on the ACA largely reflect different levels of satisfaction with the status quo and views of private health insurance. By contrast, differences between ACA supporters and those who would favor replacing it with a state-based alternative reflect sharply different political values and attitudes. Key differences remain significant after controlling for demographic, health, and political characteristics. Overwhelming public support still eludes the ACA, and reaching consensus on future directions for health reform will remain challenging given differences in underlying beliefs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the public opinion regarding the national debate in the U.S. Congress over the health care reform in the U.S. It states that the public sent at least three distinct messages to the Congress including the approach of middle class Americans to the cost and security of their health care insurance coverage, achievement of the Congress for comprehensive reform, and specific proposals to overhaul the health care system. It says that the increasing worries of middle class Americans has driven the latest health care reform debate. It mentions that the Americans were divided over the primary choices for reform such as to contain increasing health care costs and ways to achieve universal coverage.

Discusses results of a national survey on how black and white Americans used health services in 1986. Evidence showing a significant deficit in access to health care; Evidence showing that the deficit was experienced by all income levels of black Americans; Tendency for black Americans to underuse needed medical care.

Editorial. Discusses strategies for health care and health insurance reform to improve medical care access among uninsured people in the U.S. Results of a public opinion poll regarding health care access in the country; Implementation of a compulsory private insurance provided by employers; Use of tax credits for purchase of private health insurance.

In June 2018 Arkansas became the first US state to implement work requirements in Medicaid, requiring adults ages 30-49 to work twenty hours a week, participate in "community engagement" activities, or qualify for an exemption to maintain coverage. By April 2019, when a federal judge put the policy on hold, 18,000 adults had already lost coverage. We analyze the policy's effects before and after these events, using a telephone survey performed in late 2019 of 2,706 low-income adults in Arkansas and three control states compared with data from 2016 and 2018. We have four main findings. First, most of the Medicaid coverage losses in 2018 were reversed in 2019 after the court order. Second, work requirements did not increase employment over eighteen months of follow-up. Third, people in Arkansas ages 30-49 who had lost Medicaid in the prior year experienced adverse consequences: 50 percent reported serious problems paying off medical debt, 56 percent delayed care because of cost, and 64 percent delayed taking medications because of cost. These rates were significantly higher than among Arkansans who remained in Medicaid all year. Finally, awareness of the work requirements remained poor, with more than 70 percent of Arkansans unsure whether the policy was in effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Major policy uncertainty continues to surround the Affordable Care Act (ACA) at both the state and federal levels. We assessed changes in health care use and self-reported health after three years of the ACA's coverage expansion, using survey data collected from low-income adults through the end of 2016 in three states: Kentucky, which expanded Medicaid; Arkansas, which expanded private insurance to low-income adults using the federal Marketplace; and Texas, which did not expand coverage. We used a difference-in-differences model with a control group and an instrumental variables model to provide individual-level estimates of the effects of gaining insurance. By the end of 2016 the uninsurance rate in the two expansion states had dropped by more than 20 percentage points relative to the nonexpansion state. For uninsured people gaining coverage, this change was associated with a 41-percentage-point increase in having a usual source of care, a $337 reduction in annual out-of-pocket spending, significant increases in preventive health visits and glucose testing, and a 23-percentage-point increase in "excellent" self-reported health. Among adults with chronic conditions, we found improvements in affordability of care, regular care for those conditions, medication adherence, and self-reported health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public opinion can play an important role in shaping health policy alternatives and outcomes. However, little is known about how citizens in developing countries evaluate government performance in the health sector. Through a survey conducted in 2008 in twenty sub-Saharan African countries, we examined public priorities and perceptions of government efforts to improve health services. In sixteen of these countries, health was one of the top five priorities the public thought the government should address. A staggering proportion of citizens in most of the sampled countries reported having gone without medicines or medical treatment in the previous year, and going without health care was most strongly correlated with views on health services. By contrast, greater access to health care was associated with more positive impressions of government efforts to improve health services. Population health indicators, such as life expectancy and childhood mortality, were not correlated with citizens' evaluation of government efforts. Results suggest that improving access to health care will be a key factor in improving perceptions of government performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]