Value for the Money Spent? Exploring the Relationship Between Expenditures, Insurance Adequacy, and Access to Care for Publicly Insured Children

Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., 1100 1st Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002-4221, USA.
Maternal and Child Health Journal (Impact Factor: 2.24). 04/2012; 16 Suppl 1(S1):S51-60. DOI: 10.1007/s10995-012-0994-y
Source: PubMed


This study examines the relationship between total state Medicaid spending per child and measures of insurance adequacy and access to care for publicly insured children. Using the 2007 National Survey of Children's Health, seven measures of insurance adequacy and health care access were examined for publicly insured children (n = 19,715). Aggregate state-level measures were constructed, adjusting for differences in demographic, health status, and household characteristics. Per member per month (PMPM) state Medicaid spending on children ages 0-17 was calculated from capitated, fee-for-service, and administrative expenses. Adjusted measures were compared with PMPM state Medicaid spending in scatter plots, and multilevel logistic regression models tested how well state-level expenditures predicted individual adequacy and access measures. Medicaid spending PMPM was a significant predictor of both insurance adequacy and receipt of mental health services. An increase of $50 PMPM was associated with a 6-7 % increase in the likelihood that insurance would always cover needed services and allow access to providers (p = 0.04) and a 19 % increase in the likelihood of receiving mental health services (p < 0.01). For the remaining four measures, PMPM was a consistent (though not statistically significant) positive predictor. States with higher total spending per child appear to assure better access to care for Medicaid children. The policies or incentives used by the few states that get the greatest value--lower-than-median spending and higher-than-median adequacy and access--should be examined for potential best practices that other states could adapt to improve value for their Medicaid spending.

14 Reads
  • Source

    Maternal and Child Health Journal 04/2012; 16 Suppl 1(S1):S1-5. DOI:10.1007/s10995-012-1007-x · 2.24 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Is the field of pediatrics doing all that it can for the health of children? Many think that the field has gone off track and that we could do better. These articles highlight some different ways of judging the successes and failures of pediatrics in the United States today. The choices that we face are stark. To change the system, we would need to recalibrate the balance between utilitarian approaches to resource allocation, such as might be dictated by cost-effectiveness analyses, and deontologic approaches that prioritize unbreakable commitments or promises to individuals. These changes would entail large-scale social engineering projects to reshape our health care system, our educational system, and our public health system. A failure to change, however, might perpetuate a system that is not doing all it can for the health of America's children and the society they will form. Pediatrics 2013; 131: S121-S126
    Pediatrics 04/2013; 131(Supplement):S121-S126. DOI:10.1542/peds.2013-0252b · 5.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives: We sought to determine the association between changes in unemployment, healthcare spending and stomach cancer mortality. Methods: Multivariate regression analysis was used to assess how changes in unemployment and public-sector expenditure on healthcare (PSEH) varied with stomach cancer mortality in 25 member states of the European Union from 1981 to 2009. Country-specific differences in healthcare infrastructure and demographics were controlled for 1- to 5-year time-lag analyses and robustness checks were carried out. Results: A 1% increase in unemployment was associated with a significant increase in stomach cancer mortality in both men and women [men: coefficient (R)=0.1080, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.0470-0.1690, P=0.0006; women: R=0.0488, 95% CI=0.0168-0.0809, P=0.0029]. A 1% increase in PSEH was associated with a significant decrease in stomach cancer mortality (men: R=-0.0009, 95% CI=-0.0013 to -0.005, P<0.0001; women: R=-0.0004, 95% CI=-0.0007 to -0.0001, P=0.0054). The associations remained when economic factors, urbanization, nutrition and alcohol intake were controlled for, but not when healthcare resources were controlled for. Time-lag analysis showed that the largest changes in mortality occurred 3-4 years after any changes in either unemployment or PSEH. Conclusion: Increases in unemployment are associated with a significant increase in stomach cancer mortality. Stomach cancer mortality is also affected by public-sector healthcare spending. Initiatives that bolster employment and maintain public-sector healthcare expenditure may help to minimize increases in stomach cancer mortality during economic downturns.
    European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 09/2014; 26(11). DOI:10.1097/MEG.0000000000000201 · 2.25 Impact Factor

Similar Publications