Racial Disparities in Medicaid Enrollment and Prenatal Care Initiation Among Pregnant Teens in Florida

RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709-2194, USA.
Medical care (Impact Factor: 3.23). 11/2008; 46(10):1079-85. DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318187d8f8
Source: PubMed


Teens and racial and ethnic minority women are less likely to initiate prenatal care (PNC) in the first trimester of pregnancy than their counterparts.
This study examines the impact of Medicaid program changes in the late 1990s on the timing of Medicaid enrollment and PNC initiation among pregnant teens by race and ethnicity.
Using Medicaid enrollment and claims data and a difference-in-differences method, we examine how the patterns of prepregnancy Medicaid enrollment, PNC initiation, and racial and ethnic disparities in PNC changed over time after controlling for person- and county-level characteristics.
We included 14,089 teens in Florida with a Medicaid-covered delivery in fiscal years 1995 and 2001.
Prepregnancy enrollment was defined as enrollment 9 or more months before delivery; late or no PNC was defined as initiation of PNC within 3 months of delivery or not at all.
For teens enrolled in traditional welfare-related categories, the proportion with prepregnancy Medicaid enrollment increased and the proportion with late or no PNC declined from 1995 to 2001. Teens enrolled under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) expansion category in 2001 were less likely than welfare-related teen enrollees to have prepregnancy coverage but were more likely to initiate PNC early. Racial disparities were found in PNC initiation among the 1995 welfare-related group and the 2001 expansion group but were eliminated or greatly reduced among the 2001 welfare-related group.
Providing public insurance coverage improves access to care but is not sufficient to meet Healthy People 2010 goals or eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in PNC initiation.

4 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: ealth insurance matters. It affects the experiences, behaviors, and outcomes of patients, clinicians, family members and health care institutions. For economists, employers, and governmental policy makers, health insurance also has broad and far reaching impacts, extending into such far-flung arenas as immigration policy, bankruptcy law, and even domestic partner/gay marriage issues. 1-4 Perhaps it shouldn't. That is the haunting question that weaves together the collection of articles in this special theme issue of Medical Care, sponsored by the Medical Care Section of the American Public Health Association (APHA) as a collaborative effort of the journal and the professional associ- ation that it represents. Consider this recent true story of a close personal friend, for whom insurance mattered. She is a 50-year-old physician working in a public clinic for the uninsured in Chicago, Illinois. She discovered a breast lump, and immediately went to her own physician. Her physician referred her for an ultrasound-guided biopsy. However because her health insurance was in transition, she delayed getting the biopsy for 5 full months, a biopsy that ultimately returned as positive for adenocarcinoma. In transition? Waited 5 months? Why would a physician not have known better than to delay her biopsy nearly half a year? Although the story is complex (I will spare the reader the full details), such complexities and delays are not unusual in the complex and frustrating world of health insurance in the United States. My friend with breast cancer was originally working part-time for a clinic where she did not receive health insurance. For many years she was covered under her husband's plan. When a new practice opportunity opened at the hospital where her husband worked, she changed jobs, joining him in working there. One of the benefits of the new job was that part-time workers (she was 55% time) received health insurance. So far so good. But this also meant she could no longer remain on her husband's plan (at that workplace, such family coverage was forbidden if both spouses work there); and because her insurance costs would be "pro-rated," requiring her to pay 45% of the premiums out of pocket, she realized that this "benefit" was actually a financial detriment. She decided she would be better off reducing her time in her new job to less than 50% so she would no longer have "benefits," and did so. It was at that moment when she discovered the lump in her breast. Untangling the disenrollement-re-enrollment paperwork dragged on for the next 5 months. Each time she thought the matter resolved, another bureaucratic hurdle had to be surmounted. Looming large over the whole process was the question of whether, in the unlikely event a cancer was found, it would be a considered a "pre-existing condition." When finally straightened out and she went for biopsy, her worse fears were realized. While each of us has a personal experience that we could also relate about ourselves, family members, or friends, the purpose of this special theme issue is to take a look at the bigger picture of how health insurance is and is not working. In my own case, written as a personal essay several years back, I concluded by confessing that while I considered myself something of an expert on health policy, I was clueless about the fact that I would
    Medical care 11/2008; 46(10):1003-8. DOI:10.1097/MLR.0b013e318189092a · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Wide disparities in obstetric outcomes exist between women of different race/ethnicities. The prevalence of preterm birth, fetal growth restriction, fetal demise, maternal mortality, and inadequate receipt of prenatal care all vary by maternal race/ethnicity. These disparities have their roots in maternal health behaviors, genetics, the physical and social environments, and access to and quality of health care. Elimination of the health inequities because of sociocultural differences or access to or quality of health care will require a multidisciplinary approach. We aim to describe these obstetric disparities, with an eye toward potential etiologies, thereby improving our ability to target appropriate solutions.
    American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 04/2010; 202(4):335-43. DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2009.10.864 · 4.70 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examined what innovative strategies, including the use of health information technology (health IT), have been or can be used to reduce disparities in prenatal care quality in underresourced settings. Based on literature review and key informant interviews, the authors identified 17 strategies that have been or can be used to (a) increase access to timely prenatal care, (b) improve the content of prenatal care, and (c) enhance the organization and delivery of prenatal care. Health IT can be used to (a) increase consumer awareness about the importance of preconception and early prenatal care, facilitate spatial mapping of access gaps, and improve continuity of patient records; (b) support collaborative quality improvement, facilitate performance measurement, enhance health promotion, assist with care coordination, reduce clinical errors, improve delivery of preventive health services, provide decision support, and encourage completeness of documentation; and (c) support data integration and engineer collaborative innovation.
    Medical Care Research and Review 10/2010; 67(5 Suppl):198S-230S. DOI:10.1177/1077558710374324 · 2.62 Impact Factor
Show more