Search

PurposeWe undertook a study to evaluate variation in the availability of primary care new patient appointments for Medi-Cal (California Medicaid) enrollees in Northern California, and its relationship to emergency department (ED) use after Medicaid expansion.MethodsWe placed simulated calls by purported Medi-Cal enrollees to 581 primary care clinicians (PCCs) listed as accepting new patients in online directories of Medi-Cal managed care plans. Data from the California Health Interview Survey, Medi-Cal enrollment reports, and California hospital discharge records were used in analyses. We developed multilevel, mixed-effect models to evaluate variation in appointment access. Multiple linear regression was used to examine the relationship between primary care access and ED use by county.ResultsAvailability of PCC new patient appointments to Medi-Cal enrollees lacking a PCC varied significantly across counties in the multilevel model, ranging from 77 enrollees (95% CI, 70-81) to 472 enrollees (95% CI, 378-628) per each available new patient appointment. Just 19% of PCCs had available appointments within the state-mandated 10 business days. Clinicians at Federally Qualified Health Centers had higher availability of new patient appointments (rate ratio = 1.56; 95% CI, 1.24-1.97). Counties with poorer PCC access had higher ED use by Medi-Cal enrollees.ConclusionsIn contrast to findings from other states, access to primary care in Northern California was limited for new patient Medi-Cal enrollees and varied across counties, despite standard statewide reimbursement rates. Counties with more limited access to primary care new patient appointments had higher ED use by Medi-Cal enrollees.

BackgroundThere is obscurity regarding how US hospitals determine patients' charges. Whether insurance status influences a patient's hospital charge has not been explored.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine whether hospitals charge patients differently based on their insurance status.MethodsThis was an analysis of the Florida Hospital Inpatient Data File for fiscal years 2011-2012 (N = 4.7 million). Multivariable regression analysis was used to adjust for patients' age, sex, length of stay, priority of admission, principal ICD-9-CM diagnosis, and All Payer Refined Diagnosis-Related Group subdivided by Severity of Illness subclass. Hospital fixed effects were included to account for differences in hospitals' markups.ResultsCompared with those with no insurance, patients with private insurance received hospital bills that were an average of 10.7% higher and patients with Medicare received bills that were an average of 8.9% higher. The impact of Medicaid coverage was imprecisely estimated, but the magnitude of the point-estimate was consistent with 3.5% higher charges to Medicaid patients, relative to the uninsured.ConclusionConditional on patient characteristics, length of stay, and expected intensity of resource utilization, patients with private insurance and patients with Medicare were charged more (before discounting) than their uninsured counterparts within the same hospital.