Search

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) addresses food insecurity for low-income households, which is associated with access to care. Many US states expanded SNAP access through policies eliminating the asset test (ie, restrictions based on SNAP applicant assets) and/or broadening income eligibility. The objective of this study was to determine whether state SNAP policies were associated with the use of mammography among women eligible for breast cancer screening. Data for income-eligible women 40 to 79 years of age were obtained from the 2006 to 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Difference-in-differences analyses were conducted to compare changes in the percentage of mammography in the past year from pre- to post-SNAP policy adoption (asset test elimination or income eligibility increase) between states that and did not adopt policies expanding SNAP eligibility. In total, 171,684 and 294,647 income-eligible female respondents were included for the asset test elimination policy and income eligibility increase policy analyses, respectively. Mammography within 1 year was reported by 58.4%. Twenty-eight and 22 states adopted SNAP asset test elimination and income increase policies, respectively. Adoption of asset test elimination policies was associated with a 2.11 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-4.15; P =.043) percentage point increase in mammography received within 1 year, particularly for nonmetropolitan residents (4.14 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.07-7.21 percentage points; P =.008), those with household incomes <$25,000 (2.82 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.68-4.97 percentage points; P =.01), and those residing in states in the South (3.08 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.17-5.99 percentage points; P =.038) or that did not expand Medicaid under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (3.35 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.36-6.34; P =.028). There was no significant association between mammography and state-level policies broadening of SNAP income eligibility. State policies eliminating asset test requirements for SNAP eligibility were associated with increased mammography among low-income women eligible for breast cancer screening, particularly for those in the lowest income bracket or residing in nonmetropolitan areas or Medicaid nonexpansion states. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer diagnosis among men in the United States and the prevalence of prostate cancer survivors is growing. Cancer treatment and lasting or late effects of disease and treatment can adversely affect financial health, psychosocial well-being, and health-related quality of life for prostate cancer survivors, even many years after cancer diagnosis and treatment. These outcomes are important, especially because most men live for many years following a prostate cancer diagnosis. In this essay, we describe health care spending associated with prostate cancer, including patient out-of-pocket costs, and summarize research examining medical financial hardship and associations of financial hardship and psychosocial well-being and health-related quality of life among cancer survivors. We then discuss implications for health care delivery and opportunities to mitigate financial hardship for patients with prostate cancer and their families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite clinical benefits of early palliative care, little is known about Medicare physician workforce specialized in Hospice and Palliative Medicine (HPM) and their service delivery settings. To examine changes in Medicare HPM physician workforce and their service delivery settings in 2008–2020. Using the Medicare Data on Provider Practice and Specialty from 2008 to 2020, we identified 2375 unique Medicare Fee-For-Service (FFS) physicians (15,565 physician-year observations) with self-reported specialty in "Palliative Care and Hospice". We examined changes in the annual number of HPM physicians, average number of Medicare services overall and by care setting, total number of Medicare FFS beneficiaries, and total Medicare allowed charges billed by the physician. The number of Medicare HPM physicians increased 2.32 times from 771 in 2008 to 1790 in 2020. The percent of HPM physicians practicing in metropolitan areas increased from 90% to 96% in 2008–2020. Faster growth was also observed in female physicians (52.4% to 60.1%). Between 2008 and 2020, we observed decreased average annual Medicare FFS beneficiaries (170 to 123), number of FFS services (467 to 335), and Medicare allowed charges billed by the physician ($47,230 to $37,323). The share of palliative care delivered in inpatient settings increased from 47% to 68% in 2008–2020; whereas the share of services delivered in outpatient settings decreased from 37% to 19%. Despite growth in Medicare HPM physician workforce, access is disproportionately concentrated in metropolitan and inpatient settings. This may limit receipt of early outpatient specialized palliative care, especially in nonmetropolitan areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The emergence of COVID-19 disrupted health care, with consequences for cancer diagnoses and outcomes, especially for early stage diagnoses, which generally have favourable prognoses. We aimed to examine nationwide changes in adult cancer diagnoses and stage distribution during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic by cancer type and key sociodemographic factors in the USA. In this cross-sectional study, adults (aged ≥18 years) newly diagnosed with a first primary malignant cancer between Jan 1, 2018, and Dec 31, 2020, were identified from the US National Cancer Database. We included individuals across 50 US states and the District of Columbia who were treated in hospitals that were Commission on Cancer-accredited during the study period. Individuals whose cancer stage was 0 (except for bladder cancer), occult, or without an applicable American Joint Committee on Cancer staging scheme were excluded. Our primary outcomes were the change in the number and the change in the stage distribution of new cancer diagnoses between 2019 (Jan 1 to Dec 31) and 2020 (Jan 1 to Dec 31). Monthly counts and stage distributions were calculated for all cancers combined and for major cancer types. We also calculated annual change in stage distribution from 2019 to 2020 and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) using multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for age group, sex, race and ethnicity, health insurance status, comorbidity score, US state, zip code-level social deprivation index, and county-level age-adjusted COVID-19 mortality in 2020. Separate models were stratified by sociodemographic and clinical factors. We identified 2 404 050 adults who were newly diagnosed with cancer during the study period (830 528 in 2018, 849 290 in 2019, and 724 232 in 2020). Mean age was 63·5 years (SD 13·5) and 1 287 049 (53·5%) individuals were women, 1 117 001 (46·5%) were men, and 1 814 082 (75·5%) were non-Hispanic White. The monthly number of new cancer diagnoses (all stages) decreased substantially after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March, 2020, although monthly counts returned to near pre-pandemic levels by the end of 2020. The decrease in diagnoses was largest for stage I disease, leading to lower odds of being diagnosed with stage I disease in 2020 than in 2019 (aOR 0·946 [95% CI 0·939–0·952] for stage I vs stage II–IV); whereas, the odds of being diagnosed with stage IV disease were higher in 2020 than in 2019 (1·074 [1·066–1·083] for stage IV vs stage I–III). This pattern was observed in most cancer types and sociodemographic groups, although was most prominent among Hispanic individuals (0·922 [0·899–0·946] for stage I; 1·110 [1·077–1·144] for stage IV), Asian American and Pacific Islander individuals (0·924 [0·892–0·956] for stage I; 1·096 [1·052–1·142] for stage IV), uninsured individuals (0·917 [0·875–0·961] for stage I; 1·102 [1·055–1·152] for stage IV), Medicare-insured adults younger than 65 years (0·909 [0·882–0·937] for stage I; 1·105 [1·068–1·144] for stage IV), and individuals living in the most socioeconomically deprived areas (0·931 [0·917–0·946] for stage I; 1·106 [1·087–1·125] for stage IV). Substantial cancer underdiagnosis and decreases in the proportion of early stage diagnoses occurred during 2020 in the USA, particularly among medically underserved individuals. Monitoring the long-term effects of the pandemic on morbidity, survival, and mortality is warranted. None. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the association between health insurance coverage and access to care is well documented, it is unclear whether the deleterious effects of being uninsured are strictly contemporaneous or whether previous disruptions in coverage have persistent effects. This study addresses this issue using nationally representative data covering 2011–2019 to estimate the extent to which disruptions in health insurance coverage continued to be associated with poor access even after coverage was regained. Analysis was conducted in 2022. Using a nationally representative cohort of insured adults aged 18–64 years (N=39,904) and multivariable logistic regression models, the authors estimated the association between past disruptions in coverage (occurring at least 1 year before) and the risks of lacking a usual source of care provider and having unmet medical need. Among insured nonelderly adults, the risk of being without a usual source of care provider was between 18% (risk ratio=1.18; 95% CI=1.00, 1.38) and 75% higher (risk ratio=1.75; 95% CI=1.56, 1.93) than for those with continuous coverage; the risk of having unmet medical needs was between 41% (risk ratio=1.41; 95% CI=1.00, 1.83) and 66% (risk ratio=1.66; 95% CI=1.26, 2.06) higher. Longer insurance disruptions were associated with a higher risk of lacking a usual source of care provider. Previous disruptions in health insurance coverage continued to be negatively associated with access to care for more than a year after coverage was regained. Improving access to care in the U.S. may require investing in policies and programs that help to strengthen coverage continuity among individuals with insurance coverage rather than focusing exclusively on helping uninsured individuals to gain coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study examines the association of incarceration history and health insurance coverage and coverage changes in the U.S.Methods: Individuals with and without incarceration history were identified from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 with follow-up through 2017-2018 (n=7,417). Generalized estimating equations were used to examine the associations between incarceration history and health insurance and coverage changes in the past 12 months. This study also assessed variation in associations by incarceration duration, frequency, and recency and reoffence history. Analysis was conducted in 2022.Results: Individuals with incarceration history were more likely to be uninsured (AOR=1.69; 95% CI=1.55, 1.85) and to experience year-long uninsurance (AOR=1.34; 95% CI=1.12, 1.59) and were less likely to have stable health insurance coverage (AOR=1.30; 95% CI=1.08, 1.56) than individuals without incarceration history. Longer duration and more frequent incarcerations were associated with a higher likelihood of lack of and unstable insurance coverage and year-long uninsurance.Conclusions: People with an incarceration history had worse access to health insurance coverage. Targeted programs to improve health insurance coverage may reduce disparities associated with incarceration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: In January 2014, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) preexisting condition protections prohibited coverage denials, premium increases, and claim denials on the basis of preexisting conditions. This study aimed to examine changes in coverage and premiums and out-of-pocket spending after the implementation of the preexisting condition protections under the ACA.Methods: We identified adults aged 18 to 64 years with (n = 59 041) and without preexisting conditions (n = 61 970) from the 2011-2013 and 2015-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. We used a difference-in-differences and a difference-in-difference-in-differences approach to assess the associations of preexisting condition protections and changes in insurance coverage, premium contributions, and out-of-pocket spending after the ACA. Simple and multivariable logistic or multivariable 2-part models were fitted for the full sample and stratified by family income (low ≤138% federal poverty level [FPL]; middle 139%-400% FPL; and high > 400 FPL).Results: The ACA increased nongroup insurance coverage to a similar extent for individuals with or without preexisting conditions at all income levels. Decreases in premium contributions were observed to a similar extent among families with nongroup private coverage regardless of declinable preexisting condition status, whereas no significant changes were observed among families with group coverage. We found greater decreases in out-of-pocket spending for individuals with preexisting conditions than those without conditions among both individuals covered by nongroup and group insurance, and a greater difference was observed among those covered by nongroup insurance (difference-in-difference-in-differences -$279; 95% confidence interval -$528 to -$29).Conclusions: The ACA protections were associated with decreases in out-of-pocket spending among adults with preexisting conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]