To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Low-income, publicly insured youth face numerous barriers to adequate mental health care, which may be compounded for those with multiple marginalized identities. However, no research has examined how identity and diagnosis may interact to shape the treatment experiences of under-resourced youth with psychiatric conditions. Applying an intersectional lens to treatment disparities is essential for developing targeted interventions to promote equitable care.
Methods
Analyses included youth ages 7–18 with eating disorders (EDs; n = 3,311), mood/anxiety disorders (n = 3,219), or psychotic disorders (n = 3,035) enrolled in California Medicaid. Using state billing records, we examined sex- and race and ethnicity-based disparities in receipt of core services – outpatient therapy, outpatient medical care, and inpatient treatment – in the first year after diagnosis and potential differences across diagnostic groups.
Results
Many youth (50.7% across diagnoses) received no outpatient therapy, and youth with EDs were least likely to receive these services. Youth of color received fewer days of outpatient therapy than White youth, and Latinx youth received fewer therapy and medical services across outpatient and inpatient contexts. Sex- and race and ethnicity-based disparities were especially pronounced for youth with EDs, with particularly low levels of service receipt among boys and Latinx youth with EDs.
Conclusions
Results raise concerns for unmet treatment needs among publicly insured youth, which are exacerbated for youth with multiple marginalized identities and those who do not conform to historical stereotypes of affected individuals (e.g., low-income boys of color with EDs). Targeted efforts are needed to ensure equitable care.
There is a substantial difference between the housing that older Americans prefer and the housing that the market supplies. While market failures and seniors’ resource constraints explain part of this mismatch, zoning laws, Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement policies, and health law also loom large. Older Americans strongly prefer to age in place, in home-like environments. This chapter focuses on two types of housing that facilitate that manner of aging: Green House nursing homes and accessory dwelling units. The chapter discusses the substantial benefits for seniors who rely on others for care, and those who can live independently, in these respective kinds of housing. These benefits include substantial health and quality-of-life advantages as well as the ability to maintain connectedness within existing social networks. The chapter further examines the legal impediments to the proliferation of these housing types and the measures that some forward-looking jurisdictions are taking to facilitate their growth.
Accountable care models for Medicaid reimbursement aim to improve care quality and reduce costs by linking payments to performance. Oregon’s coordinated care organizations (CCOs) assume financial responsibility for their members and are incentivized to help clinics improve performance on specific quality metrics. This study explores how Oregon’s CCO model influences partnerships between payers and primary care clinics, focusing on strategies used to enhance screening and treatment for unhealthy alcohol use (UAU).
Methods:
In this qualitative study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with informants from 12 of 13 Oregon CCOs active in 2019 and 2020. The interviews focused on payer–provider partnerships, specifically around UAU screening and treatment, which is a long-standing CCO metric. We used thematic analysis to identify key themes and causal-loop diagramming to uncover feedback dynamics and communicate key findings. Meadows’ leverage point framework was applied to categorize findings based on their potential to drive change.
Results:
CCO strategies to support clinics included building relationships, reporting on metric progress, providing EHR technical assistance, offering training, and implementing alternative payment methods. CCOs prioritized clinics with more members and those highly motivated. Our analysis showed that while the CCO model aligned goals between payers and clinics, it may perpetuate rural disparities by prioritizing larger, better-resourced clinics.
Conclusions:
Oregon’s CCO model fosters partnerships centered on quality metrics but may unintentionally reinforce rural disparities by incentivizing support for larger clinics. Applying the Meadows framework highlighted leverage points within these partnerships.
This piece takes as a given that we are stuck with our fragmented, inefficient, multi-payor health care system for at least the short run. It then analyzes the deficiencies of three payment mechanisms whereby regulators (including Congress) have invited private sector providers to help ameliorate perceived problems. The first concerns an inadequate supply of nursing home beds in the early ‘70s, the next focuses on Medicare Advantage as a supposedly superior cost containment alternative to traditional Medicare, and the final one involves the ‘devil’s bargain’ struck with the pharmaceutical industry to get prescription drug coverage added to Medicare. All three teach the same lesson: the government needs to be more vigilant not to give away the store when it invites the private sector in.
Braidwood Management, Inc. v. Becerra challenges the Affordable Care Act free preventive coverage guarantee. Community health centers serve over 30 million residents of medically underserved urban and rural communities. Their limited federal grant funding makes them reliant on insurance revenue for their operations, Medicaid and subsidized marketplace coverage in particular, both of which are implicated by the case. To understand these implications, we developed an analytic model that crosswalks the preventive services potentially affected by Braidwood and the preventive care that all health centers must furnish. Of the 193 preventive services now covered under the guarantee, only forty-eight would survive were the Braidwood plaintiffs to prevail. In underserved communities, health centers are a principal source of the nearly 150 affected services, as evidenced by the care they are required to furnish under federal law, the quality metrics they are expected to meet, and the health diagnoses and treatments identified in federal performance reporting requirements. Thus, the impact on access, quality, patient health, and health center finances and care capability will likely be substantial.
Bigotry distractions are strategic invocations of racism, transphobia, or negative stigma toward other marginalized groups to shape political discourse. Although the vast majority of Americans agree on large policy issues ranging from reducing air pollution to prosecuting corporate crime, bigotry distractions divert attention from areas of agreement toward divisive identity issues. This article explores how the nefarious targeting of identity groups through bigotry distractions may be the tallest barrier to health reform, and social change more broadly. The discussion extends the literature on dog whistles, strategic racism, and scapegoating.
This tribute compares Charity Scott to Fred Rogers, highlighting how Charity nurtured health law colleagues’ unique gifts and built community. Continuing the neighborhood theme, it highlights encouraging developments relating to health, housing, and place: Medicaid housing supports and potential reparations for redlining-related health inequities.
This article proposes ethical — and legal — accountability for lawyers representing clients such as private equity (PE) firms who create ownership structures for nursing home systems. Using PE ownership as a case study, I will show that nursing home residents are often harmed and Medicaid costs inflated. I propose private law provides tools to compel such accountability, through (1) aiding and abetting doctrines and (2) fiduciary doctrines that require that the fiduciary be responsible for its vulnerable beneficiaries, not just ethically but for damages and equitable relief. I further propose that the teaching of Professional Responsibility needs to be changed to force law students to consider the effect of legal practice on third parties in situations like health care financing.
The ability to clinically diagnose and treat medical conditions within the home is rapidly becoming a reality for millions of Americans. In parallel, the vast majority of older adults currently report a preference to age in place, in part because of the independence and autonomy this affords, as well as the enhanced ability to socially distance oneself during a pandemic. The interest in receiving long-term services and support in the home is exemplified by the 820,000 Medicaid-eligible Americans on waiting lists nationwide for home- and community-based services (HCBS), with an average wait time of over three years. As a result, many Americans today face the difficult decision of whether to move to a nursing home or stay in their home, facing the risk of falls, medication adherence errors, and other safety challenges. Diagnosing and monitoring health in the home has the potential to abate this distressingly difficult decision as a cost-efficient, patient-centered alternative to reduce HCBS waiting lists and expand the long-term care options for millions of non-Medicaid-eligible Americans. This chapter delineates the ethical, social, legal, and regulatory issues around implementing diagnostic and digital health in the homes of older adults, in the context of this population’s unique vulnerability to abuse, social isolation, declining cognitive health, frailty, and diagnostic error. Broad-based conceptual and practical reforms to modernize HCBS follow, addressing the adoption of self-administered diagnostic tests for highly prevalent chronic conditions, validated decision-support tools to foster consent, and real-time health data acquisition and management strategies that support government oversight and equitable access to home telehealth.
Chapter 14 provides a brief overview of major health insurance provided by the government in the United States. The majority of the chapter goes through the major programmatic details of the Medicare and Medicaid Programs: who is covered, what services are covered and how generously, and how providers are paid by the programs. The discussion of Medicaid also explains the nature of the federal-state partnership and explores ways in which states have and use their freedom to expand upon the program. The remainder of the chapter briefly describes other public insurance (or insurance-related) programs: the VA and CHAMPVA, TRICARE, CHIP, COBRA, and the IHS.
Expansions of Medicaid family planning services have been associated with decreases in pregnancy rates. Access to a broader range of medical, non-family planning services may influence pregnancy rates as well if the increased exposure to medical services spills over to other kinds of behaviour. Using a difference-in-difference approach, I examine the impact of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansions on the propensity of low-income, single women to become single mothers. Previous expansions of Medicaid family planning services allow us to also investigate the influence of access to other medical services (i.e. non-family planning). I find that although access to contraceptives is associated with a reduction in the propensity of becoming a single mother among adult, low-income women, medical services beyond access to contraceptives can provide additional impacts.
Chronic pain has been extensively explored as a risk factor for opioid misuse, resulting in increased focus on opioid prescribing practices for individuals with such conditions. Physical disability sometimes co-occurs with chronic pain but may also represent an independent risk factor for opioid misuse. However, previous research has not disentangled whether disability contributes to risk independent of chronic pain.
Methods
Here, we estimate the independent and joint adjusted associations between having a physical disability and co-occurring chronic pain condition at time of Medicaid enrollment on subsequent 18-month risk of incident opioid use disorder (OUD) and non-fatal, unintentional opioid overdose among non-elderly, adult Medicaid beneficiaries (2016–2019).
Results
We find robust evidence that having a physical disability approximately doubles the risk of incident OUD or opioid overdose, and physical disability co-occurring with chronic pain increases the risks approximately sixfold as compared to having neither chronic pain nor disability. In absolute numbers, those with neither a physical disability nor chronic pain condition have a 1.8% adjusted risk of incident OUD over 18 months of follow-up, those with physical disability alone have an 2.9% incident risk, those with chronic pain alone have a 3.6% incident risk, and those with co-occurring physical disability and chronic pain have a 11.1% incident risk.
Conclusions
These findings suggest that those with a physical disability should receive increased attention from the medical and healthcare communities to reduce their risk of opioid misuse and attendant negative outcomes.
The default governance architecture for public and individual health care in the United States is federalism, the division of responsibility between federal and state governments. A public health emergency such as a pandemic typically produces swift federal actions to support affected individuals, businesses, and states. Such actions include exercising executive emergency power to disseminate supplies, enacting relief bills, and triggering agencies to facilitate financial and regulatory relief. An emergency also typically involves coordination between federal and state governments, as state and local public health officials need federal funding and guidance but also perform key functions such as isolation orders, testing, contact tracing, and vaccine dissemination. In the case of COVID-19, some of the usual patterns have been disrupted. The two major federal response bills enacted in March 2020 followed prior playbooks, offering financial assistance such as increased Medicaid funding and unemployment insurance benefits as well as novel policies such as paid leave to care for COVID-19-positive relatives. The bills largely relied on states to take up funds, implement emergency assistance, and exercise regulatory options to reach those harmed by the pandemic and its attendant recession. This approach built on states’ preexisting policies, heightening differences between states and intensifying the pandemic’s inequitable impact. This chapter evaluates the atypical federal pandemic response – which witnessed an executive branch rejecting much of the centralized responsibility necessary for addressing emergencies – and the wildly variable state response – some of which prioritized politics over health, and all of which depended on the strength of preexisting social programs – to determine the legacy of the novel coronavirus for federalism in public health emergencies.
Policies to decrease low-acuity emergency department (ED) use have traditionally assumed that EDs are a substitute for unavailable primary care (PC). However, such policies can exacerbate ED overcrowding, rather than ameliorate it, if patients use EDs to complement, rather than substitute, their PC use. We tested whether Medicaid managed care enrolees visit the ED for nonemergent and PC treatable conditions to substitute for or to complement PC. Based on consumer choice theory, we modelled county-level monthly ED visit rate as a function of PC supply and used 2012–2015 New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) outpatient data and non-linear least squares method to test substitution vs complementarity. In the post-Medicaid expansion period (2014–2015), ED and PC are substitutes state-wide, but are complements in highly urban and poorer counties during nights and weekends. There is no evidence of complementarity before the expansion (2012–2013). Analyses by PC provider demonstrate that the relationship between ED and PC differs depending on whether PC is provided by physicians or advanced practice providers. Policies to reduce low-acuity ED use via improved PC access in Medicaid are likely to be most effective if they focus on increasing actual appointment availability, ideally by physicians, in areas with low PC provider supply. Different aspects of PC access may be differently related to low-acuity ED use.
The overturn of Roe v. Wade has resulted in fewer rights and resources for people seeking abortion care, particularly in the South. The Hyde Amendment has historically restricted abortion access for those enrolled in Medicaid. We argue here that its guarantees of minimum abortion coverage should be leveraged to offset harms where possible.
Many people who experience opioid use disorder rely on Medicaid. The high penetration of managed care systems into Medicaid raises the importance of understanding states’ expectations regarding coverage, access to care, and health system performance and effectively elevates agreements between states and plans into blueprints for coverage and care. Federal law broadly regulates these structured agreements while leaving a high degree of discretion to states and plans. In this study, researchers reviewed the provisions of 15 state Medicaid managed care contract related to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment to identify whether certain elements of SUD treatment were a stated expectation and the extent to which the details of those expectations varied across states in ways that ultimately could affect evaluation of performance and health outcomes. We found that while all states include SUD treatment as a stated contract expectation, discussions around coverage of specific services and nationally recognized guidelines varied. These variations reflect key state choices regarding how much deference to afford their plans in coverage design and plan administration and reveal important differences in purchasing expectations that could carry implications for efforts to examine similarities and differences in access, quality, and health outcomes within managed care across the states.
Chapter discusses practical things seen in her practice that make people afraid of dying. She offers tips from many of her patients who have died a peaceful, comfortable death. Don’t be afraid to talk about dying. Chapter explains 5 things that dying looks like. If we work through our fears, plan as best we can, and talk with our primary care provider about getting hospice in a timely way, we can die comfortably with a good ending and leave our family feeling peaceful about our death.
We have a choice of when and how to plan. We can choose to plan proactively or reactively. Optimal time to start is when you are young and healthy. Studies show a direct correlation between the quality of life of those who are suffering from illness or incapacity and their level of planning. Creating a clear and comprehensive plan is a gift to your loved ones. Estate planning is too important to be considered a “do-it-yourself” project. Principal estate planning documents explained: 1. Last Will and Testament. 2. Trust. 3. Power of Attorney. 4. Health Care Proxy. 5. Living Will. Chapter give strategies on the best estate planning through the decades.
Three North Carolina Medicaid surveys conducted from 2000 to 2012 reported increasing numbers of Hispanic children enrolled in Medicaid and much lower trust in providers expressed by their adult caregiver respondents compared with responses for non-Hispanic Black and White children. To verify and explain this apparent trust chasm, we used bivariate and regression analyses. The variables employed included trust (dependent variable); child’s race/ethnicity, age, and sex; satisfaction and health status scales; two utilization measures; respondent’s age, sex, and education; geographical region; and population density of county of residence. Race/ethnicity was strongly associated with trust (p < .001), controlling for other independent variables. Access, satisfaction, and respondent’s age and education were also significant. Our results fit the Behavioral Model for Vulnerable Populations, which maps the role of significant variables in health-seeking behavior. After analyzing the concept of trust, we argue that lower acculturation explains lower Hispanic trust compared with non-Hispanic Blacks. We suggest policies to improve acculturation.
In Smith v. Rasmussen, an Eighth Circuit case from 2001, the original opinion upheld Iowa’s Medicaid ban on coverage for gender confirming surgery, finding it was reasonable and consistent with the federal Medicaid Act. Craig Konnoth’s feminist rewrite finds that the ban on gender confirming surgery is discriminatory on its face and impermissibly relies on gender stereotypes because it permits coverage of particular procedures for individuals perceived as sufficiently cisgender—such as those who are intersex but have conformed to expectations associated with their sex assigned at birth—but not for others. Konnoth draws on empirical research showing that enforcing gender roles in this context seeks to prevent men from debasing themselves as women and to prevent women from claiming the privileges of men. Heather Walter McCabe’s commentary highlights how litigation related to transgender issues reveals the socially constructed nature of gender and provides useful insight into how gender and sex relate to each other and to theories of antidiscrimination.