Medicaid enrollees are about twice as likely as the general US population to smoke tobacco: 32 percent of people in the program identify themselves as smokers. This article provides the first data about the effectiveness of state Medicaid programs in promoting smoking cessation. Our analysis of Medicaid enrollees’ use of cessation medications found that about 10 percent of current smokers received cessation medications in 2013. Every state Medicaid program covers cessation benefits, but the use of these medications varies widely, with the rate in Minnesota being thirty times higher than that in Texas. Most states could increase their efforts to help smokers quit, working with public health agencies, managed care plans, and others. In 2013 Medicaid spent $103 million on cessation medications—less than 0.25 percent of the estimated cost to Medicaid of smoking-related diseases. Additionally, states that have not expanded Medicaid eligibility in the wake of the Affordable Care Act have higher smoking prevalence and lower utilization rates of cessation medication, compared to expansion states. Given these factors, nonexpansion states will have a greater public health burden related to smoking. Medicaid and public health agencies should work together to make smoking cessation a priority for Medicaid beneficiaries.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

IntroductionThe Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA) will increase insurance coverage for US citizens and for breast and cervical cancer screening through insurance expansions and regulatory changes. The primary objective of this study was to estimate the number of low-income women who would gain health insurance after implementation of the ACA and thus be able to obtain cancer screening. A secondary objective was to estimate the size and characteristics of the uninsured low-income population and the number of women who would still need National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) services.MethodsWe used the nationally representative 2009 American Community Survey to estimate the determinants of insurance status for women in Massachusetts, assuming full implementation of the ACA. We extrapolated findings to simulate the effects of the ACA on each state. We used individual-level predicted probabilities of being uninsured to generate estimates of the number of women who would gain health insurance after implementation of the ACA and to predict demand for NBCCEDP services.ResultsApproximately 6.8 million low-income women would gain health insurance, potentially increasing the annual demand for cancer screenings initially by about 500,000 mammograms and 1.3 million Papanicolaou tests. Despite a 60% decrease in the number of low-income uninsured women, the NBCCEDP would still serve fewer than one-third of the estimated number of women eligible for services. The NBCCEDP-eligible population would comprise a larger number of women with language and literacy-related barriers to care.ConclusionImplementation of the ACA would increase insurance coverage and access to cancer screening for millions of women, but the NBCCEDP will remain essential for the millions who will remain uninsured.

A key method of stabilizing Medicaid coverage is to provide beneficiaries with twelve months of continuous eligibility. Following the passage of the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act in 2009, seven states adopted the continuous-eligibility option for children. That policy change led to a 1.8-percentage-point increase in the average length of child enrollment during fiscal year 2010 and increased annual costs for children by about 2.2 percent. The Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission has recommended offering states the option of giving adults twelve-month continuous eligibility for Medicaid. Our findings suggest that continuous eligibility could promote more stable coverage for adults enrolled in Medicaid at a modest cost.

No abstract

The Affordable Care Act increases US investment in Medicaid and community health centers, yet many people believe that care in such safety-net programs is substandard. Using data from more than 31,000 visits to primary care physicians in the period 2006-10, we examined whether the length or content of a visit was different for safety-net patients-those insured by Medicaid, those who are uninsured, and those seen in a community health center-compared to patients with private insurance. We found no significant differences in the average length of a primary care visit or in the likelihood of a patient's receiving preventive health counseling. Medicaid patients received more diagnostic and treatment services, and uninsured patients received fewer services, compared to privately insured patients, but the differences were small. This analysis indicates that length and content of primary care visits are comparable for safety-net and other patients. The main factors that contribute to differences in visit length and content are patients' health needs and the type of visit involved.