Severe maternal morbidity and mortality at the intersection of race and insurance status: a national serial cross-sectional study of United States births.

IF 2.2 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
International Journal of Population Data Science Pub Date : 2026-07-06 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.23889/ijpds.v11i5.3566
Amelia Srajer, Amity Quinn, Paul Ronksley, Erin Brennand, Amy Metcalfe
{"title":"Severe maternal morbidity and mortality at the intersection of race and insurance status: a national serial cross-sectional study of United States births.","authors":"Amelia Srajer, Amity Quinn, Paul Ronksley, Erin Brennand, Amy Metcalfe","doi":"10.23889/ijpds.v11i5.3566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Medicaid, a public insurance program for low-income individuals, covers over 40% of United States births. It disproportionately serves racial minority groups who already face elevated obstetrical risks. Coverage gaps compared to private insurance may further exacerbate these adverse outcomes. Our objective was to assess severe maternal morbidity (SMM) and in-hospital mortality at the intersection of race and insurance status.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We analyzed obstetric deliveries from 2015-2022 using the National Inpatient Sample. Ten interaction terms compared Medicaid versus private insurance across White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American groups. SMM complications were defined using ICD-10 codes. Demographics were compared using bivariate tests [p<0.05 and standardized differences>0.2]. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of SMM and mortality, adjusted for preexisting/gestational comorbidities, year, caesarean section, and hospital region.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 23.5 million weighted deliveries, 43.8% were insured by Medicaid. Medicaid coverage was higher among Black (66.7%), Hispanic (66.6%) and Native American (67.6%) individuals compared to White (32.3%) and Asian (27.9%) patients. Adjusted odds of SMM were higher among all intersectional groups compared to White patients with private insurance (all p<0.001). Within each racial category, SMM odds were significantly greater for the Medicaid versus private groups. However, increased odds of mortality were primarily observed for those with Medicaid rather than by race.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Racial disparities in SMM are amplified for those with public insurance. However, mortality risk is primarily driven by insurance rather than race. Policy reform ensuring equitable coverage is critical to mitigate obstetrical inequities.</p>","PeriodicalId":36483,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Population Data Science","volume":"11 5","pages":"3566"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13426643/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Population Data Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23889/ijpds.v11i5.3566","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Medicaid, a public insurance program for low-income individuals, covers over 40% of United States births. It disproportionately serves racial minority groups who already face elevated obstetrical risks. Coverage gaps compared to private insurance may further exacerbate these adverse outcomes. Our objective was to assess severe maternal morbidity (SMM) and in-hospital mortality at the intersection of race and insurance status.

Study design: We analyzed obstetric deliveries from 2015-2022 using the National Inpatient Sample. Ten interaction terms compared Medicaid versus private insurance across White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American groups. SMM complications were defined using ICD-10 codes. Demographics were compared using bivariate tests [p<0.05 and standardized differences>0.2]. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of SMM and mortality, adjusted for preexisting/gestational comorbidities, year, caesarean section, and hospital region.

Results: Among 23.5 million weighted deliveries, 43.8% were insured by Medicaid. Medicaid coverage was higher among Black (66.7%), Hispanic (66.6%) and Native American (67.6%) individuals compared to White (32.3%) and Asian (27.9%) patients. Adjusted odds of SMM were higher among all intersectional groups compared to White patients with private insurance (all p<0.001). Within each racial category, SMM odds were significantly greater for the Medicaid versus private groups. However, increased odds of mortality were primarily observed for those with Medicaid rather than by race.

Conclusion: Racial disparities in SMM are amplified for those with public insurance. However, mortality risk is primarily driven by insurance rather than race. Policy reform ensuring equitable coverage is critical to mitigate obstetrical inequities.

严重的产妇发病率和死亡率在种族和保险状况的交叉点:美国出生的全国系列横断面研究。
目的:医疗补助计划是一项针对低收入人群的公共保险计划,覆盖了美国40%以上的新生儿。它不成比例地服务于已经面临较高产科风险的少数种族群体。与私人保险相比,覆盖差距可能会进一步加剧这些不利后果。我们的目的是评估严重产妇发病率(SMM)和院内死亡率在种族和保险状况的交叉点。研究设计:我们使用全国住院患者样本分析了2015-2022年的产科分娩情况。十个相互作用的术语比较了医疗补助与私人保险在白人、黑人、西班牙裔、亚裔和美洲原住民群体中的差异。采用ICD-10编码定义SMM并发症。人口统计学采用双变量检验进行比较[p0.2]。多变量logistic回归模型估计了SMM和死亡率的优势比和95%置信区间,调整了既往/妊娠合并症、年份、剖宫产和医院地区。结果:在2350万加权分娩中,43.8%的人参加了医疗补助。与白人(32.3%)和亚裔(27.9%)患者相比,黑人(66.7%)、西班牙裔(66.6%)和美洲原住民(67.6%)患者的医疗补助覆盖率更高。与有私人保险的白人患者相比,所有交叉组中SMM的调整后几率更高。结论:在有公共保险的人群中,SMM的种族差异被放大。然而,死亡风险主要是由保险而非种族驱动的。确保公平覆盖的政策改革对于减轻产科不公平现象至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
386
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书