Insurance-Based Differences in Treatment Patterns for Uterine Fibroids

Purpose

The aim of this study was to examine whether Medicaid versus commercial insurance and reimbursement are associated with uterine artery embolization (UAE) utilization rates for uterine fibroid treatment.

Methods

This retrospective (October 2015 to September 2023) study of women aged 30 to 59 years who underwent procedures for the treatment of uterine fibroids (hysterectomy, myomectomy, or UAE) was based on the Inovalon Insights dataset for those with Medicaid or commercial insurance. Differences in the receipt of UAE versus hysterectomy or myomectomy by insurance type and relative reimbursement were assessed using logistic regression controlling for patient characteristics and geographic differences in treatment patterns. For women with either hysterectomy or myomectomy, differences in the receipt of these procedures laparoscopically or not were assessed by insurance type and relative reimbursement controlling for patient characteristics and geographic differences in treatment patterns.

Results

Medicaid compared with commercial insurance was associated with 38% higher odds of UAE (odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-1.42). States with higher Medicaid reimbursement for hysterectomy were associated with lower odds for UAE (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92-0.98). For women with hysterectomy or myomectomy, those with Medicaid versus commercial insurance had 20% lower odds (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.79-0.82) of undergoing the procedure laparoscopically.

Conclusions

Women insured by Medicaid versus commercial insurance were more likely to undergo the less invasive UAE procedure. Conversely, Medicaid patients who underwent hysterectomy or myomectomy were less likely to undergo the procedure laparoscopically. Both results are consistent with the notion that insurance status may influence both physician referral patterns and treatment options available to patients.