美国医疗补助和私人医疗保险人群使用生育治疗的差异

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Erica L. Eliason PhD , Marie E. Thoma PhD , Maria W. Steenland SD
{"title":"美国医疗补助和私人医疗保险人群使用生育治疗的差异","authors":"Erica L. Eliason PhD ,&nbsp;Marie E. Thoma PhD ,&nbsp;Maria W. Steenland SD","doi":"10.1016/j.whi.2023.03.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>We aimed to compare differences in receipt of any and specific types of fertility services between people with Medicaid and private insurance.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We used National Survey of Family Growth (2002–2019) data and linear probability regression models to examine the association between insurance type (Medicaid or private) and fertility service use. The primary outcome was use of fertility services in the past 12 months, and secondary outcomes were use of specific types of fertility services at any time: 1) testing, 2) common medical treatment, and 3) use of any fertility treatment type (testing, medical treatment, or surgical treatment of infertility). We additionally calculated time-to-pregnancy using a method that estimates the unobserved total amount of time the respondent spent trying to become pregnant using their current duration of pregnancy attempt at the time of the survey. We calculated time-to-pregnancy ratios across respondent characteristics to examine if insurance type was associated with differential time-to-pregnancy.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In adjusted models, Medicaid coverage was associated with an 11.2-percentage point (95% confidence interval: −22.3 to −0.0) lower use of fertility services in the past 12 months compared with private coverage. Relative to private coverage, Medicaid insurance was also associated with large and statistically significantly lower rates of ever having used infertility testing or any fertility services. Insurance type was not associated with differences in time-to-pregnancy.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>People covered by Medicaid were less likely to have used fertility services compared with people with private insurance. Differences in coverage of fertility services between Medicaid and private payers may represent a barrier to fertility treatment for Medicaid recipients.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48039,"journal":{"name":"Womens Health Issues","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10330011/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in Use of Fertility Treatment Between People With Medicaid and Private Health Insurance Coverage in the United States\",\"authors\":\"Erica L. Eliason PhD ,&nbsp;Marie E. Thoma PhD ,&nbsp;Maria W. Steenland SD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.whi.2023.03.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>We aimed to compare differences in receipt of any and specific types of fertility services between people with Medicaid and private insurance.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We used National Survey of Family Growth (2002–2019) data and linear probability regression models to examine the association between insurance type (Medicaid or private) and fertility service use. The primary outcome was use of fertility services in the past 12 months, and secondary outcomes were use of specific types of fertility services at any time: 1) testing, 2) common medical treatment, and 3) use of any fertility treatment type (testing, medical treatment, or surgical treatment of infertility). We additionally calculated time-to-pregnancy using a method that estimates the unobserved total amount of time the respondent spent trying to become pregnant using their current duration of pregnancy attempt at the time of the survey. We calculated time-to-pregnancy ratios across respondent characteristics to examine if insurance type was associated with differential time-to-pregnancy.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In adjusted models, Medicaid coverage was associated with an 11.2-percentage point (95% confidence interval: −22.3 to −0.0) lower use of fertility services in the past 12 months compared with private coverage. Relative to private coverage, Medicaid insurance was also associated with large and statistically significantly lower rates of ever having used infertility testing or any fertility services. Insurance type was not associated with differences in time-to-pregnancy.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>People covered by Medicaid were less likely to have used fertility services compared with people with private insurance. Differences in coverage of fertility services between Medicaid and private payers may represent a barrier to fertility treatment for Medicaid recipients.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48039,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Womens Health Issues\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10330011/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Womens Health Issues\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1049386723000713\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Womens Health Issues","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1049386723000713","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的我们旨在比较接受医疗补助和私人保险的人在接受任何和特定类型的生育服务方面的差异。方法我们使用2002–2019年全国家庭增长调查数据和线性概率回归模型来检验保险类型(医疗补助或私人)与生育服务使用之间的关系。主要结果是在过去12个月内使用生育服务,次要结果是在任何时候使用特定类型的生育服务:1)检测,2)普通医疗,3)使用任何生育治疗类型(不孕不育的检测、医疗或手术治疗)。此外,我们还使用一种方法计算了怀孕时间,该方法使用调查时受访者尝试怀孕的当前持续时间来估计未观察到的总时间。我们计算了受访者特征的妊娠时间比,以检查保险类型是否与不同的妊娠时间有关。结果在调整后的模型中,与私人保险相比,医疗补助保险在过去12个月内使用生育服务的比例降低了11.2%(95%置信区间:-22.3至-0.0)。相对于私人保险,医疗补助保险还与使用过不孕不育检测或任何生育服务的比率大相关,且在统计上显著较低。保险类型与怀孕时间的差异无关。结论与拥有私人保险的人相比,接受医疗补助的人不太可能使用生育服务。医疗补助和私人支付者之间生育服务覆盖范围的差异可能是医疗补助接受者接受生育治疗的障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Differences in Use of Fertility Treatment Between People With Medicaid and Private Health Insurance Coverage in the United States

Objectives

We aimed to compare differences in receipt of any and specific types of fertility services between people with Medicaid and private insurance.

Methods

We used National Survey of Family Growth (2002–2019) data and linear probability regression models to examine the association between insurance type (Medicaid or private) and fertility service use. The primary outcome was use of fertility services in the past 12 months, and secondary outcomes were use of specific types of fertility services at any time: 1) testing, 2) common medical treatment, and 3) use of any fertility treatment type (testing, medical treatment, or surgical treatment of infertility). We additionally calculated time-to-pregnancy using a method that estimates the unobserved total amount of time the respondent spent trying to become pregnant using their current duration of pregnancy attempt at the time of the survey. We calculated time-to-pregnancy ratios across respondent characteristics to examine if insurance type was associated with differential time-to-pregnancy.

Results

In adjusted models, Medicaid coverage was associated with an 11.2-percentage point (95% confidence interval: −22.3 to −0.0) lower use of fertility services in the past 12 months compared with private coverage. Relative to private coverage, Medicaid insurance was also associated with large and statistically significantly lower rates of ever having used infertility testing or any fertility services. Insurance type was not associated with differences in time-to-pregnancy.

Conclusions

People covered by Medicaid were less likely to have used fertility services compared with people with private insurance. Differences in coverage of fertility services between Medicaid and private payers may represent a barrier to fertility treatment for Medicaid recipients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
97
审稿时长
32 days
期刊介绍: Women"s Health Issues (WHI) is a peer-reviewed, bimonthly, multidisciplinary journal that publishes research and review manuscripts related to women"s health care and policy. As the official journal of the Jacobs Institute of Women"s Health, it is dedicated to improving the health and health care of all women throughout the lifespan and in diverse communities. The journal seeks to inform health services researchers, health care and public health professionals, social scientists, policymakers, and others concerned with women"s health.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信