Advertisement

Changes in Health and Ability to Work Among Medicaid Expansion Enrollees: a Mixed Methods Study

  • Renuka Tipirneni
  • Jeffrey T. Kullgren
  • John Z. Ayanian
  • Edith C. Kieffer
  • Ann-Marie Rosland
  • Tammy Chang
  • Adrianne N. Haggins
  • Sarah J. Clark
  • Sunghee Lee
  • Erica Solway
  • Matthias A. Kirch
  • Christina Mrukowicz
  • Erin Beathard
  • Erin Sears
  • Susan D. Goold
Original Research

Abstract

Background

Michigan expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act (Healthy Michigan Plan [HMP]) to improve the health of low-income residents and the state’s economy.

Objective

To understand HMP’s impact on enrollees’ health, ability to work, and ability to seek employment

Design

Mixed methods study, including 67 qualitative interviews and 4090 computer-assisted telephone surveys (response rate 53.7%)

Participants

Non-elderly adult HMP enrollees

Main Measures

Changes in health status, ability to work, and ability to seek employment

Key Results

Half (47.8%) of respondents reported better physical health, 38.2% better mental health, and 39.5% better dental health since HMP enrollment. Among employed respondents, 69.4% reported HMP helped them do a better job at work. Among out-of-work respondents, 54.5% agreed HMP made them better able to look for a job. Among respondents who changed jobs, 36.9% agreed HMP helped them get a better job. In adjusted analyses, improved health was associated with the ability to do a better job at work (aOR 4.08, 95% CI 3.11–5.35, p < 0.001), seek a job (aOR 2.82, 95% CI 1.93–4.10, p < 0.001), and get a better job (aOR 3.20, 95% CI 1.69–6.09, p < 0.001), but not with employment status (aOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89–1.30, p = 0.44). In interviews, several HMP enrollees attributed their ability to get or maintain employment to improved physical, mental, and dental health because of services covered by HMP. Remaining barriers to work cited by enrollees included older age, disability, illness, and caregiving responsibilities.

Conclusions

Many low-income HMP enrollees reported improved health, ability to work, and job seeking after obtaining health insurance through Medicaid expansion.

Notes

Contributors

We thank the following evaluation team members for their additional contributions to survey and interview development and administration: Lisa Szymecko, JD, PhD; Cengiz Salman, MA; Tolu Olorode, MSW, MUP; Zachary Rowe, BBA; and the members of the Community Advisory Board (Adnan Hammad, Global Health Research, Management and Solutions; Lynnette LaHahnn, AuSable Valley Community Mental Health Authority; Charo Ledón, Acción Buenos Vecinos; Raymond Neff, Spectrum Health; Jennifer Raymond, Mid Michigan Community Action; George Sedlacek, Marquette County YMCA; and Ashley Tuomi, American Indian Health and Family Services). We also thank Sarah Sugar, BA, for assistance with literature review, and Helen Levy, PhD, for thoughtful comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript.

Funding Source

The study was funded by a contract from the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) to the University of Michigan to conduct an evaluation of the Healthy Michigan Plan, as required by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) through a Section 1115 Medicaid waiver.

Prior Presentations

Preliminary findings were presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, April 2017, and at the AcademyHealth Annual Research Meeting, New Orleans, LA, June 2017.

Funders

The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) funded the study and approved the manuscript, but had no role in the conduct of the research, data analysis, interpretation of findings, or drafting of the manuscript. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of MDHHS.

Dr. Tipirneni is additionally supported by a K08 Clinical Scientist Development Award from the National Institute on Aging. Support was also provided to Dr. Kullgren by the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Health Services Research and Development Service. Dr. Kullgren is a VA HSR&D Career Development awardee at the Ann Arbor VA. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the United States government.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Kullgren has received consulting fees from SeeChange Health and HealthMine, and a speaking honorarium from AbilTo, Inc. There are no other conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

11606_2018_4736_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (519 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 518 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Congressional Budget Office. Cost estimate: H.R. 1628, American Health Care Act of 2017. May 24, 2017. Accessed at https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/costestimate/hr1628aspassed.pdf on 4 September 2017.
  2. 2.
    Congressional Budget Office. Cost estimate: H.R. 1628, Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017. June 26, 2017. Accessed at https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52849 on 4 September 2017.
  3. 3.
    Congressional Budget Office. Preliminary analysis of legislation that would replace subsidies for health care with block grants. 2017 Sept. Accessed at https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53126 on 26 September 2017.
  4. 4.
    Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Current status of state Medicaid expansion decisions. 2017 Jan 1. Accessed at http://www.kff.org/health-reform/slide/current-status-of-the-medicaid-expansion-decision on 4 September 2017.
  5. 5.
    Singer PM, Nelson DB, Tipirneni R. Consumer-directed health care for Medicaid patients: past and future reforms. Am J Public Health. 2017; 107(10):1592–1594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. CMS announces new policy guidance for states to test community engagement for able-bodied adults. Accessed at https://www.cms.gov/Newsroom/MediaReleaseDatabase/Press-releases/2018-Press-releases-items/2018-01-11.html on 22 May 2018.
  7. 7.
    Musumeci, M. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Medicaid and work requirements. 2017 Mar 23. Accessed at http://kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/medicaid-and-work-requirements on 4 September 2017.
  8. 8.
    Antonisse L, Garfield R, Rudowitz R, Artiga S, Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. The effects of Medicaid expansion under the ACA: updated findings from a literature review. 2017 Sept 25. Accessed at http://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/the-effects-of-medicaid-expansion-under-the-aca-updated-findings-from-a-literature-review on 26 September 2017.
  9. 9.
    The Colorado Health Foundation. Assessing the economic and budgetary impact of Medicaid expansion in Colorado: FY 2015–16 through FY 2034–35. 2016 Mar. Accessed at http://www.coloradohealth.org/sites/default/files/documents/2017-01/Medicaid_ExecutiveSummary_ONLINE.pdf on 4 September 2017.
  10. 10.
    Deloitte Development LLC. Commonwealth of Kentucky Medicaid expansion report 2014. 2015 Feb. Accessed at http://jointhehealthjourney.com/images/uploads/channel-files/Kentucky_Medicaid_Expansion_One-Year_Study_FINAL.pdf on 4 September 2017.
  11. 11.
    Ayanian JZ, Ehrlich GM, Grimes DR, et al. Economic effects of Medicaid expansion in Michigan. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:407–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Garrett AB, Kaestner R, Gangopadhyaya A. Recent evidence on the ACA and employment: Has the ACA been a job killer? 2016 update. The Urban Institute, ACA Implementation — Monitoring and Tracking; 2017 Feb. Accessed at https://ssrn.com/abstract=2922288 on 4 September 2017.
  13. 13.
    Gooptu A, Moriya AS, Simon KI, et al. Medicaid expansion did not result in significant employment changes or job reductions in 2014. Health Aff. 2016;35:111–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leung P, Mas A. Employment effects of the ACA Medicaid expansions. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 22540; 2016 Aug. Accessed at http://www.nber.org/papers/w22540.pdf on 4 September 2017.
  15. 15.
    Kaestner R, Garrett B, Chen J, et al. Effects of ACA Medicaid expansions on health insurance coverage and labor supply. J Policy Anal Manage. 2017;36:608–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Levy H, Buchmueller TC, Nikpay S. Health reform and retirement. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2016; 2016 Sep 3.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hall JP, Shartzer A, Kurth NK, et al. Effect of Medicaid expansion on workforce participation for people with disabilities. Am J Public Health. 2017;107:262–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ohio Department of Medicaid. Ohio Medicaid Group VIII assessment: a report to the Ohio General Assembly. 2016. Accessed at http://medicaid.ohio.gov/portals/0/resources/reports/annual/group-viii-assessment.pdf on 4 September 2017.
  19. 19.
    Rutledge MS. The interconnected relationships of health insurance, health, and labor market outcomes. Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, WP2016–2; 2016 Jul. Accessed at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2812211 on 4 September 2017.
  20. 20.
    Office of Governor Rick Snyder. Snyder making the case for Healthy Michigan at two town hall meetings. 2013 Aug 19. Accessed at http://www.michigan.gov/snyder/0,4668,7-277-57577_57657-310966%2D%2Drss,00.html on 4 September 2017.
  21. 21.
    Ayanian JZ. Michigan’s approach to Medicaid expansion and reform. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1773–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Patton MQ. Qualitative research & evaluation methods: integrating theory and practice. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2015.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 1998.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    The American Association for Public Opinion Research. Standard definitions: final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. Oakbrook Terrace (IL): AAPOR; 2016. Accessed at http://www.aapor.org/AAPOR_Main/media/publications/Standard-Definitions20169theditionfinal.pdf on 4 September 2017.
  25. 25.
    Lee S, Valliant R. Weighting telephone samples using propensity scores. Adv Tel Survey Methodol 2008:170–83.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National health and nutrition examination survey. National Center for Health Statistics. Accessed at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/index.htm on 4 September 2017.
  27. 27.
    Center for Studying Health System Change. Health tracking household survey. 2009-10-16. Accessed at  https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR26001.v1 on 4 September 2017.
  28. 28.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National health interview survey. National Center for Health Statistics. Accessed at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/index.htm on 4 September 2017.
  29. 29.
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Consumer assessment of healthcare providers and systems. Accessed at https://www.ahrq.gov/cahps/index.html on 4 September 2017.
  30. 30.
    U.S. Census Bureau. American community survey. Accessed at https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs on September 4, 2017.
  31. 31.
    Guetterman TC, Fetters MD, Creswell JW. Integrating quantitative and qualitative results in health science mixed methods research through joint displays. Ann Fam Med. 2015;13:554–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Creswell JW, Clark VLP. Designing and conducting mixed methods research: SAGE; 2011.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Baicker K, Finkelstein A, Song J, et al. The impact of medicaid on labor market activity and program participation: evidence from the oregon health insurance experiment. Am Econ Rev. 2014;104:322–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Goetzel RZ, Long SR, Ozminkowski RJ, et al. Health, absence, disability, and presenteeism cost estimates of certain physical and mental health conditions affecting US employers. J Occup Environ Med. 2004;46:398–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Xu X, Jensen GA. Does health insurance reduce illness-related worker absenteeism? Appl Econ. 2012;44:4591–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Baicker K, Taubman SL, Allen HL, et al. The Oregon experiment—effects of Medicaid on clinical outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:1713–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ku L, Brantley E.Medicaid work requirements: who’s at risk? Bethesda (MD): Health Affairs Blog; 2017 Apr 12. Accessed at http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/04/12/medicaid-work-requirements-whos-at-risk on 4 September 2017.
  38. 38.
    Askelson NM, Golembiewski EH, Baquero B, et al. The importance of matching the evaluation population to the intervention population: using Medicaid data to reach hard-to-reach intervention populations. Eval Program Plann. 2017;60:64–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gidengil C, Parast L, Burkhart Q, et al. Development and implementation of the family experiences with coordination of care survey quality measures. Acad Pediatr. 2017; 2017 Mar 31.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sommers BD, Maylone B, Nguyen KH, et al. The impact of state policies on ACA applications and enrollment among low-income adults in Arkansas, Kentucky, and Texas. Health Aff. 2015;34:1010–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Call KT, McAlpine DD, Garcia CM, et al. Barriers to care in an ethnically diverse publicly insured population: is health care reform enough? Med Care. 2014;52:720–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Renuka Tipirneni
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jeffrey T. Kullgren
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • John Z. Ayanian
    • 1
    • 2
    • 5
    • 6
  • Edith C. Kieffer
    • 1
    • 7
  • Ann-Marie Rosland
    • 8
    • 9
  • Tammy Chang
    • 1
    • 10
  • Adrianne N. Haggins
    • 1
    • 11
  • Sarah J. Clark
    • 1
    • 12
  • Sunghee Lee
    • 1
    • 13
  • Erica Solway
    • 1
  • Matthias A. Kirch
    • 1
  • Christina Mrukowicz
    • 1
  • Erin Beathard
    • 1
  • Erin Sears
    • 1
    • 3
  • Susan D. Goold
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 5
  1. 1.Institute for Healthcare Policy and InnovationUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Division of General Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  3. 3.Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in MedicineUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  4. 4.VA Ann Arbor Center for Clinical Management ResearchUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  5. 5.School of Public HealthUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  6. 6.Gerald R. Ford School of Public PolicyUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  7. 7.School of Social WorkUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  8. 8.Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  9. 9.VA Pittsburgh Center for Health Equity Research and PromotionPittsburghUSA
  10. 10.Department of Family MedicineUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  11. 11.Department of Emergency MedicineUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  12. 12.Department of PediatricsUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  13. 13.Institute for Social ResearchUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations