Medicaid family planning waivers in 3 states: Did they reduce unwanted births?

Inquiry (United States)

Volumn 52, Issue , 2015, Pages

  Adams, E Kathleen ^a   Galactionova, Katya ^b,c   Kenney, Genevieve M ^d  

^a EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SWISS TROPICAL AND PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BASEL   (Switzerland)

^d URBAN INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Costs; Family planning; Medicaid; Section 1115 waivers; Unwanted births

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CONTRACEPTIVE BEHAVIOR; FAMILY PLANNING; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; ILLINOIS; JUVENILE; MEDICAID; NEW YORK; OREGON; PREGNANCY; AGE; CHILD WELFARE; CONTRACEPTION; ECONOMICS; INSURANCE; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEWBORN; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; UNITED STATES; UNPLANNED PREGNANCY; UNWANTED PREGNANCY; UTILIZATION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; CHILD, UNWANTED; CONTRACEPTION; CONTRACEPTION BEHAVIOR; FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES; FEMALE; HUMANS; ILLINOIS; INFANT, NEWBORN; INSURANCE COVERAGE; MALE; MEDICAID; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEW YORK; OREGON; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY, UNPLANNED; PREGNANCY, UNWANTED; UNITED STATES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84982717658     PISSN: 00469580     EISSN: 19457243     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0046958015588915     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. US Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Healthy People 2020 Washington, DC. http://healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.aspx?topicid=13.Accessed May 7, 2015.
2. Finer LB, Henshaw SK. Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2006;38(2):90-96.
3. Singh S, Sedgh G, Hussain R. Unintended pregnancy: worldwide levels, trends and outcomes. Stud Fam Plann. 2010;41(4):241-250.
4. Kost K, Landry DJ, Darroch JE. Predicting maternal behaviors during pregnancy: does intention status matter. Fam Plann Perspect. 1998;30(2):79-88.
5. Hulsey TM. Association between early prenatal care and mother's intention of and desire for the pregnancy. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2001;30:275-282.
6. Sable MR, Wilkinson DS. Pregnancy intentions, pregnancy attitudes, and the use of prenatal care in Missouri. Matern Child Health J. 1998;2(3):155-282.
7. Markus AR, Andres E, West KD, Garro N, Pellegrini C. Medicaid covered births, 2008-2010, in the context of the implementation of health reform. Womens Health Issues. 2013;23(5):e273-e280.
8. Hessol NA, Fuentes-Afflick E. Ethnic differences in neonatal and postneonatal mortality. Pediatrics. 2006;115(1):e44-e51.
9. Hogue CJ, Vasquez C. Toward a strategic approach for reducing disparities in infant mortality. Am J Public Health. 2002;92(4):552-556.
10. Howell E. The impact of the Medicaid expansions for pregnant women: a synthesis of the evidence. Med Care Res Rev. 2001;58(1):3-30.
11. Kearney MS, Levine PB. Subsidized contraception, fertility, and sexual behavior. Rev Econ Stat. 2009;91(1):137-151.
12. Lindrooth RC, McCullough JS. The effect of Medicaid family planning expansions on unplanned births. Womens Health Issues. 2007;17:66-74.
13. Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI). State Policies in Brief: Medicaid Family Planning Eligibility Expansions. New York, NY: Alan Guttmacher Institute; 2015. http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SMFPE.pdf. Accessed May 7, 2015.
14. Wherry LR. Medicaid family planning expansions and related preventive care. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(9): 1577-1582.
15. Adams EK, Kenney GM, Galactionova K. Preventive and reproductive health services for women: the role of California's family planning waiver. Am J Health Promot. 2013;27(3 suppl):eS1-eS10.
16. Baicker K, Taubman SL, Allen HL, et al. The Oregon experiment-effects of Medicaid on clinical outcomes. New Engl J Med. 2013;368:1713-1722.
17. Rand Health. The Health Insurance Experiment: A Classic RAND Study Speaks to the Current Health Care Reform Debate. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Health; 2006. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_briefs/2006/RAND_RB9174.pdf. Accessed May 7, 2015.
18. Adams EK, Gavin NI, Manning W, Handler A. Welfare reform, insurance coverage pre-pregnancy and timely enrollment: an eight state study. Inquiry. 2005;42:129-144.
19. Dubay L, Joyce T, Kaestner R, Kenney G. Changes in prenatal care timing and low birth weight by race and socioeconomic status: implications for the Medicaid expansions for pregnant women. Health Serv Res. 2001;36(2):399-403.
20. Kaestner R, Kaushal N. Welfare reform and health insurance coverage of low-income families. J Health Econ. 2003;22: 959-81.
21. Kenney GM, Sommers A, Dubay L. Moving to mandatory Medicaid managed care in Ohio: impacts for pregnant women and infants. Med Care. 2005;43(7):683-690.
22. Ashenfelter O, Card D. Using the longitudinal structure of earnings to estimate the effects of training programs. Rev Econ Stat. 1985;67:648-660.
23. Wooldridge J. Lecture 10: Difference-in-Differences Estimation. NBER Summer Institute; 2007. http://www.nber.org/WNE/Slides7-31-07/slides_10_diffindiffs.pdf. Accessed May 7, 2015.
24. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 11 (Stata 11 Base Reference Manual). College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2009.
25. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/prams.Accessed May 12, 2015.
26. Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI). Trends in Abortion in the United States, 1973-2011. New York, NY: Alan Guttmacher Institute; 2014. www.guttmacher.org/presentations/trends.pdf. Accessed May 7, 2015.
27. D'Angelo D, Colley-Gilbert B, Rochat RW, Santelli JS, Herold JM. Measuring unintended pregnancy: are women who report mistimed and unwanted pregnancies different? Perspect Sex Repro H. 2004;36(5):192-197.
28. Pulley L, Klerman LV, Tang H, Baker BA. The extent of pregnancy mistiming and its association with maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes. Perspect Sex Repro H. 2002;34(4), 206-211.
29. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, et al. Births: final data for 2005 Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2007;56(6):1-104.
30. Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Abortion surveillance-United States, 2009. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2012;61(SS08): 1-44.
31. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) State Summary Datamart. Medicaid Statistical Information System (MSIS) State Summary Datamart: Tables by Family Planning Program. Washington, DC: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; 2012. http://msis.cms.hhs.gov/cognos/cgi-bin/ppdscgi.exe? Accessed May 7, 2015.
32. Bertrand M, Duflo E, Mullainathan S. How much should we trust difference-in-differences estimates? Q J Econ. 2004;22(4):723-766.
33. Cameron AC, Gelbach JB, Miller DL. Bootstrap-based improvements for inference with clustered errors. Rev Econ Stat. 2008;90:414-427.
34. Klein P, Santos A. A score based approach to wild bootstrap inference. J Econom Methods. 2012;1:23-41
35. Webb M. Reworking Wild Bootstrap Based Inference for Clustered Errors. Working Paper No. 1315. Kingston, Ontario, Canada: Department of Economics, Queen's University; 2013.
36. Bronstein J, Adams EK, Edwards J. Evaluation of Medicaid Family Planning Demonstrations. Final Report under CMS Contract # 752-2-415921 completed by CNA Analysis and Solutions. Alexandria, VA: CNA Corporation; 2003.
37. Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI). Estimating the Impact of Expanding Medicaid Eligibility for Family Planning Services: 2011 Update. New York, NY: Alan Guttmacher Institute; 2011.
38. Institute of Medicine (IOM). Clinical Preventive Services for Women: Closing the Gaps. http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Clinical-Preventive-Services-for-Women-Closing-the-Gaps.aspx. Published 2011. Accessed May 7, 2015.
39. Advisory Board Company. Where the States Stand Medicaid Expansion. http://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/resources/primers/medicaidmap.Accessed May 25, 2015.