Stony Brook Medicine
ORCID: 0000-0002-0366-8503Publishes on Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches, Aortic aneurysm repair treatments, Healthcare Policy and Management. 318 papers and 14.4k citations.
Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.
OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a major debilitating disease affecting approximately 27 million persons in the US. Yet, the financial costs to patients and insurers remain poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to quantify by multivariate analyses the relationships between OA and annual health care expenditures borne by patients and insurers. METHODS: Data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) for the years 1996-2005 were used. MEPS is a large, nationally representative US database that includes information on health care expenditures, medical conditions, health insurance status, and sociodemographic characteristics. Individual and nationally aggregated cost estimates are provided. RESULTS: OA was found to contribute substantially to health care expenditures. Among women, OA increased out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditures by $1,379 per annum (2007 dollars) and insurer expenditures by $4,833. Among men, OA increased OOP expenditures by $694 per annum and insurer expenditures by $4,036. Given the high prevalence of OA, the aggregate effects on health care expenditures were very large. OA raised aggregate annual medical care expenditures by $185.5 billion. Of that amount, insurer expenditures were $149.4 billion and OOP expenditures were $36.1 billion. Because of the greater prevalence of OA in women and their more intensive use of health care, total expenditures for this group accounted for $118 billion, or almost two-thirds of the total increase in health care expenditures resulting from OA. CONCLUSION: The health care cost burden associated with OA is quite large for all groups examined and is disproportionately higher for women. Although insurers bear the brunt of treatment costs for OA, the OOP costs are also substantial.
BACKGROUND: We compared access to health care, use of services, and health care experiences for Mexicans and other Latinos by citizenship and immigrant authorization status. METHODS: We acquired data from the 2003 California Health Interview Survey, with 42,044 participants representative of noninstitutionalized households. Participants were differentiated by ethnicity/race, national origin, and citizenship/immigration authorization status. Outcome measures included having a usual source of care, problems in obtaining necessary care, use of physician and emergency department care, and 3 experiences with health care. Multivariate analyses measured the associations of citizenship/immigration authorization status with the outcome measures among foreign-born Mexicans and other Latinos vs their US-born counterparts. RESULTS: In multivariate analyses, undocumented Mexicans had 1.6 fewer physician visits (P < .01); compared with US-born Mexicans; other undocumented Latinos had 2.1 fewer visits (P < .01) compared with their US-born counterparts. Both undocumented groups were less likely to report difficulty obtaining necessary health care than US-born Mexicans (odds ratio, 0.68; P < .01) and other US-born Latinos (odds ratio, 0.40; P < .01), respectively. Undocumented Mexicans were less likely to have a usual source of care (odds ratio, 0.70; P < .01) and were more likely to report negative experiences than US-born Mexicans (odds ratio, 1.93; P < .01). Findings were similar for other undocumented Latinos, with the exception of having a usual source of care. Patterns of access to and use of health care services tended to improve with changing legal status. CONCLUSION: In this large sample, undocumented Mexicans and other undocumented Latinos reported less use of health care services and poorer experiences with care compared with their US-born counterparts, after adjustment for confounders in multivariate analyses.