7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Obstetric care and payment source: do low-risk Medicaid women get less care?

      American Journal of Public Health
      Adult, Female, Health Care Rationing, economics, Humans, Insurance, Health, Linear Models, Medicaid, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Prenatal Care, utilization, Random Allocation, Risk Factors, United States, Washington

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This study examined whether Medicaid-insured women at low risk receive less adequate obstetrical care than privately insured women. Low-risk women who were cared for by a random sample of obstetrical providers in Washington State were randomly selected. Information on all prenatal and intrapartum services was abstracted from medical records. Service information was aggregated into standardized resource-use units. Results compared Medicaid-insured women with those who were privately insured. Medicaid-insured women were significantly younger (22.5 years vs 26.9 years) and averaged 6% fewer visits than privately insured women. Nonetheless, Medicaid status had no meaningful association with prenatal, intrapartum, or overall resource use. Some variation occurred in individual resources received. Medicaid-insured women had 38.8% more resources expended on testing for sexually transmitted diseases. Privately insured women had more resources expended on alpha-fetoprotein testing and on amniocentesis. There were no meaningful differences in birthweight or gestational age at delivery. In this study of women who entered obstetrical care at low risk, similar care and resources were expended on Medicaid-insured and on privately insured women.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article