The Impact of Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on Trauma Care: A Step in the Right Direction

2016 ◽  
Vol 51 (6) ◽  
pp. 761
Author(s):  
Mario Andres Camacho
2016 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. 427-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bellal Joseph ◽  
Ansab A. Haider ◽  
Asad Azim ◽  
Narong Kulvatunyou ◽  
Andrew Tang ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Suzan Dijkink ◽  
Erik W. van Zwet ◽  
Pieta Krijnen ◽  
Luke P. H. Leenen ◽  
Frank W. Bloemers ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Twenty years ago, an inclusive trauma system was implemented in the Netherlands. The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of structured trauma care on the concentration of severely injured patients over time. Methods All severely injured patients (Injury Severity Score [ISS] ≥ 16) documented in the Dutch Trauma Registry (DTR) in the calendar period 2008–2018 were included for analysis. We compared severely injured patients, with and without severe neurotrauma, directly brought to trauma centers (TC) and non-trauma centers (NTC). The proportion of patients being directly transported to a trauma center was determined, as was the total Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS), and ISS. Results The documented number of severely injured patients increased from 2350 in 2008 to 4694 in 2018. During this period, on average, 70% of these patients were directly admitted to a TC (range 63–74%). Patients without severe neurotrauma had a lower chance of being brought to a TC compared to those with severe neurotrauma. Patients directly presented to a TC were more severely injured, reflected by a higher total AIS and ISS, than those directly transported to a NTC. Conclusion Since the introduction of a well-organized trauma system in the Netherlands, trauma care has become progressively centralized, with more severely injured patients being directly presented to a TC. However, still 30% of these patients is initially brought to a NTC. Future research should focus on improving pre-hospital triage to facilitate swift transfer of the right patient to the right hospital.


2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 63
Author(s):  
Denis A Vaughan ◽  
Irene Dimitriadis ◽  
Eric Scott Sills ◽  
Kelly Pagidis

Objective: The Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (ACA), or “Obamacare”, represents the most substantial reform of the U.S. healthcare system since the 1965 creation of Medicare and Medicaid. This investigation sought to ascertain knowledge and opinion among physicians providing women’s healthcare services about how this national health program will impact access to fertility treatments.Methods: Between May-July 2014, doctor’s perceptions of ACA were registered by anonymous questionnaire submitted to program directors and house staff at 50 accredited obstetrics & gynecology training centers in USA. Self-reported political preferences were also tabulated for each respondent.Results: Overall, 53.3% of participants (n = 114) claimed familiarity with ACA although this varied significantly by seniority (68.8% of faculty vs. 40% of trainees; p = .003). Among respondents 54.9% identified as liberal, 23% as moderate, and 19.5% as conservative. Most physicians in this sample (51.8%) anticipated a positive impact on assisted fertility care from ACA, 17.9% predicted an adverse effect, and just under one third (30.3%) either had no opinion or were unable to make a prediction.Conclusions: This study offers the first analysis of women’s healthcare physicians’ opinion about the impact of ACA on assisted fertility services. Our report finds low general familiarity of ACA among doctors. Moreover, marked divisions of opinion exist among physicians concerning the ACA in general, as well as what role the ACA should play in the provision of assisted fertility care specifically. If U.S. physicians are to provide leadership on women’s healthcare policy initiatives with a view to reach consensus (especially with respect to assisted fertility services), improved awareness of the ACA and its sequela will be crucial.


2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (12) ◽  
pp. 1957-1972
Author(s):  
Donald D. Hackney ◽  
Daniel Friesner ◽  
Erica H. Johnson

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the timing associated with the implementation of the health insurance-related provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) altered the presence and distribution of medical/non-medical debts accumulated by different types of bankruptcy filers. Design/methodology/approach Data were drawn from the US Bankruptcy Court’s Eastern Washington District over the years 2009, 2011 and 2014 using interval random sampling. Binary probit and Tobit analyses were used to model the existence, and distribution, of medical debts and total debts, respectively, at the time of filing. The impact of the time frame associated with the ACA was operationalized via a Chow test for structural dynamic change. Findings Chapter 13 filers in 2014 (post-ACA-based health exchange implementation) were more likely to report medical debts than Chapter 7 filers in the pre-intervention period, and were also more likely to report a larger proportion of outstanding debts owed to a single creditor. Filers claiming health insurance premium expenses in 2011 were (at the 10 percent significance level) more likely to report a more skewed distribution of medical debts. Originality/value The time frame associated with the implementation of the ACA impacts the distribution of medical debts among filers who have sufficient net disposable income to fund a Chapter 13 plan. The polarization of outstanding medical debts may indicate coverage gaps in existing health insurance policies, whose costs would be disproportionately borne by patients operating on thin financial margins.


2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Gaynor ◽  
Kate Ho ◽  
Robert J. Town

The U.S. health-care sector is large and growing—health-care spending in 2011 amounted to $2.7 trillion and 18 percent of GDP. Approximately half of health-care output is allocated via markets. In this paper, we analyze the industrial organization literature on health-care markets, focusing on the impact of competition on price, quality, and treatment decisions for health-care providers and health insurers. We conclude with a discussion of research opportunities for industrial organization economists, including opportunities created by the U.S. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (JEL J15, J24, J71, J81, K31)


Cancer ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 126 (3) ◽  
pp. 559-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelsey L. Corrigan ◽  
Leticia Nogueira ◽  
K. Robin Yabroff ◽  
Chun Chieh Lin ◽  
Xuesong Han ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document