scholarly journals How the Affordable Care Act Will Affect Access to Health Care in North Carolina

2013 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 324-329
Author(s):  
Thomas C. Ricketts
Medical Care ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Héctor E. Alcalá ◽  
Dylan H. Roby ◽  
David T. Grande ◽  
Ryan M. McKenna ◽  
Alexander N. Ortega

Author(s):  
Kavita K. Patel ◽  
Lisa Tran

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) contains within it three significant legislative constructs: to enhance access to health care, improve quality, and decrease cost. Also known as the Triple Aim, these three simple, yet monumental, goals have been the object of actions to date as well as future implementation efforts. This article will identify sections of the legislation that would directly provide areas of opportunity to improve health and achieve the triple aim for the oncology profession.


2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 501-515
Author(s):  
Allison K. Hoffman

Abstract The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is in many ways a success. Millions more Americans now have access to health care, and the ACA catalyzed advances in health care delivery reform. Simultaneously, it has reinforced and bolstered a problem at the heart of American health policy and regulation: a love affair with choice. The ACA's insurance reforms doubled down on the particularly American obsession with choice. This article describes three ways in which that doubling down is problematic for the future of US health policy. First, pragmatically, health policy theory predicts that choice among health plans will produce tangible benefits that it does not actually produce. Most people do not like choosing among health plan options, and many people—even if well educated and knowledgeable—do not make good choices. Second, creating the regulatory structures to support these choices built and reinforced a massive market bureaucracy. Finally, and most important, philosophically and sociologically the ACA reinforces the idea that the goal of health regulation should be to preserve choice, even when that choice is empty. This vicious cycle seems likely to persist based on the lead up to the 2020 presidential election.


2009 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 309-317
Author(s):  
Jesse Lichstein ◽  
Hugh Holliman ◽  
Senator Tony Rand ◽  
L. Allen Dobson ◽  
Julia Lerche ◽  
...  

Health Equity ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 509-517
Author(s):  
Andriana M. Foiles Sifuentes ◽  
Monica Robledo Cornejo ◽  
Nien Chen Li ◽  
Maira A. Castaneda-Avila ◽  
Jennifer Tjia ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. e007701
Author(s):  
Joshua S Ng Kamstra ◽  
Teresa Molina ◽  
Timothy Halliday

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was passed in 2010 to expand access to health insurance in the USA and promote innovation in health care delivery. While the law significantly reduced the proportion of uninsured, the market-based protection it provides for poor and vulnerable US residents is an imperfect substitute for government programs such as Medicaid. In 2015, residents of Hawaii from three Compact of Free Association nations (the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau and Marshall Islands) lost their eligibility for the state’s Medicaid program and were instructed to enrol in coverage via the ACA marketplace. This transition resulted in worsened access to health care and ultimately increased mortality in this group. We explain these changes via four mechanisms: difficulty communicating the policy change to affected individuals, administrative barriers to coverage under the ACA, increased out of pocket health care costs and short enrolment windows. To achieve universal health coverage in the USA, these challenges must be addressed by policy-makers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document