IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/hecopl/v19y2024i1p73-91_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the emergency department used as a substitute or a complement to primary care in Medicaid?

Author

Listed:
  • Denham, Alina
  • Hill, Elaine L.
  • Raven, Maria
  • Mendoza, Michael
  • Raz, Mical
  • Veazie, Peter J.

Abstract

Policies to decrease low-acuity emergency department (ED) use have traditionally assumed that EDs are a substitute for unavailable primary care (PC). However, such policies can exacerbate ED overcrowding, rather than ameliorate it, if patients use EDs to complement, rather than substitute, their PC use. We tested whether Medicaid managed care enrolees visit the ED for nonemergent and PC treatable conditions to substitute for or to complement PC. Based on consumer choice theory, we modelled county-level monthly ED visit rate as a function of PC supply and used 2012–2015 New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) outpatient data and non-linear least squares method to test substitution vs complementarity. In the post-Medicaid expansion period (2014–2015), ED and PC are substitutes state-wide, but are complements in highly urban and poorer counties during nights and weekends. There is no evidence of complementarity before the expansion (2012–2013). Analyses by PC provider demonstrate that the relationship between ED and PC differs depending on whether PC is provided by physicians or advanced practice providers. Policies to reduce low-acuity ED use via improved PC access in Medicaid are likely to be most effective if they focus on increasing actual appointment availability, ideally by physicians, in areas with low PC provider supply. Different aspects of PC access may be differently related to low-acuity ED use.

Suggested Citation

  • Denham, Alina & Hill, Elaine L. & Raven, Maria & Mendoza, Michael & Raz, Mical & Veazie, Peter J., 2024. "Is the emergency department used as a substitute or a complement to primary care in Medicaid?," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 73-91, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:19:y:2024:i:1:p:73-91_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744133123000270/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:19:y:2024:i:1:p:73-91_6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/hep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.