IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/199888151-56_7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Dobie, S.
  • Hart, L.G.
  • Fordyce, M.
  • Andrilla, C.H.A.
  • Rosenblatt, R.A.

Abstract

Objectives. This study examined whether Medicaid-insured women at low risk receive less adequate obstetrical care than privately insured women. Methods. 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. Results. 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. Conclusions. 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Dobie, S. & Hart, L.G. & Fordyce, M. & Andrilla, C.H.A. & Rosenblatt, R.A., 1998. "Obstetric care and payment source: Do low-risk Medicaid women get less care?," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 88(1), pages 51-56.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1998:88:1:51-56_7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:aph:ajpbhl:1998:88:1:51-56_7. 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: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    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.