IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i23p12383-d687495.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Phantom Networks, Provider Qualities, and Poverty Sway Medicaid Dental Care Access: A Geospatial Analysis of Manhattan

Author

Listed:
  • Destiny Kelley

    (Department of Geography and Environmental Science, Hunter College, CUNY, 695 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA)

  • Shipeng Sun

    (Department of Geography and Environmental Science, Hunter College, CUNY, 695 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA
    Earth and Environmental Sciences Program, Graduate Center, CUNY, 365 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA)

Abstract

Access to general dental care is essential for preventing and treating oral diseases. To ensure adequate spatial accessibility for the most vulnerable populations, New York State mandates a ratio of one general dentist to 2000 Medicaid recipients within 30 min of public transportation. This study employed geospatial methods to determine whether the requirement is met in Manhattan by verifying the online directories of ten New York managed care organizations (MCOs), which collectively presented 868 available dentists from 259 facilities. Our survey of 118 dental facilities representing 509 dentists revealed that significantly fewer dentists are available to treat Medicaid recipients compared to MCO directories. The average dentist-to-patient ratio derived from the MCO listings by the Two-Step Floating Catchment Area (2SFCA) method was 1:315, while the average verified ratio was only 1:1927. “Phantom networks”, or inaccurate provider listings, substantially overstated Medicaid dental accessibility. Surprisingly, our study also discovered additional Medicaid providers unlisted in any MCO directory, which we coined “hidden networks”. However, their inclusion was inconsequential to the overall dental supply. We further scrutinized dental care access by uniquely applying six “patient-centered characteristics”, and these criteria vastly reduced accessibility to an average ratio of merely 1:4587. Our novel evaluation of the spatial association between poverty, dental care access, and phantom networks suggests that Medicaid dental providers wish to be located in wealthier census tracts that are in proximity to impoverished areas for maximum profitability. Additionally, we discovered that poverty and phantom networks were positively correlated, and phantom providers masked a lack of dental care access for Medicaid recipients.

Suggested Citation

  • Destiny Kelley & Shipeng Sun, 2021. "How Phantom Networks, Provider Qualities, and Poverty Sway Medicaid Dental Care Access: A Geospatial Analysis of Manhattan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-20, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12383-:d:687495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12383/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12383/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mofidi, M. & Rozier, R.G. & King, R.S., 2002. "Problems with access to dental care for medicaid-insured children: What caregivers think," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 92(1), pages 53-58.
    2. Thomas G. McGuire & Jacob Glazer, 2000. "Optimal Risk Adjustment in Markets with Adverse Selection: An Application to Managed Care," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1055-1071, September.
    3. Green, Ellen P., 2014. "Payment systems in the healthcare industry: An experimental study of physician incentives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 367-378.
    4. Mark Duggan & Tamara Hayford, 2013. "Has the Shift to Managed Care Reduced Medicaid Expenditures? Evidence from State and Local‐Level Mandates," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 505-535, June.
    5. Ilyana Kuziemko & Katherine Meckel & Maya Rossin-Slater, 2013. "Do Insurers Risk-Select Against Each Other? Evidence from Medicaid and Implications for Health Reform," NBER Working Papers 19198, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ilyana Kuziemko & Katherine Meckel & Maya Rossin-Slater, 2013. "Do Insurers Risk-Select Against Each Other? Evidence from Medicaid and Implications for Health Reform," NBER Working Papers 19198, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Chorniy, Anna & Currie, Janet & Sonchak, Lyudmyla, 2018. "Exploding asthma and ADHD caseloads: The role of medicaid managed care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-15.
    3. Decarolis, Francesco & Guglielmo, Andrea, 2017. "Insurers’ response to selection risk: Evidence from Medicare enrollment reforms," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 383-396.
    4. Lee, Ajin, 2020. "How do hospitals respond to managed care? Evidence from at-risk newborns," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    5. Francesco Decarolis & Andrea Guglielmo & Clavin Luscombe, 2020. "Open enrollment periods and plan choices," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(7), pages 733-747, July.
    6. Timothy Layton & Alice K. Ndikumana & Mark Shepard, 2017. "Health Plan Payment in Medicaid Managed Care: A Hybrid Model of Regulated Competition," NBER Working Papers 23518, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Dosis, Anastasios, 2019. "Optimal ex post risk adjustment in markets with adverse selection," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 52-59.
    8. Lesley J. Turner, 2015. "The Effect of Medicaid Policies on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Children's Mental Health Problems in Primary Care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(2), pages 142-157, February.
    9. Pietro Tebaldi, 2015. "Estimating Equilibrium in Health Insurance Exchanges: Analysis of the Californian Market under the ACA," Discussion Papers 15-012, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    10. Marianne P. Bitler & Madeline Zavodny, 2014. "Medicaid: A Review of the Literature," NBER Working Papers 20169, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Peter Zweifel & H. E. Frech, 2016. "Why ‘Optimal’ Payment for Healthcare Providers Can Never be Optimal Under Community Rating," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 9-20, February.
    12. Barros, Pedro Pita, 2003. "Cream-skimming, incentives for efficiency and payment system," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 419-443, May.
    13. Kurt R. Brekke & Tor Helge Holmås & Karin Monstad & Odd Rune Straume, 2020. "How Does The Type of Remuneration Affect Physician Behavior?," American Journal of Health Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(1), pages 104-138.
    14. Kifmann, Mathias, 2002. "Community rating in health insurance and different benefit packages," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 719-737, September.
    15. Michael Geruso & Timothy Layton, 2020. "Upcoding: Evidence from Medicare on Squishy Risk Adjustment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(3), pages 984-1026.
    16. Michele Fioretti & Hongming Wang, 2020. "Performance Pay in Insurance Markets: Evidence from Medicare," Working Papers 2020.03, International Network for Economic Research - INFER.
    17. Huck, Steffen & Lünser, Gabriele & Spitzer, Florian & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2016. "Medical insurance and free choice of physician shape patient overtreatment: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 78-105.
    18. Mohammad Usama Toseef & Gail A Jensen & Wassim Tarraf, 2020. "Medicaid managed care and preventable emergency department visits in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-15, October.
    19. David Dranove & Christopher Ody & Amanda Starc, 2021. "A Dose of Managed Care: Controlling Drug Spending in Medicaid," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 170-197, January.
    20. Michael Geruso & Timothy J. Layton & Grace McCormack & Mark Shepard, 2023. "The Two-Margin Problem in Insurance Markets," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(2), pages 237-257, March.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12383-:d:687495. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.