BACKGROUND:
The
Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires that privately insured women can obtain
contraceptive services and supplies without cost sharing. This may
substantially affect women who prefer an intrauterine device (IUD), a
long-acting reversible contraceptive, because of high upfront costs that they
would otherwise face. However, imperfect enforcement of and exceptions to this
provision could limit its effect.
STUDY DESIGN:
We
analyzed administrative data for 417,221 women whose physicians queried their
insurance plans from January 2012 to March 2014 to determine whether each woman
had insurance coverage for a hormonal IUD and the extent of that coverage.
RESULTS:
In
January 2012, 58% of women would have incurred out-of-pocket costs for an IUD,
compared to only 13% of women in March 2014. Differentials by age and region
virtually dissolved over the period studied, which suggests that the ACA
reduced inequality among insured women.
CONCLUSIONS:
Our
findings suggest that the cost of hormonal IUDs fell to US$0 for most insured
women following the implementation of the ACA.
IMPLICATIONS:
Financial
barriers to one of the most effective methods of contraception fell substantially following the ACA. If more
women interested in this method can access it, this may contribute to a decline
in unintended pregnancies in the United States.
Below: Percentage of women who would have had out-of-pocket costs for a hormonal IUD, by month. Note: The lighter line begins in January 2013 because the 2012 data do not contain insertion copayments and deductible applicability.
Below: In each age group: percentage of women who would have had out-of-pocket costs for a hormonal IUD, by quarter
Below: In each region: percentage of women would have had out-of-pocket costs for a hormonal IUD, by quarter
- 1Guttmacher Institute, New York, NY 10038, USA. Electronic address: jbearak@guttmacher.org.
- 2Guttmacher Institute, New York, NY 10038, USA.
- Contraception. 2016 Feb;93(2):139-44. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2015.08.018. Epub 2015 Sep 16.
No comments:
Post a Comment