Abstract

The 2016 presidential campaign was marked by intensified rhetoric around the deportation of undocumented immigrants. The association of such rhetoric with primary, emergency, and inpatient care among undocumented immigrants is unclear. To examine the association of increased anti-immigrant rhetoric during the 2016 presidential campaign with health care use among a group of Medicaid-ineligible patients largely composed of undocumented immigrants. Using a difference-in-differences (DID) approach, this cohort study analyzed health care use between January 1, 2014, and May 31, 2018, in a retrospective cohort of Medicaid and Medicaid-ineligible (>90% undocumented) adult and pediatric patients. The inflection point of interest was June 16, 2015, the date of Donald Trump's announcement of candidacy, which represented a documented increase in anti-immigration rhetoric during the presidential campaign. Analyses were controlled for age, self-reported sex, and baseline comorbidities. Data analysis was conducted from August 28, 2018, to September 1, 2020. The DID of the number of completed primary care encounters before and after June 16, 2015, in Medicaid compared with Medicaid-ineligible patients. Secondary outcomes included the DID of emergency department (ED) visits and inpatient discharges over the same period. There were 20 211 patients included in the analysis: 1501 (7.4%) in the sample of predominantly undocumented Medicaid-ineligible patients (861 [57.4%] female) and 18 710 (92.6%) in the Medicaid control group (10 443 [55.8%] female). The mean (SD) age as of 2018 in the Medicaid-ineligible group was 38.2 (15.4) years compared with 22.2 (16.5) years in the control group. There was a differential decrease in completed visits among Medicaid-ineligible children compared with Medicaid children (DID estimate, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.7-0.9) and Medicaid-ineligible adults (DID estimate, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.8-0.9). There was also a significant differential increase in ED visits among Medicaid-ineligible children (DID estimate, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1-5.0). In addition, there was a differential decrease in inpatient discharges among Medicaid-ineligible adults (DID estimate, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7), with no significant change in ED visits or ED admission rates in this group. In this cohort study, there was a significant decrease in primary care use among undocumented patients during a period of increased anti-immigrant rhetoric associated with the 2016 presidential campaign, coincident with an increase in ED visits among children and a decrease in inpatient discharges among adults, with the latter possibly attributed to a decrease in elective admissions during this period.

Highlights

  • 11 million undocumented immigrants live in the US.[1]

  • There was a differential decrease in completed visits among Medicaid-ineligible children compared with Medicaid children (DID estimate, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.7-0.9) and Medicaid-ineligible adults (DID estimate, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.8-0.9)

  • In this cohort study, there was a significant decrease in primary care use among undocumented patients during a period of increased anti-immigrant rhetoric associated with the 2016 presidential campaign, coincident with an increase in emergency department (ED) visits among children and a decrease in inpatient discharges among adults, with the latter possibly attributed to a decrease in elective admissions during this period

Read more

Summary

Introduction

11 million undocumented immigrants live in the US.[1]. Undocumented populations face substantial, multifactorial barriers to health care, including lack of insurance, racism, limited English proficiency, complex and unfamiliar health systems, transportation, and lower household incomes.[2]. The association between restrictive or unfavorable immigration policies and health care and social service use, known as the chilling effect, has been well documented. In a study of US national Medicaid registration data from 1992 to 2003, decreases in Medicaid participation among citizen children of noncitizen parents corresponded to spikes in immigration enforcement.[5] Decreases and delays in initiation of prenatal care in North Carolina and Arizona followed both states’ adoption of provisions increasing local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration officials.[6,7] More recently, the expansion of the definition of public charge by US Citizenship and Immigration Services as a condition of inadmissibility for permanent residence visas is expected to deter eligible families from accessing public benefits.[8]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call