Blythe Adamson1,2, Lauren Lipira3, Aaron B Katz3. 1. The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street, HSB H-375, Box 357630, Seattle, WA, 98195-7630, USA. blythem@uw.edu. 2. Vaccine and Infectious Diseases Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, USA. blythem@uw.edu. 3. Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010 and subsequent Medicaid expansion has influenced access to HIV treatment and care in the USA. This review aims to evaluate whether the implementation of these policies has impacted progress toward UNAIDS 90-90-90 goals. RECENT FINDINGS: Preliminary evidence has emerged suggesting that the ACA and Medicaid expansion has increased the likelihood of HIV testing and diagnosis, reduced the number of people unaware of HIV infection, and increased the number of people on antiretroviral therapy (ART) who are virally suppressed. While the ACA is associated with some progress toward 90-90-90 goals, more years of data after policy implementation are needed for robust analysis. Methods including difference-in-differences, instrumental variables, and propensity scores are recommended to minimize bias from unmeasured confounders and make causal inference about non-random Medicaid expansion among states.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010 and subsequent Medicaid expansion has influenced access to HIV treatment and care in the USA. This review aims to evaluate whether the implementation of these policies has impacted progress toward UNAIDS 90-90-90 goals. RECENT FINDINGS: Preliminary evidence has emerged suggesting that the ACA and Medicaid expansion has increased the likelihood of HIV testing and diagnosis, reduced the number of people unaware of HIV infection, and increased the number of people on antiretroviral therapy (ART) who are virally suppressed. While the ACA is associated with some progress toward 90-90-90 goals, more years of data after policy implementation are needed for robust analysis. Methods including difference-in-differences, instrumental variables, and propensity scores are recommended to minimize bias from unmeasured confounders and make causal inference about non-random Medicaid expansion among states.
Authors: A N Phillips; S Staszewski; R Weber; O Kirk; P Francioli; V Miller; P Vernazza; J D Lundgren; B Ledergerber Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-11-28 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jens D Lundgren; Abdel G Babiker; Fred Gordin; Sean Emery; Birgit Grund; Shweta Sharma; Anchalee Avihingsanon; David A Cooper; Gerd Fätkenheuer; Josep M Llibre; Jean-Michel Molina; Paula Munderi; Mauro Schechter; Robin Wood; Karin L Klingman; Simon Collins; H Clifford Lane; Andrew N Phillips; James D Neaton Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-07-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kevin Cranston; Betsey John; H Dawn Fukuda; Liisa M Randall; Jonathan Mermin; Kenneth H Mayer; Alfred DeMaria Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Katherine Baicker; Sarah L Taubman; Heidi L Allen; Mira Bernstein; Jonathan H Gruber; Joseph P Newhouse; Eric C Schneider; Bill J Wright; Alan M Zaslavsky; Amy N Finkelstein Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-05-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Dana P Goldman; Arleen A Leibowitz; Geoffrey F Joyce; John A Fleishman; Samuel A Bozzette; Naihua Duan; Martin F Shapiro Journal: Appl Health Econ Health Policy Date: 2003 Impact factor: 2.561
Authors: Derek D Satre; Sujaya Parthasarathy; Andrea Altschuler; Michael J Silverberg; Erik Storholm; Cynthia I Campbell Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2016-04-14 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Brooke G Rogers; C Sosnowy; A Zanowick-Marr; P A Chan; L A Mena; R R Patel; W C Goedel; T Arnold; C Chu; D Galipeau; M C Montgomery; K Curoe; A Underwood; J Villalobos; C Gomillia; A S Nunn Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2022-08-05 Impact factor: 3.667