Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Mobley, Lee R.
Kuo, Tzy-Mey
Traczynski, Jeffrey
Udalova, Victoria
Frech, H. E.
Year of Publication: 
[Journal:] Health Economics Review [ISSN:] 2191-1991 [Volume:] 4 [Year:] 2014 [Issue:] 13 [Pages:] 1-15
Objectives: Examine how differences in state regulatory environments predict geographic disparities in the utilization of cancer screening. Data sources/setting: 100% Medicare fee-for-service population data from 2001-2005 was developed as multi-year breast (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening utilization rates in each county in the US. Study design: A comprehensive set of supply and demand predictors are used in a multilevel model of county-level cancer screening utilization in the context of state regulatory markets. States dictate insurance mandates/regulations and whether alternative providers (nurse practitioners) can provide preventive care services supplied by MDs. Controlling statistically for the supply of both types of providers, we study the joint effects of two private insurance regulations: one mandating that insureds with serious or chronic health conditions may receive continuity of care from their established physician(s) after changing health insurance plans, and another mandating that external grievance review is an option for all health plan coverage/denial decisions. These private insurance plan regulations are expected to affect the degree of beneficial spillovers from managed care practices, which may have increased area-wide cancer screening rates. Principal findings: The two private insurance regulations under study were significant predictors impacted by local market conditions. Managed care spillovers in local markets were significantly associated with higher BC screening rates, but only in states lacking the two forms of regulation under study. Spillovers were significantly associated with higher CRC cancer screening rates everywhere, but much higher in the unregulated states. Area poverty dampened screening rates, but less so for CRC screening in the states with these regulations. Conclusions: Two state insurance regulations that empowered consumers with more autonomy to make informed utilization decisions varied across states, and exhibited significant associations with screening rates, which varied with the degree of managed care penetration or poverty in the state's counties. Beneficial spillover effects from managed care practices and negative influences from area poverty are not uniform across the United States. Both variables had stronger associations with CRC than BC screening utilization, as did state regulatory variables. CRC screening by endoscopy was more subject to market and regulatory factors than BC screening.
Insurance regulation
Managed care spillovers
Cancer screening
Geographic disparities
Health insurance reform
Comprehensive cancer control
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License:
Document Type: 

Files in This Item:

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.