Medicaid Policy and Hepatitis C Treatment Among Rural People Who Use Drugs

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background: Restrictive Medicaid policies regarding hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment may exacerbate rural health care disparities for people who use drugs (PWUD). We assessed associations between Medicaid restrictions and HCV treatment among rural PWUD. Methods: We compiled state-specific Medicaid treatment policies across 8 US rural sites in 10 states and merged these with participant survey data. We hypothesized that local restrictions regarding prescriber type, sobriety, and fibrosis estimates were associated with HCV treatment outcomes. We conducted a cross-sectional, ecological analysis of treatment restrictions and HCV treatment outcomes using bivariate analyses to characterize differences between PWUD who initiated HCV treatment and unadjusted logistic regressions to assess associations between restrictions and treatment. Results: Among 944 participants, 111 (12%) reported receiving HCV treatment. Participants receiving treatment were older [median age (interquartile range): 42 (34–53) vs. 35 (29–42), P <0.001], more likely to receive disability support (32% vs. 20%, P =0.002), and less likely to be Medicaid-insured (57% vs. 71%, P < 0.001). More PWUD in states without any restrictions reported receiving treatment (17% vs. 11%, P =0.08) and achieving HCV cure/clearance (42% vs. 30%, P =0.01) than in states with restrictions. Restrictions were associated with lower odds of receiving HCV treatment (odds ratio=0.61, 95% CI: 0.35–1.06, P =0.08). Sensitivity analyses showed a similar association with HCV cure/clearance (odds ratio=0.60, 95% CI: 0.40–0.91, P =0.02). Conclusions: We identified significant unadjusted associations between Medicaid restrictions and receipt of HCV treatment and cure, which has substantial implications for health outcomes among rural PWUD. Lifting remaining Medicaid restrictions will be critical to achieving HCV elimination.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.