From EPSDT to EHBs: The Future of Pediatric Coverage Design Under Government Financed Health Insurance

被引:16
作者
Goldstein, Melissa M. [1 ]
Rosenbaum, Sara [1 ]
机构
[1] George Washington Univ, Dept Hlth Policy, Washington, DC USA
关键词
Medicaid; Affordable Care Act; distributive justice; resource allocation; public policy; CARE;
D O I
10.1542/peds.2013-0252e
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
We review the evolution of federal financing for child health care over the past 40 years. The Social Security Amendments of 1967 established the program of early and periodic screening, diagnosis and treatment (EPSDT) as a required Medicaid benefit. The EPSDT amendments directed agencies to cover "early and periodic" screening and diagnostic services to ascertain "defects" and "chronic conditions" in children, as well as health care and treatment needed to "correct or ameliorate" such defects and conditions discovered during the screening examinations. The 1997 enactment of the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) shifted federal policy from the use of an early coverage standard to one that gives insurers much more discretion to define medical necessity and coverage exclusions. CHIP programs offer coverage that is narrower than the benefits available under Medicaid. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires significantly more classes of care to be covered than does CHIP but well below the level of coverage under Medicaid. Implementation of the ACA to date suggests that the US Department of Health and Human Services will only demand pediatric coverage pegged to the commercial insurance market standards, rather than Medicaid's unique pediatric coverage standard. Although EPSDT's emphasis on early, developmental, and ameliorative services might result in more comprehensive benefits for children, particularly those with special health needs, one might still describe the ACA coverage as providing a basic, minimal level of services from a distributive justice perspective. It may, however, vary from state to state. States have the authority to decide whether to use an EPSDT-style approach or to follow the more restrictive approach of commercial insurance plans. Advocacy at the state level will determine which approach different states take. Pediatrics 2013; 131: S142-S148
引用
收藏
页码:S142 / S148
页数:7
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
American Medical Association, 2004, ENS FAIRN HLTH CAR C
[2]  
[Anonymous], ESSENTIAL HLTH BENEF
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2011, ESS HLTH BEN B
[4]  
Cookson R, 2000, UCLA LAW REV, V26, P323
[5]   Limits to health care: Fair procedures, democratic deliberation, and the legitimacy problem for insurers [J].
Daniels, N ;
Sabin, J .
PHILOSOPHY & PUBLIC AFFAIRS, 1997, 26 (04) :303-350
[6]  
Daniels N., 2008, Setting limits fairly: Learning to share resources for health
[7]  
Foltz AM, 1981, OUNCE PREVENTION CHI
[8]  
Furrow BR, 2012, HLTH CARE REFORM M S, P162
[9]  
Mantel J, 2010, UCLA LAW REV, V58, P221
[10]  
Rosenbaum S, 2009, INSURANCE DISCRIMINA