Healthcare Decision-Making Among Dual-Eligible Immigrants: Implications from a Study of an Integrated Medicare-Medicaid Demonstration Program in California

The Value of Medicare Coverage on Depressive Symptoms Among Older Immigrants

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The immigrant population, the primary driver of U.S. population growth, is aging and many immigrants remain uninsured. Lack of health insurance limits access to care, aggravating the already high level of depression for older immigrants. However, there is scarce evidence on how health insurance, particularly Medicare, affects their mental health. Using the Health and Retirement Study, this study examines the effect of Medicare coverage on depressive symptoms of older immigrants in the United States.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Exploiting the fact that many immigrants are not covered by Medicare after passing age 65, we use a difference-in-difference model with propensity score weighting to compare differences in depressive symptoms pre- and post-age-65. We further stratify the sample by socioeconomic status and by race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

Medicare coverage was significantly associated with a reduction in the probability of reporting depressive symptoms for immigrants with low socioeconomic status, especially for those below median wealth levels. The beneficial effect of Medicare coverage was also statistically significant for non-White immigrants-Black, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander-even when holding socioeconomic status constant.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Our findings imply that immigration policies that expand health care protection to older immigrants can lead to further health benefits and reduce existing disparities for the aging population. Policy reforms such as providing limited Medicare access to immigrants who paid sufficient taxes but are still awaiting permanent residency status could increase coverage for the uninsured and improve participation of immigrants in the payroll system.

Immigration and the Life Course: Contextualizing and Understanding Healthcare Access and Health of Older Adult Immigrants

OBJECTIVE

Immigrant health discussions often focus on acculturation and omit discussions on historical events that may underlie health differences among immigrant older adults. This paper provides a historical overview of immigration policy and flows to the U.S. and examines insurance access and health difficulties by sending country.

METHODS

We analyzed the "Immigrants Admitted to the United States, Fiscal Years 1972-2000" and 2015-2019 American Community Survey datasets to examine the number of admitted immigrants, sociodemographic profiles for current immigrant older adults, and the predicted probabilities of health insurance access and health difficulties.

RESULTS

Our results highlight alignment of immigration flows with immigration legislation and vast heterogeneity in migration, health, and healthcare access of immigrants by sending country.

DISCUSSION/IMPLICATIONS

Public health practitioners must consider how historical events and social factors contribute to the healthcare access and health of immigrant populations, as demographic shifts will require interventions that promote equitable healthy aging.

Recasting the Immigrant Health Paradox Through Intersections of Legal Status and Race

Immigrant health research has often noted an "immigrant health paradox", the observation that immigrants are "healthier" compared to their native-born peers of similar demographic and socioeconomic profile. This paradox disappears as immigrants stay longer in the host country. Multiple arguments, including migrant selectivity and cultural and behavioral factors have been proposed as reasons for the apparent paradox. Recently, the field has focused on immigrant legal status, especially its racialization. We review the literature on the immigrant health paradox, legal status, and racialized legal status to examine how this debate has taken a more structural approach. We find that immigrant health research has taken a needed intersectional approach, a productive development that examines how different markers of disadvantage work concurrently to shape immigrants' health. This approach, which factors in immigration enforcement practices, aligns with explanations for poor health outcomes among other racialized groups, and promises a fruitful avenue for future research.

Legal Status, Worries About Deportation, and Depression Among Asian Immigrants

Although legal status and worries of deportation have been identified as key factors in immigrant health inequities for Latinx immigrants, how they impact health of Asian immigrants is largely unknown. Using 2016 Collaborative Multiracial Post-Election Survey, we used sets of logistic regressions to examine the relationships among legal statuses, worries about deportation, and depression for Asian immigrants (n = 1371). Asian immigrants who are in the process of applying for citizenship, those with visas, and those who are ineligible to apply for citizenship were significantly more likely to be depressed compared with naturalized citizens. The significant associations between legal status and depression were mediated by worries about deportation. Legal status and worries of deportation are important determinants of health for Asian immigrants. The results point to a critical need for systematic investment in data collection for data disaggregation.

Conflicts of interest in dialysis: A barrier to policy reforms

Conflicts of interest involving physicians are commonplace in the US, occurring across many different specialties and subspecialties in a variety of clinical settings. In nephrology, two important scenarios in which conflicts of interest arise are dialysis facility joint venture (JV) arrangements and financial participation in End-stage Kidney Disease Seamless Care Organizations (ESCOs). Whether conflicts of interest occurring in either of these settings influence decision-making or patient care outcomes is not known due to a lack of transparent, publicly available information, and opportunities to conduct independent study. We discuss possible benefits and risks of nephrologist's financial participation in JVs and ESCOs and possible mechanisms for disclosure and reporting of such arrangements as well as risk mitigation.