Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Community Health Center Use After Oregon’s Randomized Medicaid Experiment

Jennifer E. DeVoe, Miguel Marino, Rachel Gold, Megan J. Hoopes, Stuart Cowburn, Jean P. O’Malley, John Heintzman, Charles Gallia, K. John McConnell, Christine A. Nelson, Nathalie Huguet and Steffani R. Bailey
The Annals of Family Medicine July 2015, 13 (4) 312-320; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1812
Jennifer E. DeVoe
1Oregon Health & Science University, Department of Family Medicine, Portland, Oregon
2OCHIN, Inc, Portland, Oregon
MD, DPhil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Miguel Marino
1Oregon Health & Science University, Department of Family Medicine, Portland, Oregon
3Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Division of Biostatistics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rachel Gold
2OCHIN, Inc, Portland, Oregon
4Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research, Portland, Oregon
PhD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Megan J. Hoopes
2OCHIN, Inc, Portland, Oregon
MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stuart Cowburn
2OCHIN, Inc, Portland, Oregon
MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jean P. O’Malley
3Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Division of Biostatistics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon
MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John Heintzman
1Oregon Health & Science University, Department of Family Medicine, Portland, Oregon
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Charles Gallia
5Office of Health Analytics, Oregon Health Authority, Portland, Oregon
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
K. John McConnell
6Center for Health System Effectiveness, Department of Emergency Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christine A. Nelson
2OCHIN, Inc, Portland, Oregon
PhD, RN
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nathalie Huguet
1Oregon Health & Science University, Department of Family Medicine, Portland, Oregon
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Steffani R. Bailey
1Oregon Health & Science University, Department of Family Medicine, Portland, Oregon
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: bailstef@ohsu.edu
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Study population flow diagram.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Demographic Characteristics of Study Sample by Selection Status (N = 34,849)

    CharacteristicSelected, No. (%)(n = 13,219)Not Selected, No. (%)(n = 21,630)P Valuea
    Sex.56
     Female7,639 (57.8)12,431 (57.5)
     Male5,580 (42.2)9,199 (42.5)
    Age-group, yb<.001
     19–293,529 (26.7)5,877 (27.2)
     30–393,212 (24.3)4,831 (22.3)
     40–493,300 (25.0)5,720 (26.4)
     50–592,574 (19.5)4,209 (19.5)
     60–64604 (4.6)993 (4.6)
    Race/ethnicity.004
     Hispanic, any race1,750 (13.2)2,579 (11.9)
     Non-Hispanic, white8,635 (65.3)14,295 (66.1)
     Non-Hispanic, other1,495 (11.3)2,519 (11.7)
     Unknown1,339 (10.1)2,237 (10.3)
    Average federal poverty levelc.36
     <100%8,215 (62.2)13,564 (62.7)
     ≥100%3,598 (27.2)5,736 (26.5)
     Missing/unknown1,406 (10.6)2,330 (10.8)
    Number of chronic conditionsd.25
     Missing/unknown4,240 (32.1)6,758 (31.2)
     07,075 (53.5)11,547 (53.4)
     11,128 (8.5)1,989 (9.2)
     2509 (3.9)859 (4.0)
     3221 (1.7)402 (1.9)
     443 (0.3)69 (0.3)
     53 (0.02)6 (0.03)
    • Note: Oregon OCHIN patients selected to apply for health insurance coverage via Oregon Experiment compared with those patients not selected to apply.

    • ↵a P values for χ2 test.

    • ↵b Mean (SD) age was 39.3 (12.1) years for selected patients vs 39.4 (12.2) years for nonselected patients; 2-sided Wilcoxon rank sum test P =.50.

    • ↵c Values ≥1,000% of the federal poverty level (seen in less than 1% of patients) were set to missing.

    • ↵d Diagnosed before selection date; among asthma, coronary artery disease, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension. Missing/unknown indicates that patient had no preselection date encounters from which to assess chronic condition diagnoses.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Intent-to-Treat Outcome Rates by Selection Group (Selected n = 13,219; Not Selected n = 21,630)

    Unadjusted
    Outcome in Postselection PeriodRate per 1,000 Patients/Month (SE)Absolute Difference in RateRate Ratio (95% CI)Adjusted Rate Ratio (95% CI)
    Total primary care office visitsa
     Selectedb235 (12)−11.00 (0.93–1.08)1.01 (0.94–1.09)
     Not selected (ref)236 (17)–1.001.00
    Total behavioral/mental health visitsc
     Selected201 (28)−31d0.87 (0.79–0.94)d0.89 (0.81–0.99)d
     Not selected (ref)232 (29)–1.001.00
    Total laboratory testse
     Selected342 (28)−130.96 (0.88–1.05)0.97 (0.89–1.05)
     Not selected (ref)355 (39)–1.001.00
    Total referralsf
     Selected45 (9)+51.14 (0.95–1.37)1.18 (1.02–1.35)d
     Not selected (ref)40 (6)–1.001.00
    Total immunizationsg
     Selected57 (4)−20.97 (0.93–1.01)0.98 (0.94–1.03)
     Not selected (ref)59 (4)–1.001.00
    Total imaging studiesh
     Selected43 (3)+21.06 (0.99–1.13)1.08 (1.01–1.16)d
     Not selected (ref)41 (2)–1.001.00
    • CHC = community health center; CPT = Current Procedural Terminology; EHR = electronic health record; HCPCS = Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System; ref = reference group; SE = standard error.

    • Notes: (1) Rates are zero-inflated Poisson regression estimates. Adjusted estimates controlled for categorical age and race/ethnicity as these variables differed significantly between the selection groups at baseline. (2) All models accounted for clustering of patients by primary CHC through a robust sandwich variance estimator. (3) Postselection period was the 36 months after an applicant was notified of selection to apply for insurance coverage (the selection date) through the Oregon Experiment or, for those not selected, a randomly assigned selection date based on the distribution of selection dates for the selected group. (4) SE denotes robust standard error estimate of the use rate that accounts for clustering of patients within primary CHC.

    • ↵a Face-to-face office visits in a primary care setting and/or with a primary care clinician.

    • ↵b Oregon OCHIN patients selected to apply for health insurance coverage via the Oregon Experiment vs not selected.

    • ↵c Face-to-face encounters designated as behavioral or mental health in the EHR; limited to 11,571 patients seen at 1 or more of the 33 clinics with the behavioral/mental health visit indicator.

    • ↵d Statistically significant difference compared with reference group.

    • ↵e CPT and HCPCS codes grouped as laboratory tests in the EHR.

    • ↵f CPT and HCPCS codes grouped as referrals in the EHR.

    • ↵g CPT and HCPCS codes grouped as immunizations in the EHR.

    • ↵h CPT and HCPCS codes grouped as imaging studies in the EHR.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Estimated Effect of Gaining Medicaid Coverage on Use Outcomes Among Oregon OCHIN Patients Who Participated in the Oregon Experiment (N = 34,849)

    Outcome in Postselection PeriodRate per 1,000 Patients/Month (SE)Absolute Difference in RateRate Ratio (95% CI)
    Total primary care office visitsa
     Medicaid coverage282 (21)+81b1.39 (1.16–1.66)b
     No Medicaid coverage (ref)201 (15)–1.00
    Total behavioral/mental health visitsc
     Medicaid coverage183 (37)−130.93 (0.66–1.32)
     No Medicaid coverage (ref)196 (28)–1.00
    Total laboratory testsd
     Medicaid coverage436 (43)+94b1.27 (1.05–1.55)b
     No Medicaid coverage (ref)342 (38)–1.00
    Total referralse
     Medicaid coverage45 (14)+17b1.58 (1.10–2.28)b
     No Medicaid coverage (ref)28 (5)–1.00
    Total immunizationsf
     Medicaid coverage57 (6)+11.03 (0.87–1.21)
     No Medicaid coverage (ref)56 (4)–1.00
    Total imaging studiesg
     Medicaid coverage45 (5)+11b1.33 (1.07–1.64)b
     No Medicaid coverage (ref)34 (2)–1.00
    • Acronyms are as shown in Table 2 footnote.

    • Notes: (1) Rates calculated using the 2-stage residual inclusion instrumental variable approach. Models adjusted for categorical age and race/ethnicity as these variables differed significantly between selection groups at baseline. (2) SEs were estimated with 2,000 bootstrap replicates clustered by primary CHC. (3) Postselection period was the 36 months after an applicant was notified of selection to apply for health insurance coverage (the selection date) via the Oregon Experiment or, for those not selected, a randomly assigned selection date based on the distribution of selection dates for the selected group.

    • ↵a Face-to-face office visits in a primary care setting and/or with a primary care clinician.

    • ↵b Statistically significant difference compared with reference group.

    • ↵c Face-to-face encounters designated as behavioral or mental health in the EHR; limited to 11,571 patients seen at 1 or more of the 33 clinics with the behavioral/mental health visit indicator.

    • ↵d CPT and HCPCS codes grouped as laboratory tests in the EHR.

    • ↵e CPT and HCPCS codes grouped as referrals in the EHR.

    • ↵f CPT and HCPCS codes grouped as immunizations in the EHR.

    • ↵g CPT and HCPCS codes grouped as imaging in the EHR.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplemental Tables 1-2

    Supplemental Table 1. Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of Effect of Treatment on the Treated Study Sample by Selection Status (N=24,705); Supplemental Table 2. Effect of Treatment On the Treated Outcome Rates by Selection Group (Selected and Gained Insurance: n=5,267; Not Selected and Did Not Gain Insurance: n=19,438)

    Files in this Data Supplement:

    • Supplemental data: Tables 1-2 - PDF file
  • The Article in Brief

    Community Health Center Use After Oregon's Randomized Medicaid Experiment

    Steffani R. Bailey , and colleagues

    Background Will Community Health Centers (CHCs) experience increased demand from patients who gain health care coverage through the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion? This study explores that question by examining primary care use over a three-year period in a population of low-income adult CHC patients who gained coverage when Oregon expanded its Medicaid program in 2008.

    What This Study Found Analysis of data on 34,849 patients showed that Medicaid coverage significantly increased the rate of primary care visits, laboratory tests, referrals and imaging. Specifically, the number of primary care office visits per month was 282 per 1,000 Medicaid-covered patients, compared with 201 for patients without such coverage. In the 3-year follow-up period, Medicaid coverage led to a 58 percent higher rate of referrals, 27 percent higher rate of orders for laboratory tests and a 33 percent higher imaging rate.

    Implications

    • ACA insurance expansions could lead to increased demand for services from CHCs and other primary care settings. According to the authors, it will be important to ensure that the health care system can support increasing demands by providing more resources to CHCs and other primary care settings.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 13 (4)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 13 (4)
Vol. 13, Issue 4
July/August 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
  • In Brief
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Community Health Center Use After Oregon’s Randomized Medicaid Experiment
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
16 + 4 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Community Health Center Use After Oregon’s Randomized Medicaid Experiment
Jennifer E. DeVoe, Miguel Marino, Rachel Gold, Megan J. Hoopes, Stuart Cowburn, Jean P. O’Malley, John Heintzman, Charles Gallia, K. John McConnell, Christine A. Nelson, Nathalie Huguet, Steffani R. Bailey
The Annals of Family Medicine Jul 2015, 13 (4) 312-320; DOI: 10.1370/afm.1812

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Community Health Center Use After Oregon’s Randomized Medicaid Experiment
Jennifer E. DeVoe, Miguel Marino, Rachel Gold, Megan J. Hoopes, Stuart Cowburn, Jean P. O’Malley, John Heintzman, Charles Gallia, K. John McConnell, Christine A. Nelson, Nathalie Huguet, Steffani R. Bailey
The Annals of Family Medicine Jul 2015, 13 (4) 312-320; DOI: 10.1370/afm.1812
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • At Federally Funded Health Centers, Medicaid Expansion Was Associated With Improved Quality Of Care
  • Medicaid Expansion And Grant Funding Increases Helped Improve Community Health Center Capacity
  • In This Issue: Views from Above and Below
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Artificial Intelligence Tools for Preconception Cardiomyopathy Screening Among Women of Reproductive Age
  • Family Physicians in Focused Practice in Ontario, Canada: A Population-Level Study of Trends From 1993/1994 Through 2021/2022
  • Seven Opportunities for Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care Electronic Visits: Qualitative Study of Staff and Patient Views
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Person groups:
    • Vulnerable populations
  • Methods:
    • Quantitative methods
  • Other research types:
    • Health policy
    • Health services
  • Core values of primary care:
    • Access
  • Other topics:
    • Disparities in health and health care

Keywords

  • community health centers
  • primary care utilization
  • Medicaid
  • Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
  • ACA
  • Oregon Experiment
  • health policy
  • practice-based research
  • vulnerable populations

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine