The study confirmed what Dr. Aileen Gariepy told Reuters Health she
and other gynecologists have long known: when insurance lifts the
cost barrier, women will choose more expensive contraceptives with
better odds of preventing pregnancy, such as intrauterine devices or
IUDs.
Gariepy is a professor at the Yale School of Medicine in New Haven,
Connecticut, and was not involved with the study.
She praised the research for highlighting the benefit of the 2012
mandate in the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, that most private health
plans pay in full for prescription birth control.
“This paper shows that the ACA is a win for women and their
families,” Gariepy said.
“I’m hopeful that this study means we are going to have fewer
unintended pregnancies,” said Caroline Carlin, the study’s lead
author and a health economist at the Medica Research Institute in
Minneapolis.
“We know that the health of women and children is greatly increased
when we can reduce unintended pregnancies,” she said in a telephone
interview.
The Health Affairs study is one of the first to analyze if and how
the contraceptive mandate in the ACA (also known as Obamacare)
changed women’s decisions about contraception, the authors write.
Previous studies have shown that before the mandate, women were
price sensitive about contraception. Long-term methods like IUDs,
contraceptive implants and sterilizations have significantly higher
upfront costs relative to shorter-term methods, like birth-control
pills.
In the current study, researchers examined medical and pharmacy
claims from 2008 to 2014 for more than 27,000 adult Midwestern women
of reproductive age working for 486 employers who eliminated
out-of-pocket spending for prescription contraception.
The researchers also analyzed claims during the same period from
nearly 2,900 women covered by one of 13 employers who had not
complied with the ACA contraceptive mandate.
Women eligible for no-cost prescription birth control increased
their use of prescription contraception by nearly 8 percent, after
controlling for age and other demographic variables, Carlin said.
Two-thirds of the increase came from pricier, long-term methods,
like IUDs, she said.
Researchers saw a similar trend toward long-term contraceptive
methods in the group subject to copays, but the trend was weaker.
[to top of second column] |
“We think the shift toward long-term methods is critical because
it’s easy to forget to take a pill or to not use your diaphragm,”
Carlin said.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention considers the IUD and
a hormonal rod inserted under the skin of the arm the most effective
reversible long-term contraceptives and estimates they fail less
than 1 percent of the time.
Short-term methods, such as birth-control pills, patches and
hormonal vaginal rings fail 9 percent of the time, the CDC
estimates. The failures usually stem from women using the methods
inconsistently or incorrectly.
Although the cost for an IUD could save women money in the long run,
the initial outlay before the ACA mandate made it difficult for some
women to afford long-term contraceptives, Gariepy and Carlin said.
Before employer compliance with the ACA contraception mandate, women
had to pay an estimated $192 a year for birth-control pills – but
they could split that into smaller, monthly payments. By comparison,
they would have to pay $235 for an IUD, in a single payment.
Prior research has estimated that the ACA mandate saved women as
much as $1.4 billion in out-of-pocket spending on birth-control
pills alone in 2013, the authors write.
“Not all contraception is created equal. There are differences in
effectiveness and cost. And we’ve always known it affects what women
choose,” Gariepy said.
“This data helps show the decreased out-of-pocket cost to women and
the increased use of more effective contraceptive methods,” she
said. “And that’s a win for all of us,”
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/2ccDFLP Health Affairs, online September 7,
2016.
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |