Medicaid is Crucial to Rural Hospitals
Rural hospital closings can be a matter of life or death.
Residents in these remote locations may have to drive 100 miles or more for emergency medical care. One new study found that hospital closings increase mortality in rural areas by 6 percent. No such impact occurred in urban areas with multiple medical centers.
Both urban and rural hospitals serving poor and low-income patients face myriad financial pressures, led by Medicare and Medicaid’s relatively low reimbursement rates for their disproportionate numbers of older and sicker patients. The 2013 federal budget, which cut Medicare reimbursements for hospitals and physicians by 2 percent, compounded the problems.
But what has become increasingly clear in rural areas is that the option given to states under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to expand their Medicaid-covered populations of high-need patients has created a dividing line between the most vulnerable hospitals and the survivors, said Brock Slabach, senior vice president of the National Rural Health Association, a hospital trade group.
With closures accelerating across the country over the past decade, 24 of the 31 rural hospitals that closed in 2018 and 2019 were located in the minority of states (14) that have not expanded their Medicaid programs, according to the Sheps Center for Health Services Research at the University of North Carolina, which tracks hospital closures.
In contrast, the ACA has bolstered rural hospitals in expansion states by cutting their uninsured populations roughly in half by bringing in a fresh supply of federal and state revenues to insure more patients under Medicaid.
Rural hospitals’ finances are actually improving in this diverse group of expansion states, which cut across traditional ideological fault lines. A 2018 study in the journal Health Affairs found that expansion states have seen “improved hospital financial performance and substantially lower likelihoods of closures, especially in rural markets and counties.”
“While there are a lot of different factors playing into rural hospital closures, Medicaid financing is huge,” said Adam Searing at Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families. “Closing them down is a crisis and deprives some people of some of the most important health care that they need.”
When a hospital closes, residents in small towns and rural areas not only lose access to critical care. They face financial consequences too. Driving long distances for medical care is costly to patients, who must take hours off from work to drive for miles, pay for gas, arrange childcare, drive a parent to a doctor’s office, or visit family in the hospital.
Squared Away writer Kim Blanton invites you to follow us on Twitter @SquaredAwayBC. To stay current on our blog, please join our free email list. You’ll receive just one email each week – with links to the two new posts for that week – when you sign up here. This blog is supported by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.
Comments are closed.
Keeping rural hospitals open also serves the needs of non-Medicaid patients, particularly those with mobility issues as well as those with Medicare. An area's economic future well-being is very much tied to the health of it's citizens. Loss of medical services in these areas contributes to an overall downward spiral in an area's ability to attract investment, businesses and jobs. Recent studies point to this dynamic as a root cause of economic inequality.
We (as a country) now spend $3.65 trillion per year on health care costs or twice what any other country in Europe spends on health care, with no better outcomes. Furthermore, it is now higher than the federal budget. Obama premiums have gone from $2,900 per year to $5,900 per year. This fact remains: is it is all about the PROFIT MOTIVE.