Back

Economic Gains from Health Equity: A Model for Pregnancy and Childbirth Policy Decisions

Evans, M. I.; Ryan, G. F.; Devoe, L. D.; Mussalli, G. M.; Britt, D. W.; Worth, J. M.; Mondestin-Sorrentino, M.; Macedonia, C. R.

2024-10-22 health economics
10.1101/2024.10.21.24315689 medRxiv
Show abstract

ImportanceAmerican maternal and neonatal mortality rates are the worst of the worlds high-income countries. These rates are particularly low among patients of color, who have higher Cesarean delivery rates (CDR), higher healthcare costs, and poorer outcomes than White patients. However, common economic analyses do not address interlinked issues and therefore underestimate both the hidden causes of health inequities and the resultant costs to taxpayers. We have therefore designed a more comprehensive health economic model and metric (DEVELOP) that incorporates population health, equity, and economic integration. Design & MeasuresThe DEVELOP model, a childbirth-specific model of the societal economic gain or loss related to healthcare outcomes, incorporates an individuals long-term economic contributions into its calculations of economic benefits. We first used our model to estimate fiscal outcomes if each states CDR for Black patients was lowered to that of White patients. Second, we calculated the costs of "excess" CDR and mortalities among Black patients. Third, we incorporated the additional long-term economic contributions of mothers and their children. ResultsIn the U.S., maternal and neonatal mortality rates and associated costs were higher for Black patients than White patients, and states with the lowest per capita health expenditures showed worse maternal outcomes and higher continuing costs. If the Black patient CDR were reduced to the White patient CDR, taxpayer-funded healthcare programs would save $263 million annually. Reducing the Black patient MMR would improve economic output by $224 million per year, and reducing the Black patient NMR would save $3.1 billion per year, for a combined economic improvement of $3.3 billion annually. Conclusions and RelevanceThe costs of improved prenatal care should be reconceptualized as investments for future economic growth rather than as short-term burdens. Policies blocking reasonable investments in health equity are counterproductive.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Health Policy
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.0%
2
Journal of Medical Economics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.8%
3
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
7.9%
4
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 22%
7.9%
5
SSM - Population Health
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
6
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
7
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.3%
8
BMC Health Services Research
51 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
9
Medical Decision Making
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
10
BMJ Global Health
113 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
11
PLOS Global Public Health
344 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.6%
12
Value in Health
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
13
Preventive Medicine Reports
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
14
PNAS Nexus
159 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
15
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 44%
2.4%
16
Frontiers in Public Health
148 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.4%
17
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 27%
1.7%
18
Genetics in Medicine
78 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
19
Journal of General Internal Medicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
20
eClinicalMedicine
77 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
21
Journal of Global Health
21 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
22
Annals of Epidemiology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
23
Healthcare
17 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
24
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
128 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
25
BMC Medicine
176 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
26
Journal of Public Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
27
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
28
BMC Medical Research Methodology
47 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
29
Cureus
68 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
30
JMIR Formative Research
33 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%