Data Brief | | November 2024

Idaho Survey Respondents Bear Health Care Affordability Burdens Unequally; Distrust of/Disrespect by Health Care Providers Leads Some to Delay/Go Without Needed Care

Key Findings

A survey of more than 1, 300 Idaho adults, conducted from September 6 to September 30, 2024,
found that:

• Over 4 in 5 (81%) experienced at least one health care affordability burden in the past year;
• 4 in 5 (80%) worry about affording health care in the future;
• Respondents living in households with a person with a disability more frequently reported rationing medication due to cost (41% versus 28%); delaying or going without care due to cost
• (84% versus 77%); and experiencing a cost burden due to medical bills (64% versus 38%).
• Respondents of color more frequently reported experiencing one or more health care affordability burdens in the past year compared to white respondents;
• Over a third (34%) percent of respondents of color skipped needed medical care due to distrust of or feeling disrespected by health care providers, compared to 29% of white alone, non-Hispanic respondents; and
• Over half (56%) of all respondents think that people are treated unfairly based on their race or ethnic background ‘somewhat’ or ‘very often’ in the U.S. health care system.

Difference in Affordability Burdens & Concerns

Race and Ethnicity

Health disparities and a lack of affordable care negatively impact many communities of color, particularly
Black, Hispanic and Latino communities.^1,2
Idaho respondents of color reported higher rates of any health
care affordability worry when compared to white alone, non-Hispanic/Latino respondents, including cost
burdens due to medical bills (see Table 1).³ Respondents of color also more frequently reported difficulty
attaining select types of care compared to white, non-Hispanic respondents (see Figure 1).

A small share of respondents also reported barriers to care that were unique to their ethnic or cultural
backgrounds. Fifty-eight (3% of) respondents reported not getting needed medical care because they
couldn’t find a doctor of the same race, ethnicity or cultural background as them and 57 (3% of)
respondents reported not getting needed care because they couldn’t find a doctor who spoke their
language.

Income and Education

The survey also highlighted differences in health care affordability burdens between different income and
educational levels. Respondents living in households earning below $50,000 per year most frequently
reported experiencing an affordability burden, with 84% struggling to afford health care in the past
twelve months (see Table 2). Additionally, 35% of respondents with an annual household income of
$50,000 or less reported not filling a prescription, skipping doses, or cutting pills in half due to cost.

These respondents also more frequently reported experiencing a cost burden due to medical bills, such as incurring medical debt, depleting savings or sacrificing basic needs like food, heat, or housing compared to those earning $100,000 or more annually (48% versus 38%). Still, over half of respondents living in higher income households also faced affordability issues, indicating that these burdens affect all income groups. At least 80% of respondents across all income levels expressed concern about affording health care now or in the future.

Similarly, Idaho respondents with a Bachelor’s or graduate degree reported experiencing a health care
affordability burden more frequently than respondents with lower educational attainment. In contrast,
respondents who did not pursue additional education beyond a high school diploma or GED reported
experiencing a health care affordability worry (87%), more frequently than other respondents. Those with
some college, training, or certificate programs also reported experiencing rationing medication, (40%)
more frequently than other respondents (see Table 3).

The relationship between education and income is well established, however higher education is also
associated with better health outcomes, lower morbidity, and greater health care affordability.⁴
This disparity is influenced by various mediators such as economic status and the likelihood of being employed in a position which offers employee benefits including paid time off, sick leave and health insurance, which are associated with greater utilization of preventive health care.⁵

Disability Status 

People with disabilities interact with the health care system more often than those without disabilities,
which frequently results in greater out-of-pocket costs.⁶ Additionally, individuals who receive disability
benefits face unique coverage challenges that impact their ability to afford care, such as losing coverage if
their income or assets exceed certain limits (e.g., after marriage).⁷

In Idaho, respondents with disabilities or who live with someone with a disability reported more
affordability burdens compared to others (see Table 4). These respondents also worried more about
health care affordability in general compared to respondents without a disability or who do not live with a
person with a disability (87% versus 77%) and losing health insurance compared to respondents without a
disability or who do not live with a person with a disability (50% versus 33%).

Individuals with disabilities also face unique health care affordability burdens compared to nondisabled
individuals. Eight percent (8%) of respondents with a disability in their household delayed getting a
medical assistive device such as a wheelchair, cane, walker, hearing aid or prosthetic limb due to cost,
compared to only 5% of respondents without a disability who may have required one of these tools for
temporary support (see Figure 2). Additionally, 18% of respondents with a disability in their household
reported problems accessing mental health care, compared to 11% of those without a disability.

Gender and Sexual Orientation

The survey revealed differences in health care affordability burdens and concerns based on gender and
sexual orientation. Men reported higher rates of experiencing at least one affordability burden in the past
year compared to women (82% versus 80%) (see Table 5). Across both genders (33%) frequently reported delaying or forgoing care due to cost and reported higher rates of rationing medications by not filling prescriptions, skipping doses, or cutting pills in half. Although many respondents regardless of gender expressed concern about health care costs, a higher percentage of women worried about affording some aspect of coverage or care compared to men (81% versus 80%).

The survey also revealed that LGBTQIA+ respondents more frequently experienced affordability burdens,
with 40% reporting rationing medication due to cost compared to 31% of other respondents (see Table 6).
Members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community may encounter unique challenges accessing health care and
medications, including limited insurance coverage and discrimination within the health care system.^8,9
State and federal policies, particularly regarding gender-affirming treatments, can further hinder access
or limit coverage, exacerbating financial strain and health disparities.¹⁰ Unfortunately, due to the small
sample size, this survey could not produce reliable estimates exclusively for transgender, genderqueer or
nonbinary respondents.

Distrust and Mistrust in the Health System

Whether a patient trusts or feels respected by their health care provider may influence their willingness to
seek necessary care. In Idaho, more than a quarter (26%) of respondents reported feeling that their health care providers never, rarely or only sometimes treat them with respect. When asked why they felt that health care providers did not treat them with respect, respondents most frequently cited income or
financial status (44%), disability (23%), ethnic background (21%), race (15%), educational attainment (13%), experience with violence or abuse (13%), and gender or gender identity (12%). In lesser numbers, some respondents also cited sexual orientation (8%), and religion (6%) as the primary reason.

When asked to describe how their identities or circumstances have impacted their ability to get affordable
health care, many respondents offered examples of how they perceived their race, income, insurance
status, gender and ethnicity to impact their health care.

The survey also revealed differences in the frequency of respondents who reported forgoing care because they distrusted or felt disrespected by their health care provider by coverage type, income, educational attainment, gender identity, orientation, disability, race and ethnicity (see Table 8).

Individual & Systemic Racism 

Respondents believe that both individual and systemic racism exist in the U.S. health care system. Fifty-six percent reported that they believe that people are treated unfairly by the health care system due to their race or ethnicity either ‘somewhat’ or ‘very often’. When asked what they think causes health care
systems to treat people unfairly, respondents most frequently responded with the following:

• Over 1 in 5 (21%) cited policies and practices built into the health care system;
• Over 1 in 5 (21%) cited the actions and beliefs of individual health care providers; and
• Nearly 2 in 5 (36%) believe it is an equal mixture of both.

Dissatisfaction with the Health System and Support for Change

Given this information, it is not surprising that 68% of Idaho respondents ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ that
the U.S. health care system needs to change. Recognizing how the health care system disproportionately
harms some groups of people over others is key to creating a fairer and higher value system for all.
Making health care affordable for all residents is an area ripe for policymaker intervention, with
widespread support for government-led solutions across party lines. For more information on the types of
strategies Idaho residents want their policymakers to pursue, see: Idaho Residents Struggle to Afford High Healthcare Costs; Worry about Affording Health Care in the Future; Support Government Action across Party Lines, Health Care Value Hub, Data Brief (November 2024).

Notes 

1. Fadeyi-Jones, Tomi, et al., High Prescription Drug Prices Perpetuate Systemic Racism. We Can Change It, Patients for Affordable Drugs Now (December 2020), https://patientsforaffordabledrugsnow.org/2020/12/14/drug-pricing-systemic-racism/
2. Kaplan, Alan and O’Neill, Daniel, “Hospital Price Discrimination Is Deepening Racial Health Inequity,” New England Journal of Medicine—Catalyst (December 2020), https://catalyst.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/CAT.20.0593
3. Survey participants were asked whether they have experienced any of the following due to the cost of medical bills in the past twelve months: use up all or most of their savings; sacrifice basic necessities, such as food, heat, or housing; borrow money, get a loan or take out another mortgage; use a crowdfunding platform to solicit donations; interact with a collections agency; go into credit card debt; be placed on a long-term payment plan; or declare bankruptcy.
4. Raghupathi, V., Raghupathi, W., “The influence of education on health: an empirical assessment of OECD countries for the period 1995–2015,” Arch Public Health 78, 20 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-020-00402-5
5. Suhang S., et al., “Exploring the association of paid sick leave with healthcare utilization and health outcomes in the United States: a rapid evidence review,” Global Health Journal, 7, 1 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glohj.2023.01.002
6. Miles, Angel L., Challenges and Opportunities in Quality Affordable Health Care Coverage for People with Disabilities, Protect Our Care Illinois (February 2021), https://protectourcareil.org/index.php/2021/02/26/challenges-and-opportunities-in-quality-affordable-health-care-coverage-for-people-with-disabilities/
7. As of 2024, most people with disabilities risk losing their benefits if they earn more than $1,550 a month. According to the Center for American Progress, in most states, people who receive Supplemental Security are automatically eligible for Medicaid. Therefore, if they lose their disability benefits, they may also lose their Medicaid coverage. Forbes has also reported on marriage penalties for people with disabilities, including fears about losing health insurance. See: Seervai, Shanoor, Shah, Arnav, and Shah, Tanya, “The Challenges of Living with a Disability in America, and How Serious Illness Can Add to Them,” Commonwealth Fund (April 2019), https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2019/apr/challenges-living-disability-america-and-how-serious-illness-can; Fremstaf, Shawn and Valles, Rebecca, “The Facts on Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income for Workers with Disabilities,” Center for American Progress (May 2013), https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-facts-on-social-security-disability-insurance-and-supplemental-security-income-for-workers-with-disabilities/; and Pulrang, Andrew, “A Simple Fix For One Of Disabled People’s Most Persistent, Pointless Injustices,” Forbes (April 2020), https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewpulrang/2020/08/31/a-simple-fix-for-one-of-disabled-peoples-most-persistent-pointless-injustices/?sh=6e159b946b71
8. Bosworth, Arielle, et al., Health Insurance Coverage and Access to Care for LGBTQ+ Individuals: Current Trends and Key Challenges, ASPE Office of Health Policy (July 2021), https://www.aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/2021-07/lgbt-health-ib.pdf
9. Casanova-Perez R, Apodaca C, Bascom E, et al, “Broken down by bias: Healthcare biases experienced by BIPOC and LGBTQ+ patients,” AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2022;2021:275-284, Published 2022 Feb 21.
10. Baker K., Restar A., “Utilization and Costs of Gender-Affirming Care in a Commercially Insured Transgender Population,” J Law Med Ethics, 2022;50(3):456-470, doi:10.1017/jme.2022.87

Methodology

Altarum’s Consumer Healthcare Experience State Survey (CHESS) is designed to elicit respondents’ views on a wide range of health system issues, including confidence using the health system, financial burden and possible policy solutions. This survey, conducted from September 6 to September 30, 2024, used a web panel from Dynata with a demographically balanced sample of approximately 1,300 respondents who live in Idaho. Information about Dynata’s recruitment and compensation methods can be
found here. The survey was conducted in English or Spanish and restricted to adults ages 18 and older. Respondents who finished the survey in less than half the median time were excluded from the final sample, leaving 1,365 cases for analysis. After those exclusions, the demographic composition of respondents was as follows, although not all demographic information has complete response rates: