Kost S, Arruda J
A.I. duPont Hospital for Children and Thomas Jefferson University, Wilmington, Delaware 19899, USA.
Prehosp Emerg Care. 1999 Jul-Sep;3(3):187-90. doi: 10.1080/10903129908958934.
To assess the appropriateness of ambulance use in patients presenting to a pediatric emergency department (ED), with regard to both medical necessity and insurance status.
The authors conducted a one-year retrospective chart analysis of all patients (age range 2 weeks to 19 years) who were transported via ambulance in 1994 to a suburban children's hospital ED. ED records of all patients who arrived by ambulance were abstracted for demographic data, type of insurance, chief complaint, medical interventions, discharge diagnosis, and disposition. Ambulance transportation was deemed unnecessary unless the medical record revealed any of the following criteria: 1) requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 2) respiratory distress, 3) altered mental status or seizure, 4) immobilization, 5) inability to walk, 6) admission to intensive care, 7) ambulance recommended by medical personnel, 8) motor vehicle collision, or 9) parents not on scene.
43% of the ambulance patients were insured by Medicaid, compared with 29% of the overall ED population. Thus, Medicaid patients were significantly more likely to use ambulance transportation than were patients with commercial insurance (p<0.001). 28% of patients who arrived by ambulance were judged to have used the ambulance transportation unnecessarily. Of the unnecessary transports, 60% were insured by Medicaid. Thus, Medicaid patients were significantly more likely to have used ambulance transportation unnecessarily (p<0.001). The most common reason for appropriate ambulance use was seizure activity; the most common reason for inappropriate use was fever.
Inappropriate use of ambulance transportation is common in this pediatric population, with Medicaid patients accounting for a significant majority of the misuse.
评估儿科急诊科就诊患者使用救护车的合理性,包括医疗必要性和保险状况。
作者对1994年通过救护车转运至一家郊区儿童医院急诊科的所有患者(年龄范围为2周至19岁)进行了为期一年的回顾性病历分析。提取所有通过救护车到达的患者的急诊记录,以获取人口统计学数据、保险类型、主要症状、医疗干预措施、出院诊断和处置情况。除非病历显示有以下任何标准,否则救护车转运被视为不必要:1)需要心肺复苏,2)呼吸窘迫,3)精神状态改变或癫痫发作,4)固定,5)无法行走,6)入住重症监护病房,7)医务人员推荐使用救护车,8)机动车碰撞,或9)父母不在现场。
43%的救护车患者由医疗补助计划承保,而急诊部总体患者中这一比例为29%。因此,医疗补助计划患者比商业保险患者更有可能使用救护车转运(p<0.001)。28%通过救护车到达的患者被判定不必要地使用了救护车转运。在不必要的转运中,60%由医疗补助计划承保。因此,医疗补助计划患者更有可能不必要地使用救护车转运(p<0.001)。合理使用救护车的最常见原因是癫痫发作;不当使用的最常见原因是发烧。
在这个儿科人群中,救护车转运的不当使用很常见,医疗补助计划患者在滥用中占了很大比例。