Fisher Elliott S, Wennberg David E, Stukel Thérèse A, Gottlieb Daniel J, Lucas F L, Pinder Etoile L
Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755, USA.
Ann Intern Med. 2003 Feb 18;138(4):273-87. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-138-4-200302180-00006.
The health implications of regional differences in Medicare spending are unknown.
To determine whether regions with higher Medicare spending provide better care.
Cohort study.
National study of Medicare beneficiaries.
Patients hospitalized between 1993 and 1995 for hip fracture (n = 614,503), colorectal cancer (n = 195,429), or acute myocardial infarction (n = 159,393) and a representative sample (n = 18,190) drawn from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (1992-1995). EXPOSURE MEASUREMENT: End-of-life spending reflects the component of regional variation in Medicare spending that is unrelated to regional differences in illness. Each cohort member's exposure to different levels of spending was therefore defined by the level of end-of-life spending in his or her hospital referral region of residence (n = 306).
Content of care (for example, frequency and type of services received), quality of care (for example, use of aspirin after acute myocardial infarction, influenza immunization), and access to care (for example, having a usual source of care).
Average baseline health status of cohort members was similar across regions of differing spending levels, but patients in higher-spending regions received approximately 60% more care. The increased utilization was explained by more frequent physician visits, especially in the inpatient setting (rate ratios in the highest vs. the lowest quintile of hospital referral regions were 2.13 [95% CI, 2.12 to 2.14] for inpatient visits and 2.36 [CI, 2.33 to 2.39] for new inpatient consultations), more frequent tests and minor (but not major) procedures, and increased use of specialists and hospitals (rate ratio in the highest vs. the lowest quintile was 1.52 [CI, 1.50 to 1.54] for inpatient days and 1.55 [CI, 1.50 to 1.60] for intensive care unit days). Quality of care in higher-spending regions was no better on most measures and was worse for several preventive care measures. Access to care in higher-spending regions was also no better or worse.
Regional differences in Medicare spending are largely explained by the more inpatient-based and specialist-oriented pattern of practice observed in high-spending regions. Neither quality of care nor access to care appear to be better for Medicare enrollees in higher-spending regions.
医疗保险支出地区差异对健康的影响尚不清楚。
确定医疗保险支出较高的地区是否能提供更好的医疗服务。
队列研究。
对医疗保险受益人的全国性研究。
1993年至1995年间因髋部骨折(n = 614,503)、结肠直肠癌(n = 195,429)或急性心肌梗死(n = 159,393)住院的患者,以及从医疗保险当前受益人调查(1992 - 1995年)中抽取的代表性样本(n = 18,190)。暴露测量:临终支出反映了医疗保险支出中与疾病地区差异无关的地区差异部分。因此,每个队列成员对不同支出水平的暴露程度由其居住的医院转诊地区的临终支出水平确定(n = 306)。
医疗服务内容(例如,接受服务的频率和类型)、医疗质量(例如,急性心肌梗死后使用阿司匹林、流感疫苗接种)以及获得医疗服务的机会(例如,有固定的医疗服务来源)。
不同支出水平地区的队列成员平均基线健康状况相似,但高支出地区的患者接受的医疗服务大约多60%。利用率增加的原因是医生就诊更频繁,尤其是在住院环境中(医院转诊地区最高五分位数与最低五分位数的住院就诊率比为2.13 [95%CI,2.12至2.14],新住院会诊率比为2.36 [CI,2.33至2.39]),检查和小(但非大)手术更频繁,以及专科医生和医院的使用增加(住院天数最高五分位数与最低五分位数的率比为1.52 [CI,1.50至1.54],重症监护病房天数率比为1.55 [CI,1.50至1.60])。高支出地区的医疗质量在大多数指标上并不更好,在一些预防保健指标上更差。高支出地区获得医疗服务的机会也没有更好或更差。
医疗保险支出的地区差异在很大程度上是由高支出地区观察到的更多以住院为基础且以专科医生为导向的医疗模式所解释的。高支出地区的医疗保险参保者在医疗质量和获得医疗服务的机会方面似乎都没有更好。