Smith Maureen A, Frytak Jennifer R, Liou Jinn-Ing, Finch Michael D
Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison Medical School, Madison, Wisconsin 53705-2397, USA.
Med Care. 2005 Sep;43(9):902-10. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000173597.97232.a0.
Stroke affects more than 500,000 older persons each year in the United States, but no studies have compared older stroke patients in Medicare health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and fee-for-service (FFS) after recent changes in FFS reimbursement.
We sought to compare utilization and outcomes after stroke in Medicare HMO and FFS.
We reviewed administrative data in 11 regions from Medicare and a large national health plan.
We studied Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older discharged with ischemic stroke during 1998-2000, ie, 4816 HMO patients and a random sample of 4187 FFS patients from 422 hospitals.
We measured survival, rehospitalization, length of stay, discharge destination, and warfarin use.
Overall, HMO patients were younger, male, non-Caucasian, and had fewer comorbid conditions. When compared with FFS patients, HMO patients were more likely to be rehospitalized within 30 days for a primary diagnosis of ischemic stroke (Adjusted Hazard Ratio = 1.45, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.14-1.83) or ill-defined conditions (eg, rehabilitation services) (2.87, 95% CI 1.85-4.46) and less likely to be rehospitalized for fluid and electrolyte disorders (0.54, 95% CI 0.34-0.87) or circulatory/respiratory problems (0.77, 95% CI 0.60-0.98). There were no consistent differences in 30-day mortality or in 1-year rehospitalization or mortality for 30-day survivors. HMO patients also were much less likely to be discharged to rehabilitation facilities, slightly less likely to be discharged to skilled nursing facilities and to have a shorter length of stay, and did not differ in the use of home care services or warfarin use when compared with FFS patients.
Traditional measures of quality such as 30-day rehospitalization may not be valid when comparing HMO and FFS patients if differences might reflect an alternative service mix. Utilization of post-acute care for FFS patients appears similar to HMO patients except for discharge to rehabilitation facilities.
在美国,每年有超过50万老年人患中风,但尚无研究对医疗保险健康维护组织(HMO)和按服务付费(FFS)模式下的老年中风患者进行比较,尤其是在FFS报销政策近期发生变化之后。
我们试图比较医疗保险HMO和FFS模式下中风后的医疗服务利用情况和治疗结果。
我们回顾了来自医疗保险和一家大型全国性医疗计划的11个地区的管理数据。
我们研究了1998 - 2000年期间因缺血性中风出院的65岁及以上医疗保险受益人,即4816名HMO患者和从422家医院随机抽取的4187名FFS患者。
我们测量了生存率、再次住院情况、住院时间、出院去向以及华法林的使用情况。
总体而言,HMO患者更年轻、男性居多、非白种人且合并症较少。与FFS患者相比,HMO患者因缺血性中风(校正风险比 = 1.45,95%置信区间[CI] 1.14 - 1.83)或不明病症(如康复服务)(2.87,95% CI 1.85 - 4.46)在30天内再次住院的可能性更高,而因液体和电解质紊乱(0.54,95% CI 0.34 - 0.87)或循环/呼吸问题(0.77,95% CI 0.60 - 0.98)再次住院的可能性更低。30天死亡率、30天幸存者的1年再次住院率或死亡率方面没有一致的差异。与FFS患者相比,HMO患者出院到康复机构的可能性也低得多,出院到专业护理机构的可能性略低且住院时间更短,在家庭护理服务使用或华法林使用方面没有差异。
如果差异可能反映了不同的服务组合,那么在比较HMO和FFS患者时,诸如30天再次住院率等传统质量指标可能无效。除了出院到康复机构外,FFS患者的急性后期护理利用情况与HMO患者相似。