TRICARE标准计划与TRICARE标准远程计划的医疗保健受益人评估差异。
Differences in beneficiary assessments of health care between TRICARE prime and TRICARE prime remote.
作者信息
Meza Jane L, Chen Li-Wu, Williams Thomas V, Ullrich Fred, Mueller Keith J
机构信息
Department of Preventive and Societal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-4350, USA.
出版信息
Mil Med. 2006 Oct;171(10):950-4. doi: 10.7205/milmed.171.10.950.
OBJECTIVES
We examined differences in health care ratings and reported health care experiences for active duty uniform services personnel using health care plans other than military treatment facilities.
METHODS
We used a cross-sectional mail survey of a stratified sample of 3,871 beneficiaries enrolled in TRICARE Prime (TP) and TRICARE Prime Remote (TPR). The adjusted plan mean composite and global ratings were compared between TP and TPR participants.
RESULTS
There were few significant differences between the two groups. Patient satisfaction was higher when patients chose their providers (TPR), and use of some preventive services was higher in managed-care plans (TP). Respondents in metropolitan locations differed significantly from those in nonmetropolitan locations in ratings of plans, quality of health care received, and access to services.
CONCLUSIONS
The military health system is achieving some success in delivering uniform benefits but faces challenges in delivering high-quality uniform benefits in rural communities.
目的
我们研究了使用军事治疗设施以外的医疗保健计划的现役军人在医疗保健评级和报告的医疗保健经历方面的差异。
方法
我们对3871名参加TRICARE Prime（TP）和TRICARE Prime Remote（TPR）的受益人进行分层抽样，开展了一项横断面邮件调查。比较了TP和TPR参与者之间调整后的计划平均综合评分和总体评分。
结果
两组之间几乎没有显著差异。当患者选择自己的医疗服务提供者时（TPR），患者满意度更高，而在管理式医疗计划（TP）中，一些预防服务的使用率更高。大城市地区的受访者在计划评级、所接受医疗保健的质量以及服务可及性方面与非大城市地区的受访者存在显著差异。
结论
军事医疗系统在提供统一福利方面取得了一些成功，但在农村社区提供高质量统一福利方面面临挑战。
Zotero 插件