Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Medicine, the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Acad Emerg Med. 2011 Aug;18(8):836-43. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01127.x.
The relative effects of socioeconomic status (SES) and health status on emergency department (ED) utilization are controversial. The authors examined this in a setting with universal health coverage.
For Ontario participants age 20-74 years, Canadian Community Health Survey 2000 to 2001 responses were linked to Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) physician utilization data for 1999 to 2001 and the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System (NACRS) for ED utilization in 2002. SES was defined primarily according to high school completion and secondarily according to income. The primary outcome was less urgent ED visit, defined as Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) 4 or 5 and not admitted to hospital.
The weighted sample was 9,323,217. Overall, 31.4% of the sample used an Ontario ED in 2002. The majority of visits (59.1%) were classified as less urgent. Fair or poor self-perceived health was the largest predictor of ED use, regardless of visit urgency. Respondents with low education were more likely to have both less urgent visits (odds ratio [OR] = 1.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.35 to 1.94) and more urgent visits (OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.68) after controlling for age, sex, income, self-perceived health, urban or rural location, regular doctor, and non-ED physician visits. Education was not associated with having less urgent versus more urgent visits (OR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.68 to 1.14).
In a setting with universal health insurance, worse health status is the largest predictor of ED utilization, but low SES is independently associated with increased use of the ED, regardless of visit urgency. This study lends support to findings in other health systems that those using EDs are more ill and more disadvantaged.
社会经济地位(SES)和健康状况对急诊部(ED)利用率的相对影响存在争议。作者在全民医保的环境下对此进行了研究。
对于安大略省 20 至 74 岁的参与者,将加拿大社区健康调查 2000 年至 2001 年的答复与安大略省健康保险计划(OHIP)的 1999 年至 2001 年医生就诊数据以及 2002 年国家门诊护理报告系统(NACRS)的 ED 就诊数据进行了关联。SES 主要根据高中学历,其次根据收入来定义。主要结果是不太紧急的 ED 就诊,定义为加拿大分诊和急症量表(CTAS)4 或 5 级,且未住院。
加权样本为 9323217 人。总体而言,2002 年有 31.4%的样本使用了安大略省的 ED。大多数就诊(59.1%)被归类为不太紧急。无论就诊紧急程度如何,自我感觉健康状况一般或较差是 ED 使用的最大预测因素。受教育程度较低的人更有可能出现不太紧急的就诊(优势比[OR] = 1.65,95%置信区间[CI] = 1.35 至 1.94)和更紧急的就诊(OR = 1.39,95%CI = 1.09 至 1.68),同时控制了年龄、性别、收入、自我感觉健康状况、城市或农村地区、常规医生和非 ED 医生就诊情况。教育程度与不太紧急的就诊和更紧急的就诊之间没有关联(OR = 0.92,95%CI = 0.68 至 1.14)。
在全民医保的环境下,较差的健康状况是 ED 使用的最大预测因素,但 SES 较低与 ED 的使用增加独立相关,无论就诊紧急程度如何。这项研究支持了在其他医疗体系中发现的研究结果,即使用 ED 的人病情更严重,处境更不利。