Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri 64111, USA.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Mar 12;61(10):1069-75. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.11.058. Epub 2013 Jan 30.
This study examined the association between insurance status and physicians' adherence with providing evidence-based treatments for coronary artery disease (CAD).
Within the PINNACLE (Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence) registry of the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry), the authors identified 60,814 outpatients with CAD from 30 U.S. practices. Hierarchical modified Poisson regression models with practice site as a random effect were used to study the association between health insurance (no insurance, public, or private health insurance) and 5 CAD quality measures.
Of 60,814 patients, 5716 patients (9.4%) were uninsured and 11,962 patients (19.7%) had public insurance, whereas 43,136 (70.9%) were privately insured. After accounting for exclusions, uninsured patients with CAD were 9%, 12%, and 6% less likely to receive treatment with a beta-blocker, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ACE-I/ARB), and lipid-lowering therapy, respectively, than privately insured patients, and patients with public insurance were 9% less likely to be prescribed ACE-I/ARB therapy. Most differences by insurance status were attenuated after adjusting for the site providing care. For example, whereas uninsured patients with left ventricular dysfunction and CAD were less likely to receive ACE-I/ARB therapy (unadjusted RR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.84 to 0.93), this difference was eliminated after adjustment for site (adjusted RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.03; p = 0.18).
Within this national outpatient cardiac registry, uninsured patients were less likely to receive evidence-based medications for CAD. These disparities were explained by the site providing care. Efforts to reduce treatment differences by insurance status among cardiac outpatients may additionally need to focus on improving the rates of evidence-based treatment at sites with high proportions of uninsured patients.
本研究旨在探讨保险状况与医生是否遵循为冠心病(CAD)患者提供循证治疗之间的关联。
作者在 NCDR(国家心血管数据注册中心)的 PINNACLE(实践创新与临床卓越)注册库中,从 30 家美国医疗机构中确定了 60814 名 CAD 门诊患者。使用以医疗机构为随机效应的分层修正泊松回归模型来研究医疗保险(无保险、公共保险或私人医疗保险)与 5 项 CAD 质量指标之间的关系。
在 60814 例患者中,5716 例(9.4%)无保险,11962 例(19.7%)有公共保险,43136 例(70.9%)有私人保险。在排除了排除标准后,患有 CAD 的无保险患者接受β受体阻滞剂、血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂/血管紧张素 II 受体阻滞剂(ACE-I/ARB)和降脂治疗的可能性分别比私人保险患者低 9%、12%和 6%,而公共保险患者接受 ACE-I/ARB 治疗的可能性低 9%。在调整医疗机构后,大多数保险状况的差异均有所减弱。例如,无保险且左心室功能不全和 CAD 的患者接受 ACE-I/ARB 治疗的可能性较低(未经调整的 RR:0.88;95%CI:0.84 至 0.93),但在调整医疗机构后,这种差异消失(调整后的 RR:0.95;95%CI:0.88 至 1.03;p=0.18)。
在这项全国性的门诊心脏登记研究中,无保险患者接受 CAD 循证药物治疗的可能性较低。这些差异可以通过医疗机构来解释。为减少心脏门诊患者的保险状况导致的治疗差异,可能还需要额外关注提高高比例无保险患者医疗机构中循证治疗的比例。