Skinner Elizabeth H, Foster Michele, Mitchell Geoffrey, Haynes Michele, O'Flaherty Martin, Haines Terry P
Department of Physiotherapy, Monash Health, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, Melbourne, Vic. 3168, Australia.
Postgraduate Research Studies, School of Social Work and Human Services, The University of Queensland, Mansfield Place, St Lucia, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia.
Aust J Prim Health. 2014;20(1):9-19. doi: 10.1071/PY13092.
Allied health services benefit the management of many chronic diseases. The effects of health insurance on the utilisation of allied health services has not yet been established despite health insurance frequently being identified as a factor promoting utilisation of medical and hospital services among people with chronic disease. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to establish the effects of health insurance on the utilisation of allied health services by people with chronic disease. Medline (Ovid Medline 1948 to Present with Daily Update), EMBASE (1980 to 1 April 2011), CINAHL, PsychINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to 12 April 2011 inclusive. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were published in English, randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental trials, quantitative observational studies and included people with one or more chronic diseases using allied health services and health insurance. A full-text review was performed independently by two reviewers. Meta-analyses were conducted. One hundred and fifty-eight citations were retrieved and seven articles were included in the meta-analyses. The pooled odds ratio (95% CI) of having insurance (versus no insurance) on the utilisation of allied health services among people with chronic disease was 1.33 (1.16-1.52; P<0.001). There was a significant effect of insurance on the utilisation of non-physiotherapy services, pooled odds ratio (95% CI) 4.80 (1.46-15.79; P=0.01) but having insurance compared with insurance of a lesser coverage was not significantly associated with an increase in physiotherapy utilisation, pooled odds ratio (95% CI) 1.53 (0.81-2.91; P=0.19). The presence of co-morbidity or functional limitation and higher levels of education increased utilisation whereas gender, race, marital status and income had a limited and variable effect, according to the study population. The review was limited by the considerable heterogeneity in the research questions being asked, sample sizes, study methodology (including allied health service), insurance type and dependent variables analysed. The presence of health insurance was generally associated with increased utilisation of allied health services; however, this varied depending on the population, provider type and insurance product.
联合健康服务对多种慢性病的管理有益。尽管健康保险经常被视为促进慢性病患者利用医疗和医院服务的一个因素,但健康保险对联合健康服务利用情况的影响尚未明确。本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是确定健康保险对慢性病患者利用联合健康服务的影响。检索了Medline(Ovid Medline 1948年至今且每日更新)、EMBASE(1980年至2011年4月1日)、CINAHL、PsychINFO以及Cochrane对照试验中央注册库,检索截至2011年4月12日。如果研究以英文发表、为随机对照试验、准实验性试验、定量观察性研究,且纳入了使用联合健康服务和健康保险的一种或多种慢性病患者,则符合纳入标准。由两名评审员独立进行全文评审。进行了荟萃分析。检索到158篇文献,7篇文章纳入荟萃分析。慢性病患者拥有保险(相对于无保险)对联合健康服务利用情况的合并比值比(95%置信区间)为1.33(1.16 - 1.52;P < 0.001)。保险对非物理治疗服务的利用有显著影响,合并比值比(95%置信区间)为4.80(1.46 - 15.79;P = 0.01),但与保险范围较小的保险相比,拥有保险与物理治疗利用增加无显著关联,合并比值比(95%置信区间)为1.53(0.81 - 2.91;P = 0.19)。根据研究人群的不同,合并症或功能受限的存在以及较高的教育水平会增加利用情况,而性别、种族、婚姻状况和收入的影响有限且各不相同。本综述受到所提研究问题、样本量、研究方法(包括联合健康服务)、保险类型以及所分析的因变量存在相当大异质性的限制。健康保险的存在通常与联合健康服务利用增加相关;然而,这因人群、服务提供者类型和保险产品而异。