Capp Roberta, Rooks Sean P, Wiler Jennifer L, Zane Richard D, Ginde Adit A
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, 12401 E. 17th Avenue, B-215, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Apr;29(4):621-7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-013-2734-4. Epub 2013 Dec 24.
The rates of emergency department (ED) utilization vary substantially by type of health insurance, but the association between health insurance type and patient-reported reasons for seeking ED care is unknown.
We evaluated the association between health insurance type and self-perceived acuity or access issues among individuals discharged from the ED.
DESIGN, PATIENTS: This was a cross-sectional analysis of the 2011 National Health Interview Survey. Adults whose last ED visit did not result in hospitalization (n = 4,606) were asked structured questions about reasons for seeking ED care. We classified responses as 1) perceived need for immediate evaluation (acuity issues), or 2) barriers to accessing outpatient services (access issues).
We analyzed survey-weighted data using multivariable logistic regression models to test the association between health insurance type and reasons for ED visits, while adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics.
Overall, 65.0% (95% CI 63.0-66.9) of adults reported ≥ 1 acuity issue and 78.9% (95% CI 77.3-80.5) reported ≥ 1 access issue. Among those who reported no acuity issue leading to the most recent ED visit, 84.2% reported ≥ 1 access issue. Relative to those with private insurance, adults with Medicaid (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.79-1.40) and those with Medicare (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.66-1.47) were similarly likely to seek ED care due to an acuity issue. Adults with Medicaid (OR 1.50; 95% CI 1.06-2.13) and Medicaid + Medicare (dual eligible) (OR 1.94; 95% CI 1.18-3.19) were more likely than those with private insurance to seek ED care for access issues.
Variability in reasons for seeking ED care among discharged patients by health insurance type may be driven more by lack of access to alternate care, rather than by differences in patient-perceived acuity. Policymakers should focus on increasing access to alternate sites of care, particularly for Medicaid beneficiaries, as well as strategies to increase care coordination that involve ED patients and providers.
急诊科(ED)的利用率因医疗保险类型而异,但医疗保险类型与患者自述的寻求急诊护理原因之间的关联尚不清楚。
我们评估了医疗保险类型与急诊科出院患者自我感知的病情严重程度或就医便利性问题之间的关联。
设计、研究对象:这是对2011年全国健康访谈调查的横断面分析。对上次急诊就诊未导致住院的成年人(n = 4606)询问了有关寻求急诊护理原因的结构化问题。我们将回答分为1)认为需要立即评估(病情严重程度问题),或2)获得门诊服务的障碍(就医便利性问题)。
我们使用多变量逻辑回归模型分析调查加权数据,以检验医疗保险类型与急诊就诊原因之间的关联,同时调整社会人口学特征。
总体而言,65.0%(95%置信区间63.0 - 66.9)的成年人报告有≥1个病情严重程度问题,78.9%(95%置信区间77.3 - 80.5)报告有≥1个就医便利性问题。在那些报告最近一次急诊就诊没有病情严重程度问题的人中,84.2%报告有≥1个就医便利性问题。与有私人保险的人相比,有医疗补助的成年人(比值比1.05;95%置信区间0.79 - 1.40)和有医疗保险的成年人(比值比0.�8;95%置信区间0.66 - 1.47)因病情严重程度问题寻求急诊护理的可能性相似。有医疗补助的成年人(比值比1.50;95%置信区间1.06 - 2.13)和有医疗补助+医疗保险(双重资格)的成年人(比值比1.94;95%置信区间1.18 - 3.19)因就医便利性问题寻求急诊护理的可能性比有私人保险的人更大。
出院患者因医疗保险类型不同而寻求急诊护理的原因差异,可能更多是由缺乏获得替代护理的机会驱动的,而非患者感知的病情严重程度差异。政策制定者应专注于增加获得替代护理场所的机会,特别是为医疗补助受益人,以及增加涉及急诊患者和提供者的护理协调策略。