Chen Brian K, Hibbert James, Cheng Xi, Bennett Kevin
Department of Health Services Policy and Management, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street Suite 354, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA.
Center for Research in Nutrition and Health Disparities, University of South Carolina, 921 Assembly Street #230, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA.
Int J Equity Health. 2015 Mar 21;14:30. doi: 10.1186/s12939-015-0158-y.
Use of the hospital emergency department (ED) for medical conditions not likely to require immediate treatment is a controversial topic. It has been faulted for ED overcrowding, increased expenditures, and decreased quality of care. On the other hand, such avoidable ED utilization may be a manifestation of barriers to primary care access.
A random 10% subsample of all ED visits with unmasked variables, or approximately 7.2% of all ED visits in California between 2006 and 2010 are used in the analysis. Using panel data methods, we employ linear probability and fractional probit models with hospital fixed effects to analyze the associations between avoidable ED utilization in California and observable patient characteristics. We also test whether shorter estimated road distances to the hospital ED are correlated with non-urgent ED utilization, as defined by the New York University ED Algorithm. We then investigate whether proximity of a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) is correlated with reductions in non-urgent ED utilization among Medicaid patients.
We find that relative to the reference group of adults aged 35-64, younger patients generally have higher scores for non-urgent conditions and lower scores for urgent conditions. However, elderly patients (≥65) use the ED for conditions more likely to be urgent. Relative to male and white patients, respectively, female patients and all identified racial and ethnic minorities use the ED for conditions more likely to be non-urgent. Patients with non-commercial insurance coverage also use the ED for conditions more likely to be non-urgent. Medicare and Medicaid patients who live closer to the hospital ED have higher probability scores for non-emergent visits. However, among Medicaid enrollees, those who live in zip codes with an FQHC within 0.5 mile of the zip code population centroid visit the ED for medical conditions less likely to be non-emergent.
These patterns of ED utilization point to potential barriers to care among historically vulnerable groups, observable even when using rough estimates of travel distances and avoidable ED utilization.
将医院急诊科(ED)用于不太可能需要立即治疗的医疗状况是一个有争议的话题。它因导致急诊科过度拥挤、支出增加和护理质量下降而受到指责。另一方面,这种可避免的急诊科利用情况可能是初级医疗服务获取障碍的一种表现。
分析中使用了所有急诊就诊病例的10%随机子样本,这些病例的变量未被掩盖,约占2006年至2010年加利福尼亚州所有急诊就诊病例的7.2%。使用面板数据方法,我们采用具有医院固定效应的线性概率模型和分数概率模型,来分析加利福尼亚州可避免的急诊利用情况与可观察到的患者特征之间的关联。我们还测试了根据纽约大学急诊科算法定义的,到医院急诊科估计道路距离较短是否与非紧急急诊利用情况相关。然后,我们调查联邦合格健康中心(FQHC)的临近程度是否与医疗补助患者非紧急急诊利用情况的减少相关。
我们发现,相对于35 - 64岁的成年人参考组,年轻患者通常在非紧急状况下得分较高,而在紧急状况下得分较低。然而,老年患者(≥65岁)因更可能紧急的状况而使用急诊科。相对于男性患者和白人患者,女性患者以及所有已识别的种族和少数族裔因更可能非紧急的状况而使用急诊科。拥有非商业保险的患者也因更可能非紧急的状况而使用急诊科。居住在离医院急诊科较近的医疗保险和医疗补助患者非紧急就诊的概率得分较高。然而,在医疗补助参保者中,那些居住在邮政编码区域内、距离邮政编码区域人口中心0.5英里范围内有FQHC的人,因不太可能非紧急的医疗状况而就诊急诊科的情况较少。
这些急诊利用模式表明,在历史上易受影响的群体中存在潜在的医疗服务障碍,即使在使用粗略的出行距离估计和可避免的急诊利用情况时也能观察到。