Sears Erika D, Swiatek Peter R, Hou Hechuan, Chung Kevin C
Ann Arbor, Mich.
From the Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, University of Michigan Health System and VA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, University of Michigan Medical School, and the University of Michigan Health System.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Nov;138(5):1041-1049. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002635.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of insurance type on use of diagnostic testing, treatments, and the efficiency of care for patients with carpal tunnel syndrome.
The 2009 to 2013 Truven MarketScan Databases were used to identify adult patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. Insurance type was categorized as fee-for-service versus capitated managed care. Multivariable regression models were created to evaluate the relationship between insurance type and costs, number of visits, treatment, and electrodiagnostic study use, and controlling for demographic characteristics and comorbidities.
The cohort included 233,572 patients, of which 86 percent carried fee-for-service insurance. Predicted probabilities were clinically similar between the capitated and fee-for-service insurance types for therapy (0.23 versus 0.24), steroid injection (0.07 versus 0.09), and electrodiagnostic study use (0.44 versus 0.47). The difference in predicted probabilities between the insurance groups was greatest for surgery use (0.22 versus 0.28 for managed care and fee-for-service, respectively). The mean number of visits was similar between the two groups (2.1 versus 2.0 visits). In the controlled analysis, managed care was associated with a 10 percent decrease in cost compared to patients with fee-for-service (p < 0.001).
Managed care was associated with a lower probability of surgery than fee-for-service, but similar use of less costly services. These data may be used to predict future practice trends with increased implementation of bundled payment reimbursement. Routine collection of validated patient outcomes measures is critical to assess patient outcomes associated with anticipated reduction of surgical services.
CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, II.
本研究旨在评估保险类型对腕管综合征患者诊断性检查的使用、治疗及医疗效率的影响。
使用2009年至2013年的Truven MarketScan数据库来识别成年腕管综合征患者。保险类型分为按服务收费与按人头预付管理式医疗。建立多变量回归模型以评估保险类型与成本、就诊次数、治疗及电诊断检查使用之间的关系,并控制人口统计学特征和合并症。
该队列包括233,572名患者,其中86%拥有按服务收费保险。在按人头预付保险和按服务收费保险类型之间,治疗(0.23对0.24)、类固醇注射(0.07对0.09)及电诊断检查使用(0.44对0.47)的预测概率在临床上相似。保险组之间预测概率的差异在手术使用方面最大(管理式医疗和按服务收费分别为0.22对0.28)。两组的平均就诊次数相似(2.1次对2.0次)。在对照分析中,与按服务收费的患者相比,管理式医疗的成本降低了10%(p < 0.001)。
与按服务收费相比,管理式医疗进行手术的概率较低,但在使用成本较低的服务方面相似。这些数据可用于预测随着捆绑支付报销的更多实施,未来的实践趋势。常规收集经过验证的患者结局指标对于评估与预期手术服务减少相关的患者结局至关重要。
临床问题/证据水平:风险,II级。