Fuentes Molly M, Thompson Leah, Quistberg D Alex, Haaland Wren L, Rhodes Karin, Kartin Deborah, Kerfeld Cheryl, Apkon Susan, Rowhani-Rahbar Ali, Rivara Frederick P
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA; Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA; Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, Seattle, WA.
Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Sep;98(9):1763-1770.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.12.013. Epub 2017 Jan 23.
To identify insurance-based disparities in access to outpatient pediatric neurorehabilitation services.
Audit study with paired calls, where callers posed as a mother seeking services for a simulated child with history of severe traumatic brain injury and public or private insurance.
Outpatient rehabilitation clinics.
Sample of rehabilitation clinics (N=287): 195 physical therapy (PT) clinics, 109 occupational therapy (OT) clinics, 102 speech therapy (ST) clinics, and 11 rehabilitation medicine clinics.
Not applicable.
Acceptance of public insurance and the number of business days until the next available appointment.
Therapy clinics were more likely to accept private insurance than public insurance (relative risk [RR] for PT clinics, 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-1.44; RR for OT clinics, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.24-1.57; and RR for ST clinics, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.25-1.62), with no significant difference for rehabilitation medicine clinics (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.90-1.34). The difference in median wait time between clinics that accepted public insurance and those accepting only private insurance was 4 business days for PT clinics and 15 days for ST clinics (P≤.001), but the median wait time was not significantly different for OT clinics or rehabilitation medicine clinics. When adjusting for urban and multidisciplinary clinic statuses, the wait time at clinics accepting public insurance was 59% longer for PT (95% CI, 39%-81%), 18% longer for OT (95% CI, 7%-30%), and 107% longer for ST (95% CI, 87%-130%) than that at clinics accepting only private insurance. Distance to clinics varied by discipline and area within the state.
Therapy clinics were less likely to accept public insurance than private insurance. Therapy clinics accepting public insurance had longer wait times than did clinics that accepted only private insurance. Rehabilitation professionals should attempt to implement policy and practice changes to promote equitable access to care.
确定基于保险的门诊儿科神经康复服务可及性方面的差异。
配对电话审计研究,打电话者假扮一位为患有重度创伤性脑损伤病史的模拟儿童寻求服务的母亲,分别提及公共保险或私人保险。
门诊康复诊所。
康复诊所样本(N = 287):195家物理治疗(PT)诊所、109家职业治疗(OT)诊所、102家言语治疗(ST)诊所和11家康复医学诊所。
不适用。
对公共保险的接受情况以及距离下一次可预约的工作日天数。
治疗诊所更倾向于接受私人保险而非公共保险(PT诊所的相对风险[RR]为1.33;95%置信区间[CI]为1.22 - 1.44;OT诊所的RR为1.40;95% CI为1.24 - 1.57;ST诊所的RR为1.42;95% CI为1.25 - 1.62),康复医学诊所无显著差异(RR为1.10;95% CI为0.90 - 1.34)。接受公共保险的诊所与仅接受私人保险的诊所之间,PT诊所的中位等待时间差异为4个工作日,ST诊所为15天(P≤0.001),但OT诊所或康复医学诊所的中位等待时间无显著差异。在调整城市和多学科诊所状态后,接受公共保险的诊所中,PT的等待时间比仅接受私人保险的诊所长59%(95% CI为39% - 81%),OT长18%(95% CI为7% - 30%),ST长107%(95% CI为87% - 130%)。到诊所的距离因学科和该州内的区域而异。
治疗诊所接受公共保险的可能性低于私人保险。接受公共保险的治疗诊所等待时间比仅接受私人保险的诊所更长。康复专业人员应尝试实施政策和实践变革,以促进公平获得医疗服务。