比利时中毒中心对非故意中毒医疗费用的影响：成本效益分析。

Belgian Poison Centre impact on healthcare expenses of unintentional poisonings: a cost-benefit analysis.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Department of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.

出版信息

Int J Public Health. 2019 Dec;64(9):1283-1290. doi: 10.1007/s00038-019-01283-4. Epub 2019 Jul 11.

DOI:10.1007/s00038-019-01283-4

PMID:31297557

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluates the impact of the Belgian Poison Centre (BPC) on national healthcare expenses for calls from the public for unintentional poisonings.

METHODS

The probability of either calling the BPC, consulting a general practitioner (GP) or consulting an emergency department (ED) was examined in a telephone survey (February-March 2016). Callers were asked what they would have done in case of unavailability of the BPC. The proportion and cost for ED-ambulatory care, ED 24-h observation or hospitalisation were calculated from individual invoices. A cost-benefit analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Unintentional cases (n = 485) from 1045 calls to the BPC were included. After having called the BPC, 92.1% did not seek further medical help, 4.2% consulted a GP and 3.7% went to an ED. In the absence of the BPC, 13.8% would not have sought any further help, 49.3% would have consulted a GP and 36.9% would have gone to the hospital. The cost-benefit ratio of the availability of the BPC as versus its absence was estimated at 5.70.

CONCLUSIONS

Financial savings can be made if people first call the BPC for unintentional poisonings.

摘要

目的

本研究评估了比利时中毒中心（BPC）对因非故意中毒而拨打公众电话给国家医疗费用的影响。

方法

在电话调查（2016 年 2 月至 3 月）中，检查了拨打 BPC、咨询全科医生（GP）或咨询急诊部（ED）的可能性。询问来电者如果 BPC 不可用，他们会怎么做。根据个人发票计算了 ED-门诊护理、ED 24 小时观察或住院的比例和费用。进行了成本效益分析。

结果

共纳入 1045 个电话咨询 BPC 的 485 例非故意中毒病例。在拨打 BPC 后，92.1%的人不再寻求进一步的医疗帮助，4.2%的人咨询了 GP，3.7%的人去了 ED。如果没有 BPC，13.8%的人不会寻求任何进一步的帮助，49.3%的人会咨询 GP，36.9%的人会去医院。BPC 可用性与其不存在的成本效益比估计为 5.70。