• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

消除预防性保健服务费用分担的利用影响:快速综述

Utilization Impact of Cost-Sharing Elimination for Preventive Care Services: A Rapid Review.

作者信息

Norris Hope C, Richardson Haley M, Benoit Marie-Anais C, Shrosbree Beth, Smith Judith E, Fendrick A Mark

机构信息

The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

New York University, New York, NY, USA.

出版信息

Med Care Res Rev. 2022 Apr;79(2):175-197. doi: 10.1177/10775587211027372. Epub 2021 Jun 22.

DOI:10.1177/10775587211027372
PMID:34157906
Abstract

Consumer cost-sharing has been shown to diminish utilization of preventive services. Recent efforts, including provisions within the Affordable Care Act, have sought to increase use of preventive care through elimination of cost-sharing for clinically indicated services. We conducted a rapid review of the literature to determine the impact of cost-share elimination on utilization of preventive services. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL Complete databases as well as in grey literature. A total of 35 articles were included in qualitative synthesis and findings were summarized for three clinical service categories: cancer screenings, contraceptives, and additional services. Impacts of cost-sharing elimination varied depending on clinical service, with a majority of findings showing increases in use. Studies that included socioeconomic status reported that those who were financially vulnerable incurred substantial increases in utilization. Future investigations on additional clinical services are warranted as is research to better elucidate populations who most benefit from cost-sharing elimination.

摘要

消费者成本分担已被证明会减少预防性服务的使用。最近的一些举措,包括《平价医疗法案》中的相关规定,试图通过消除临床推荐服务的成本分担来增加预防性护理的使用。我们对文献进行了快速回顾,以确定消除成本分担对预防性服务使用的影响。在PubMed、Scopus和CINAHL Complete数据库以及灰色文献中进行了检索。共有35篇文章纳入定性综合分析,并针对癌症筛查、避孕药具和其他服务这三个临床服务类别总结了研究结果。消除成本分担的影响因临床服务而异,大多数研究结果显示使用量增加。纳入社会经济地位因素的研究报告称,经济上脆弱的人群使用量大幅增加。有必要对更多临床服务进行未来调查,同时也需要开展研究以更好地阐明最能从消除成本分担中受益的人群。

相似文献

1
Utilization Impact of Cost-Sharing Elimination for Preventive Care Services: A Rapid Review.消除预防性保健服务费用分担的利用影响:快速综述
Med Care Res Rev. 2022 Apr;79(2):175-197. doi: 10.1177/10775587211027372. Epub 2021 Jun 22.
2
Breast Screening Utilization and Cost Sharing Among Employed Insured Women After the Affordable Care Act.《平价医疗法案》实施后,有保险的就业女性的乳房 X 光筛查利用率和费用分担情况。
J Am Coll Radiol. 2019 Jun;16(6):788-796. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2019.01.028. Epub 2019 Mar 2.
3
Has recommended preventive service use increased after elimination of cost-sharing as part of the Affordable Care Act in the United States?在美国,作为《平价医疗法案》的一部分,取消费用分担后,推荐的预防性服务使用情况是否有所增加?
Prev Med. 2015 Sep;78:85-91. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.07.012. Epub 2015 Jul 23.
4
Effectiveness of Medicare cost-sharing elimination for Cancer screening on utilization.医疗保险消除癌症筛查费用分担对利用率的有效性。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun 17;19(1):392. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4135-9.
5
Breast Screening Utilization and Cost Sharing Among Employed Insured Women Following the Affordable Care Act: Impact of Race and Income.《平价医疗法案实施后,受保女性的乳房 X 光筛查利用和费用分担:种族和收入的影响》。
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2019 Nov;28(11):1529-1537. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2018.7403. Epub 2019 Apr 13.
6
The impact of cost sharing on women's use of annual examinations and effective contraception.费用分担对女性进行年度体检和有效避孕的影响。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jul;219(1):93.e1-93.e13. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.04.051. Epub 2018 May 9.
7
Variation of preventive service utilization by state Medicaid coverage, cost-sharing, and Medicaid expansion status.各州医疗补助保险覆盖范围、费用分担和医疗补助扩展状况对预防服务利用率的影响。
Prev Med. 2018 Oct;115:97-103. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.08.020. Epub 2018 Aug 23.
8
High Deductible Health Plans and Use of Free Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act.高免赔额健康计划与平价医疗法案下免费预防服务的使用。
Inquiry. 2023 Jan-Dec;60:469580231182512. doi: 10.1177/00469580231182512.
9
The ACA's Zero Cost-Sharing Mandate and Trends in Out-of-Pocket Expenditures on Well-Child and Screening Mammography Visits.《平价医疗法案》的零费用分担规定以及儿童健康检查和乳腺钼靶筛查门诊自付费用的趋势。
Med Care. 2016 Dec;54(12):1056-1062. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000610.
10
Impact of the Affordable Care Act on Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality.平价医疗法案对结直肠癌发病率和死亡率的影响。
Am J Prev Med. 2022 Mar;62(3):387-394. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.08.025. Epub 2021 Nov 8.

引用本文的文献

1
Use of No-Cost Preventive Services Jeopardized by Kennedy v Braidwood.肯尼迪诉布雷德伍德案危及免费预防性服务的使用。
JAMA Health Forum. 2025 Apr 4;6(4):e251559. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.1559.
2
Preferences for HIV preexposure prophylaxis care among gay, bisexual, and other MSM: a large discrete choice experiment.男同性恋、双性恋及其他男男性行为者对HIV暴露前预防护理的偏好:一项大型离散选择实验
AIDS. 2025 Jun 1;39(7):905-911. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000004124. Epub 2025 Jan 15.
3
Implications of the initial Braidwood v. Becerra ruling for colorectal cancer outcomes: a modeling study.
布雷德伍德诉贝塞拉案初审裁决对结直肠癌治疗结果的影响:一项建模研究。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2025 Apr 1;117(4):790-794. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djae244.
4
PERSPECTIVE: A Path to Value-Based Insurance Design for Mental Health Services.观点:精神健康服务基于价值的保险设计的路径。
J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2024 Mar 1;27(1):23-31.
5
The Cost to Breathe: Eliminating Cost Sharing Associated with Lung Cancer Screening.呼吸的代价:消除与肺癌筛查相关的费用分担
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2024 Jun;21(6):849-851. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202401-064VP.
6
Differences in Health Care Utilization for Asthma by Children with Medicaid versus Private Insurance.儿童哮喘患者利用医疗补助与私人保险的医疗保健差异。
Popul Health Manag. 2024 Apr;27(2):105-113. doi: 10.1089/pop.2023.0244.
7
Lives Saved Through Increasing Adherence to Follow-Up After Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Results.通过提高宫颈癌筛查结果异常后的随访依从性挽救生命。
O G Open. 2024 Mar 19;1(1):e001. doi: 10.1097/og9.0000000000000001. eCollection 2024 Mar.
8
Expanding the Catalog of Patient and Caregiver Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Systematic Literature Review.扩大患者和照护者自付费用目录:系统文献回顾。
Popul Health Manag. 2024 Feb;27(1):70-83. doi: 10.1089/pop.2023.0238. Epub 2023 Dec 13.
9
Impact of Eliminating Cost-Sharing by Medicare Beneficiaries for Follow-Up Colonoscopy After a Positive Stool-based Colorectal Cancer Screening Test.消除 Medicare 受益人的后续结肠镜检查费用分担对阳性粪便结直肠癌筛查试验后的影响。
Cancer Res Commun. 2023 Oct 17;3(10):2113-2117. doi: 10.1158/2767-9764.CRC-23-0322.
10
Assessment of racial and ethnic inequities in copay card utilization and enrollment in copay adjustment programs.评估种族和民族在 copay 卡使用和 copay 调整计划参与方面的不平等现象。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2023 Sep;29(9):1084-1092. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2023.23021. Epub 2023 Aug 7.