Suppr超能文献

平价医疗法案实施前后,获得联邦合格健康中心的地理可及性。

Geographic access to federally qualified health centers before and after the affordable care act.

机构信息

Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.

Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Mar 23;22(1):385. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-07685-0.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) increased funding for Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). We defined FQHC service areas based on patient use and examined the characteristics of areas that gained FQHC access post-ACA.

METHODS

We defined FQHC service areas using total patient counts by ZIP code from the Uniform Data System (UDS) and compared this approach with existing methods. We then compared the characteristics of ZIP codes included in Medically Underserved Areas/Populations (MUA/Ps) that gained access vs. MUA/P ZIP codes that did not gain access to FQHCs between 2011-15.

RESULTS

FQHC service areas based on UDS data vs. Primary Care Service Areas or counties included a higher percentage of each FQHC's patients (86% vs. 49% and 71%) and ZIP codes with greater use of FQHCs among low-income residents (29% vs. 22% and 22%), on average. MUA/Ps that gained FQHC access 2011-2015 included more poor, uninsured, publicly insured, and foreign-born residents than underserved areas that did not gain access, but were less likely to be rural (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Measures of actual patient use provide a promising method of assessing FQHC service areas and access. Post-ACA funding, the FQHC program expanded access into areas that were more likely to have higher rates of poverty and uninsurance, which could help address disparities in access to care. Rural areas were less likely to gain access to FQHCs, underscoring the persistent challenges of providing care in these areas.

摘要

背景

平价医疗法案(ACA)增加了联邦合格医疗中心(FQHC)的资金。我们根据患者的使用情况定义了 FQHC 服务区域,并研究了在 ACA 之后获得 FQHC 服务的区域的特征。

方法

我们使用统一数据系统(UDS)中的邮政编码的总患者计数来定义 FQHC 服务区域,并将这种方法与现有方法进行比较。然后,我们比较了在 2011-15 年期间获得 FQHC 服务和未获得 FQHC 服务的医疗服务不足地区/人群(MUA/P)的邮政编码的特征。

结果

基于 UDS 数据的 FQHC 服务区域与初级保健服务区或县相比,每个 FQHC 的患者比例更高(86%对 49%和 71%),低收入居民中 FQHC 使用量更高的邮政编码比例也更高(29%对 22%和 22%)。在 2011-2015 年期间获得 FQHC 服务的 MUA/P 地区的贫困人口、无保险人口、公共保险人口和外国出生人口比例高于未获得服务的服务不足地区,但农村地区的比例较低(p<0.05)。

结论

实际患者使用的衡量标准为评估 FQHC 服务区域和服务提供了一种有前途的方法。在 ACA 之后,FQHC 计划扩大了服务范围,覆盖了更多可能存在更高贫困率和无保险率的地区,这有助于解决获得医疗服务的差距。农村地区获得 FQHC 服务的机会较少,突显了在这些地区提供医疗服务的持续挑战。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/127d/8943953/0243eebe9609/12913_2022_7685_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验