Suppr超能文献

基于医院的治疗与社区治疗中心治疗的成本效益比较:基于韩国国家健康保险索赔数据的分析。

Cost-effectiveness of hospital-based treatment compared with community treatment centres: an analysis of Korea National Health Insurance claims data.

机构信息

Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2024 Jul 24;14(7):e079232. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079232.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

We compared the cost-effectiveness of hospital-based treatment and that of community treatment centres (CTCs).

DESIGN

We performed statistical analysis to compare the expenses incurred by COVID-19 patients who received hospital care with those incurred by COVID-19 patients who went to CTCs.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A study was conducted on 411 530 COVID-19 inpatients and 243 329 CTC patients from January 2020 to December 2021.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We calculated the probability of severe disease, hospitalisation period and medical expenses for inpatients and CTC patients. Subsequently, we analysed the cost-effectiveness of CTC compared with hospitalisation.

RESULTS

Comparing medical expenses, CTC patients incurred 2 220 000 KRW on average, which is less than the expenses incurred by hospitalised COVID-19 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The study suggests that using a CTC may be more cost-effective than a hospital service alone.

摘要

目的

比较基于医院的治疗与社区治疗中心(CTC)治疗的成本效益。

设计

我们进行了统计分析,比较了接受医院治疗的 COVID-19 患者和前往 CTC 治疗的 COVID-19 患者的费用。

设置和参与者

这项研究对 2020 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月的 411530 名住院 COVID-19 患者和 243329 名 CTC 患者进行了研究。

主要结果测量

我们计算了住院患者和 CTC 患者患重病、住院期和医疗费用的概率。随后,我们分析了 CTC 与住院治疗相比的成本效益。

结果

比较医疗费用,平均而言,CTC 患者的费用为 222 万韩元,低于住院 COVID-19 患者的费用。

结论

该研究表明,使用 CTC 可能比单独使用医院服务更具成本效益。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7238/11284902/027338bcacad/bmjopen-14-7-g001.jpg

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