Retchin S M, Brown R S, Yeh S C, Chu D, Moreno L
Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, USA.
JAMA. 1997 Jul 9;278(2):119-24.
Increasing numbers of Medicare beneficiaries have been enrolling in health maintenance organizations (HMOs) because HMO participation reduces out-of-pocket expenses, and the federal government views HMOs as a way to contain Medicare costs. However, results comparing outcomes and quality of care in HMOs vs fee for service (FFS) have been mixed, and outcomes after stroke have not been adequately assessed.
To compare discharge destinations and survival rates following stroke in Medicare HMOs with similar FFS settings.
An observational study for 2 groups evaluating stroke patients' discharge destinations and survival times from the date of hospital admission.
A total of 19 HMOs were selected from 12 states. The FFS sample was drawn from the same geographic areas.
The sample included 402 HMO patients from 71 hospitals and 408 FFS patients from 60 hospitals. PROCESS AND OUTCOME MEASURES: Data were abstracted from medical records on demographics, clinical characteristics of stroke, comorbid illnesses, and discharge destinations following hospitalization. Data on survival were obtained from Medicare files and included 25 to 37 months of follow-up (median, 30.4 months, HMO; 31.1 months, FFS) from the date of hospital admission.
There were 109 patients who died during the hospitalization (49 HMO, 12.2%; 60 FFS, 14.7%), and a total of 410 patients had died by the end of follow-up (191 HMO, 47.5%; 219 FFS, 53.7%). Approximately one fourth of both groups had do-not-resuscitate orders (HMO, 25.4%; FFS, 27.9%; P=.68). After controlling for age, marital status, and characteristics of dependency at discharge, HMO patients were more likely than FFS patients to be sent to nursing homes (HMO, 41.8%; FFS, 27.9%; P=.001) and less likely to be discharged to rehabilitation hospitals or units (HMO, 16.2%; FFS, 23.4%; P=.03). At follow-up, no significant differences in relative risk of dying were found between HMO and FFS groups (relative risk, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.26; P=.77).
Patients in Medicare HMOs who experience strokes are more likely to be discharged to nursing homes and less likely to go to rehabilitation facilities following the acute event. However, they have similar survival patterns compared with comparable patients in FFS settings after adjusting for other factors.
越来越多的医疗保险受益人加入了健康维护组织(HMO),因为加入HMO可降低自付费用,而且联邦政府将HMO视为控制医疗保险成本的一种方式。然而,比较HMO与按服务收费(FFS)的医疗结果和护理质量的研究结果不一,且中风后的结果尚未得到充分评估。
比较医疗保险HMO与类似FFS环境中中风后的出院去向和生存率。
一项针对两组的观察性研究,评估中风患者从入院日期起的出院去向和生存时间。
从12个州中选取了19个HMO。FFS样本来自相同的地理区域。
样本包括来自71家医院的402名HMO患者和来自60家医院的408名FFS患者。过程和结果测量:从病历中提取有关人口统计学、中风的临床特征、合并疾病以及住院后的出院去向的数据。生存数据来自医疗保险档案,包括从入院日期起25至37个月的随访(中位数,HMO为30.4个月;FFS为31.1个月)。
109名患者在住院期间死亡(49名HMO患者,12.2%;60名FFS患者,14.7%),到随访结束时共有410名患者死亡(191名HMO患者,47.5%;219名FFS患者,53.7%)。两组中约四分之一的患者有不要复苏的医嘱(HMO为25.4%;FFS为27.9%;P = 0.68)。在控制了年龄、婚姻状况和出院时的依赖特征后,HMO患者比FFS患者更有可能被送往养老院(HMO为41.8%;FFS为27.9%;P = 0.001),而被送往康复医院或康复科的可能性较小(HMO为16.2%;FFS为23.4%;P = 0.03)。在随访中,HMO组和FFS组之间在死亡相对风险上没有发现显著差异(相对风险为0.96;95%置信区间为0.73 - 1.26;P = 0.7)。
患有中风的医疗保险HMO患者在急性事件后更有可能被送往养老院,而前往康复机构的可能性较小。然而,在调整其他因素后,与FFS环境中的类似患者相比,他们的生存模式相似。