...
首页> 外文期刊>American journal of public health >When Health Insurance Is Not a Factor: National Comparison of Homeless and Nonhomeless US Veterans Who Use Veterans Affairs Emergency Departments
【24h】

When Health Insurance Is Not a Factor: National Comparison of Homeless and Nonhomeless US Veterans Who Use Veterans Affairs Emergency Departments

机译:当健康保险不是一个因素时:使用退伍军人事务急诊科的美国无家可归者和非无家可归者的全国比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Objectives. We examined the proportion of homeless veterans among users of Veterans Affairs (VA) emergency departments (EDs) and compared sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of homeless and nonhomeless VA emergency department users nationally. Methods. We used national VA administrative data from fiscal year 2010 for a cross-sectional study comparing homeless (n?=?64?091) and nonhomeless (n?=?866?621) ED users on sociodemographics, medical and psychiatric diagnoses, and other clinical characteristics. Results. Homeless veterans had 4 times the odds of using EDs than nonhomeless veterans. Multivariate analyses found few differences between homeless and nonhomeless ED users on the medical conditions examined, but homeless ED users were more likely to have been diagnosed with a drug use disorder (odds ratio [OR]?=?4.12; 95% confidence interval [CI]?=?3.97, 4.27), alcohol use disorder (OR?=?3.67; 95% CI?=?3.55, 3.79), or schizophrenia (OR?=?3.44; 95% CI?=?3.25, 3.64) in the past year. Conclusions. In a national integrated health care system with no specific requirements for health insurance, the major differences found between homeless and nonhomeless ED users were high rates of psychiatric and substance abuse diagnoses. EDs may be an important location for specialized homeless outreach (or “in” reach) services to address mental health and addictive disorders. Use of emergency departments (EDs) is of national concern because high rates of ED use are thought by many to indicate poor access to regular health care providers and failure to address preventable illness and injury. 1 Approximately 5% of patients are responsible for a quarter of all ED visits, 2 and homeless adults are among the most frequent users of ED services. 3–7 Two studies conducted in San Francisco, California, found that 40% of homeless adults used EDs at least once in the past year, a rate 3 times the US norm, 3 and that homeless people were nearly 4 times as likely as domiciled people to be frequent ED users, that is, to have visited an ED more than 4 times in the past year. 7 One large national study of homeless adults found that 32% reported having an ED visit in the past year, 4 which is much higher than the rate of 13% to 20% for US adults overall. 8,9 Several additional studies have found that homeless adults are disproportionately represented among the most frequent users of EDs. 7,10,11 In addition to using EDs more often than nonhomeless adults, homeless adults who use ED services have been reported to have higher rates of infectious diseases, substance use, and psychiatric illness. 6,10 They have also been reported to be more likely to be ED recidivists, that is, to return to the ED within a short period of time after a prior ED visit. 6,12 Among homeless adults, some identified predictors of ED use have been unstable housing, chronic medical illness, food insecurity, and victimization. 3,4,13,14 An additional factor thought to be associated with ED use is the lack of regular and accessible health care, health insurance, or both. Analyses of national ED utilization data have shown that homeless ED users are more likely to be uninsured than nonhomeless ED users. 5,6 Other studies have shown that homeless patients who use EDs often have no other source of health care, 4 especially those who are chronically homeless. 15 Thus, homeless patients may be more likely to use EDs because they do not have health insurance for ambulatory care. Moreover, even though more than half of the homeless population is enrolled in public financial assistance programs, these subsidies may not fully address the needs of those with substance use disorders or chronic medical conditions. 10 However, another series of studies have shown that frequent ED users, who are especially likely to be homeless, are more likely to be insured and less likely to be uninsured 2,3,16,17 and, rather than being disengaged from care outside of the ED, frequent ED users have been found in some studies to use outpatient primary and specialty clinic systems quite heavily. 2,18–22 One explanation for these mixed findings may be that some studies are based on health care systems that offer extensive services for the uninsured and homeless, in which insurance may be a marker for higher levels of physical and mental disability rather than an indicator of access or lack of access to ambulatory care. 3 The Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system offers a unique opportunity to examine correlates of ED use by homeless individuals. The VA is one of the largest integrated health care networks in the United States and offers veterans equal access to an array of health care services, in which insurance coverage is unrelated to access to services. 23,24 Little examination of homeless patients who use EDs within this type of health care system has occurred. Moreover, the health of homeless veterans is vital to the VA’s established goal of ending homelessness among veterans. 25 One s
机译:目标。我们检查了退伍军人事务(VA)急诊科(ED)使用者中无家可归退伍军人的比例,并比较了全国无家可归和非无家可归VA急诊科使用者的社会人口统计学和临床​​特征。方法。我们使用了2010财年的国家VA行政数据进行了横断面研究,比较了无家可归(n = 64?091)和非无家可归(n = 866866621)ED用户在社会人口统计学,医学和精神病学诊断以及其他方面的使用情况临床特征。结果。无家可归的退伍军人使用ED的几率是非无家可归的退伍军人的4倍。多变量分析发现,在检查的医疗状况下,无家可归者和非无家可归者之间的差异很小,但无家可归者中的使用者更有可能被诊断出患有药物滥用(赔率[OR]?=?4.12; 95%置信区间[CI] ]?=?3.97,4.27),酒精滥用障碍(OR?=?3.67; 95%CI?=?3.55,3.79)或精神分裂症(OR?=?3.44; 95%CI?=?3.25,3.64)过去的一年。结论。在没有对医疗保险有具体要求的国家综合医疗体系中,无家可归和非无家可归的急诊科使用者之间发现的主要区别是精神病和药物滥用诊断的比率很高。急诊部可能是专门的无家可归者外展(或“触及”范围内)服务的重要场所,以解决心理健康和成瘾性疾病。急诊室(ED)的使用引起了国家的关注,因为许多人认为急诊室的高使用率表明其无法获得正规的医疗服务提供者,也无法解决可预防的疾病和伤害。 1大约5%的患者占所有急诊就诊的四分之一,2和无家可归的成年人是急诊服务的最常使用者。 3–7在加利福尼亚州旧金山进行的两项研究发现,过去一年中,有40%的无家可归的成年人至少使用过一次ED,这一比率是美国正常水平的3倍,3而无家可归的人的可能性是定居者的近4倍。经常使用ED的用户,即过去一年访问过​​ED超过4次。 7一项针对无家可归的成年人的大型全国性研究发现,去年有32%的人报告过急诊就诊,[4]远高于美国成年人的13%至20%的比率。 [8,9]一些其他研究发现,无家可归的成年人在最常使用ED的人群中所占比例过高。 7,10,11除了比无家可归的成年人更频繁地使用急诊,据报道,使用急诊服务的无家可归的成年人传染病,吸毒和精神病的比率更高。 6,10据报道,他们更有可能是急诊科的累犯,也就是说,在上次急诊科就诊后的短时间内返回急诊科。 6,12在无家可归的成年人中,确定使用ED的一些预测因素包括住房不稳定,慢性病,粮食不安全和受害。 3,4,13,14与ED的使用有关的另一个因素是缺乏常规和可及的医疗保健,健康保险或两者兼而有之。对全国ED使用数据的分析表明,无家可归的ED用户比非无家可归的ED用户更有可能没有保险。 5,6其他研究表明,使用ED的无家可归患者通常没有其他医疗保健来源,4尤其是那些长期无家可归的患者。 15因此,无家可归的患者可能更可能使用急诊室,因为他们没有门诊医疗保险。此外,即使超过一半的无家可归者参加了公共财政援助计划,但这些补贴可能无法充分满足那些患有吸毒障碍或慢性病的人的需求。 10然而,另一系列研究表明,经常使用电子病历的人,尤其是无家可归的人,更有被保险的可能性,而没有被保险的可能性则较小2,3,16,17,而不是脱离外界护理在ED中,在一些研究中发现经常使用ED的用户大量使用门诊的初级和专科门诊系统。 2,18–22对于这些混合发现的一种解释可能是,某些研究基于医疗体系,这些体系为无保险者和无家可归者提供广泛的服务,其中保险可能是更高水平的身心残疾的标志,而不是能否获得非卧床护理的指标。 3退伍军人事务(VA)卫生保健系统为检查无家可归者使用ED的相关性提供了独特的机会。弗吉尼亚州是美国最大的综合医疗保健网络之一,为退伍军人提供平等的一系列医疗保健服务,而保险范围与获得医疗服务无关。 23,24在这种类型的医疗保健系统中,对使用ED的无家可归患者进行的检查很少。此外,无家可归退伍军人的健康状况对于弗吉尼亚州旨在消除退伍军人无家可归的既定目标至关重要。 25秒

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号