首页> 外文期刊>Health services research: HSR >The impact of allergy and pulmonary specialist care on emergency asthma utilization in a large managed care organization.
【24h】

The impact of allergy and pulmonary specialist care on emergency asthma utilization in a large managed care organization.

机译:在大型管理式护理组织中,过敏和肺部专科护理对紧急哮喘利用的影响。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective. To evaluate the longitudinal impact of asthma specialist care on the risk of emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalization for asthma. Data Sources/Study Setting. A prospective cohort study using both telephone survey and computerized utilization data. Study Design. We recruited a prospective cohort of 4,742 adult members of a closed panel managed care organization who were hospitalized for asthma (the "baseline hospitalization"). Data Collection/Extraction Methods. Visits to asthma specialists were ascertained from computerized utilization databases. Specialist visits after baseline hospitalization were defined as time-dependent covariates. An alternative analysis defined specialist visits during the year preceding baseline hospitalization. A subcohort of 596 subjects completed telephone interviews. Principal Findings. Compared with subjects who received no specialist visits after baseline hospitalization, treatment by allergists (hazard ratio (HR) 1.04; 95 percent confidence interval (CI) 0.87-1.26) or pulmonologists (HR 0.92; 95 percent CI 0.71-1.19) was not associated with a reduction in the risk of future ED visits for asthma in the entire cohort, controlling for age, sex, race, recent asthma medication dispensing, and pharmacy benefits status. There was also no association between allergist visits and the risk of subsequent hospitalizations for asthma (HR 0.93; 95 percent CI 0.75-1.14). In contrast, visits to pulmonologists (HR 0.74; 95 percent CI 0.55-0.99) were related to a reduced risk of rehospitalization. Conclusions. Pulmonary specialist visits appeared to reduce the risk of hospitalization for asthma, whereas asthma specialist visits did not reduce the risk of ED visits. In the context of comprehensive prepaid health care, the benefit of specialist care was modest.
机译:目的。为了评估哮喘专科治疗对急诊就诊和哮喘住院风险的纵向影响。数据源/研究设置。使用电话调查和计算机利用率数据进行的前瞻性队列研究。学习规划。我们招募了一个封闭小组管理的护理组织的4,742名成年成员的预期队列,这些成员因哮喘住院(“基准住院”)。数据收集/提取方法。哮喘专家的访问是从计算机利用率数据库确定的。基线住院后的专家就诊被定义为时间依赖性协变量。另一种分析方法定义了基线住院前一年中的专家就诊。 596名受试者的一个子队列完成了电话采访。主要发现。与基线住院后未接受专科医生就诊的受试者相比,过敏者(危险比(HR)1.04; 95%置信区间(CI)0.87-1.26)或肺病学家(HR 0.92; 95%CI 0.71-1.19)的治疗没有相关性降低了整个队列中未来ED哮喘患者就诊的风险,并控制了年龄,性别,种族,最近的哮喘药物分配和药房受益状况。过敏症就诊与随后因哮喘住院的风险之间也没有关联(HR 0.93; 95%CI 0.75-1.14)。相比之下,就诊肺科医生(HR 0.74; 95%CI 0.55-0.99)与再次住院的风险降低有关。结论。肺专科就诊似乎降低了因哮喘住院的风险,而哮喘专科就诊并未降低急诊就诊的风险。在全面的预付费医疗保健的背景下,专科护理的收益微不足道。

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