首页> 外文期刊>Journal of general internal medicine >Comparison of hospital costs and length of stay for community internists, hospitalists, and academicians.
【24h】

Comparison of hospital costs and length of stay for community internists, hospitalists, and academicians.

机译:比较社区内科医师,住院医师和院士的住院费用和住院时间。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: The model of inpatient medical management has evolved toward Hospitalists because of greater cost efficiency compared to traditional practice. The optimal model of inpatient care is not known. OBJECTIVE: To compare three models of inpatient Internal Medicine (traditional private practice Internists, private Hospitalist Internists, and Academic Internists with resident teams) for cost efficiency and quality at a community teaching hospital. DESIGN: Single-institution retrospective cohort study. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Measurements were hospital cost, length of stay (LOS), mortality, and 30-day readmission rate adjusted for severity, demographics, and case mix. Academic Internist teams had 30% lower cost and 40% lower LOS compared to traditional private Internists and 24% lower cost and 30% lower LOS compared to private Hospitalists. Hospital mortality was equivalent for all groups. Academic teams had 2.3-2.6% more 30-day readmissions than the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Academic teams compare favorably to private Hospitalists and traditional Internists for hospital cost efficiency and quality.
机译:背景:由于与传统做法相比具有更高的成本效率,住院医疗管理模式已经向医院医生发展。住院护理的最佳模型尚不清楚。目的:比较社区教学医院的三种住院内科模型(传统的私人执业实习医生,私人住院医生实习医生和具有住院团队的学术实习医生)的成本效率和质量。设计:单机构回顾性队列研究。测量和主要结果:测量包括医院费用,住院时间(LOS),死亡率和根据严重程度,人口统计学和病例组合调整的30天再入院率。与传统的私人Internists相比,学术Internist团队的成本降低了30%,LOS降低了40%,与私人医院专家相比,成本降低了24%,LOS降低了30%。所有组的医院死亡率均相等。学术团队的30天入学率比其他小组高2.3-2.6%。结论:学术团队在医院成本效率和质量上均优于私人医院专家和传统实习医生。

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