17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Primary Care Patients’ Preference for Hospitals over Clinics in Korea

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Korea is in a unique condition to observe whether patients, when equal access to the levels of health care facilities is guaranteed by the support of the national health insurance, choose the appropriate levels of health care facilities. This study was performed to investigate the primary care patients’ preference for hospitals over clinics under no restriction for their choice. We used the 2011 National Inpatient Sample database of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service in Korea. A primary care patient was defined as a patient who visited as an outpatient in health care facilities with one of the 52 minor conditions defined by the Korean government. We found that approximately 15% of outpatient visits of the patients who were eligible for primary care in Korea happened in hospitals. In terms of cost, the outpatient visits in hospitals accounted for about 29% of total cost of outpatient visits. This arbitrary access to hospitals can lead to an inefficient use of health care resources. In order to ensure that health care facilities are stratified in terms of access as well as size and function, interventions to distribute patients to the appropriate level of care are required.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cross-national comparative performance of three versions of the ICD-10 Charlson index.

          The Charlson comorbidity index has been widely used for risk adjustment in outcome studies using administrative health data. Recently, 3 International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) translations have been published for the Charlson comorbidities. This study was conducted to compare the predictive performance of these versions (the Halfon, Sundararajan, and Quan versions) of the ICD-10 coding algorithms using data from 4 countries. Data from Australia (N = 2000-2001, max 25 diagnosis codes), Canada (N = 2002-2003, max 16 diagnosis codes), Switzerland (N = 1999-2001, unlimited number of diagnosis codes), and Japan (N = 2003, max 11 diagnosis codes) were analyzed. Only the first admission for patients age 18 years and older, with a length of stay of >/=2 days was included. For each algorithm, 2 logistic regression models were fitted with hospital mortality as the outcome and the Charlson individual comorbidities or the Charlson index score as independent variables. The c-statistic (representing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) and its 95% probability bootstrap distribution were employed to evaluate model performance. Overall, within each population's data, the distribution of comorbidity level categories was similar across the 3 translations. The Quan version produced slightly higher median c-statistics than the Halfon or Sundararajan versions in all datasets. For example, in Japanese data, the median c-statistics were 0.712 (Quan), 0.709 (Sundararajan), and 0.694 (Halfon) using individual comorbidity coefficients. In general, the probability distributions between the Quan and the Sundararajan versions overlapped, whereas those between the Quan and the Halfon version did not. Our analyses show that all of the ICD-10 versions of the Charlson algorithm performed satisfactorily (c-statistics 0.70-0.86), with the Quan version showing a trend toward outperforming the other versions in all data sets.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Ambulatory medical care utilization estimates for 2007.

            This report presents statistics on ambulatory care visits to physician offices, hospital outpatient departments (OPDs), and hospital emergency departments (EDs) in the United States in 2007. Ambulatory medical care utilization is described in terms of patient, provider, and visit characteristics. Data from the 2007 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey were combined to produce annual estimates of ambulatory medical care utilization. Patients in the United States made an estimated 1.2 billion visits to physician offices and hospital OPDs and EDs, a rate of 405.0 visits per 100 persons annually. This was not significantly different than the rate of 381.9 visits per 100 persons in 2006, neither were significant differences found in overall visit rates by age, sex, or geographic region. Visit distribution by ambulatory care setting differed by poverty level in the patient's ZIP Code of residence, with higher proportions of visits to hospital OPDs and EDs as poverty levels increased. Between 1997 and 2007, the age-adjusted visit rate increased by 11 percent, fueled mainly by a 29 percent increase in the visit rate to medical specialty offices. Nonillness and noninjury conditions, such as general and prenatal exams, accounted for the largest percentage of ambulatory care diagnoses in 2007, about 19 per 100 visits. Seven of 10 ambulatory care visits had at least one medication provided, prescribed, or continued in 2007, for a total of 2.7 billion drugs overall. These were not significantly different than 2006 figures. Analgesics were the most common therapeutic category, accounting for 13.1 drugs per 100 drugs reported, and were most often utilized at primary care and ED visits. The number of viral vaccines that were ordered or provided increased by 79 percent, from 33.2 million occurrences in 2006 to 59.3 million in 2007; significant increases were also noted for anticonvulsants and antiemetics.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Evidence of a Broken Healthcare Delivery System in Korea: Unnecessary Hospital Outpatient Utilization among Patients with a Single Chronic Disease Without Complications

              This study aims to estimate the volume of unnecessarily utilized hospital outpatient services in Korea and quantify the total cost resulting from the inappropriate utilization. The analysis included a sample of 27,320,505 outpatient claims from the 2009 National Inpatient Sample database. Using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), patients were considered to have received 'unnecessary hospital outpatient utilization' if they had a CCI score of 0 and were concurrently admitted to hospital for treatment of a single chronic disease - hypertension (HTN), diabetes mellitus (DM), or hyperlipidemia (HL) - without complication. Overall, 85% of patients received unnecessary hospital services. Also hospitals were taking away 18.7% of HTN patients, 18.6% of DM and 31.6% of HL from clinics. Healthcare expenditures from unnecessary hospital outpatient utilization were estimated at: HTN (94,058 thousands USD, 38.6% of total expenditure); DM (17,795 thousands USD, 40.6%) and HL (62,876 thousands USD, 49.1%). If 100% of patients who received unnecessary hospital outpatient services were redirected to clinics, the estimated savings would be 104,226 thousands USD. This research proves that approximately 85% of hospital outpatient utilizations are unnecessary and that a significant amount of money is wasted on unnecessary healthcare services; thus burdening the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) and patients. Graphical Abstract
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                30 May 2018
                June 2018
                : 15
                : 6
                : 1119
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Health Policy and Management, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul 03080, Korea; agnus@ 123456snu.ac.kr (A.M.K.); hyeminjung82@ 123456gmail.com (H.J.)
                [2 ]Regional Emergency Care Center, Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul 03080, Korea; mdchosc@ 123456gmail.com
                [3 ]Department of Nursing Science, Shinsung University, Dangjin 31801, Korea; hyjkim2012@ 123456gmail.com
                [4 ]Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul 05505, Korea; mdjominwoo@ 123456gmail.com
                [5 ]Public Health Medical Service, Boramae Medical Center, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 20 Boramae-ro 5-gil, Dongjak-gu, Seoul 07061, Korea
                [6 ]Department of Preventive Medicine, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon 35015, Korea
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: jylee2000@ 123456gmail.com (J.Y.L.); zepplin7@ 123456cnu.ac.kr (S.J.E.); Tel.: +82-2-870-2165 (J.Y.L.); +82-42-580-8262 (S.J.E.)
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6616-2534
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5784-3576
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7752-2697
                Article
                ijerph-15-01119
                10.3390/ijerph15061119
                6025534
                29848995
                6cc1871b-e6a5-4122-b19a-29cd664b8f84
                © 2018 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 23 April 2018
                : 26 May 2018
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                primary care,health care facilities,access,preference,hospitals,clinics,korea
                Public health
                primary care, health care facilities, access, preference, hospitals, clinics, korea

                Comments

                Comment on this article