Differences in risk factors for children with special health care needs (CSHCN) receiving needed specialty care by socioeconomic status

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of this study is to identify factors affecting CSHCN's receiving needed specialty care among different socioeconomic levels. Previous literature has shown that Socioeconomic Status (SES) is a significant factor in CHSHCN receiving access to healthcare. Other literature has shown that factors of insurance, family size, race/ethnicity and sex also have effects on these children's receipt of care. However, this literature does not address whether other factors such as maternal education, geographic location, age, insurance type, severity of condition, or race/ethnicity have different effects on receiving needed specialty care for children in each SES level.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data were obtained from the National Survey of Children with Special Health Care Needs, 2000–2002. The study analyzed the survey which studies whether CHSCN who needed specialty care received it. The analysis included demographic characteristics, geographical location of household, severity of condition, and social factors. Multiple logistic regression models were constructed for SES levels defined by federal poverty level: < 199%; 200–299%; ≥ 300%.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For the poorest children (,199% FPL) being uninsured had a strong negative effect on receiving all needed specialty care. Being Hispanic was a protective factor. Having more than one adult in the household had a positive impact on receipt of needed specialty care but a larger number of children in the family had a negative impact. For the middle income group of children (200–299% of FPL severity of condition had a strong negative association with receipt of needed specialty care.</p> <p>Children in highest income group (> 300% FPL) were positively impacted by living in the Midwest and were negatively impacted by the mother having only some college compared to a four-year degree.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Factors affecting CSHCN receiving all needed specialty care differed among socioeconomic groups. These differences should be addressed in policy and practice. Future research should explore the CSHCN population by income groups to better serve this population</p

Use of outpatient care in VA and Medicare among disability-eligible and age-eligible veteran patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>More than half of veterans who use Veterans Health Administration (VA) care are also eligible for Medicare via disability or age, but no prior studies have examined variation in use of outpatient services by Medicare-eligible veterans across health system, type of care or time.</p> <p>Objectives</p> <p>To examine differences in use of VA and Medicare outpatient services by disability-eligible or age-eligible veterans among veterans who used VA primary care services and were also eligible for Medicare.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A retrospective cohort study of 4,704 disability- and 10,816 age-eligible veterans who used VA primary care services in fiscal year (FY) 2000. We tracked their outpatient utilization from FY2001 to FY2004 using VA administrative and Medicare claims data. We examined utilization differences for primary care, specialty care, and mental health outpatient visits using generalized estimating equations.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Among Medicare-eligible veterans who used VA primary care, disability-eligible veterans had more VA primary care visits (<it>p </it>< 0.001) and more VA specialty care visits (<it>p </it>< 0.001) than age-eligible veterans. They were more likely to have mental health visits in VA (<it>p </it>< 0.01) and Medicare-reimbursed visits (<it>p </it>< 0.01). Disability-eligible veterans also had more total (VA+Medicare) visits for primary care (<it>p </it>< 0.01) and specialty care (<it>p </it>< 0.01), controlling for patient characteristics.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Greater use of primary care and specialty care visits by disability-eligible veterans is most likely related to greater health needs not captured by the patient characteristics we employed and eligibility for VA care at no cost. Outpatient care patterns of disability-eligible veterans may foreshadow care patterns of veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq wars, who are entering the system in growing numbers. This study provides an important baseline for future research assessing utilizations among returning veterans who use both VA and Medicare systems. Establishing effective care coordination protocols between VA and Medicare providers can help ensure efficient use of taxpayer resources and high quality care for disabled veterans.</p

Differences between immigrant and non-immigrant groups in the use of primary medical care; a systematic review

Background. Studies on differences between immigrant and non-immigrant groups in health care utilization vary with respect to the extent and direction of differences in use. Therefore, our study aimed to provide a systematic overview of the existing research on differences in primary care utilization between immigrant groups and the majority population. Methods. For this review PubMed, PsycInfo, Cinahl, Sociofile, Web of Science and Current Contents were consulted. Study selection and quality assessment was performed using a predefined protocol by 2 reviewers independently of each other. Only original, quantitative, peer-reviewed papers were taken into account. To account for this hierarchical structure, logistic multilevel analyses were performed to examine the extent to which differences are found across countries and immigrant groups. Differences in primary care use were related to study characteristics, strength of the primary care system and methodological quality. Results. A total of 37 studies from 7 countries met all inclusion criteria. Remarkably, studies performed within the US more often reported a significant lower use among immigrant groups as compared to the majority population than the other countries. As studies scored higher on methodological quality, the likelihood of reporting significant differences increased. Adjustment for health status and use of culture-/language-adjusted procedures during the data

Psychiatric inpatient expenditures and public health insurance programmes: analysis of a national database covering the entire South Korean population

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Medical spending on psychiatric hospitalization has been reported to impose a tremendous socio-economic burden on many developed countries with public health insurance programmes. However, there has been no in-depth study of the factors affecting psychiatric inpatient medical expenditures and differentiated these factors across different types of public health insurance programmes. In view of this, this study attempted to explore factors affecting medical expenditures for psychiatric inpatients between two public health insurance programmes covering the entire South Korean population: National Health Insurance (NHI) and National Medical Care Aid (AID).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This retrospective, cross-sectional study used a nationwide, population-based reimbursement claims dataset consisting of 1,131,346 claims of all 160,465 citizens institutionalized due to psychiatric diagnosis between January 2005 and June 2006 in South Korea. To adjust for possible correlation of patients characteristics within the same medical institution and a non-linearity structure, a Box-Cox transformed, multilevel regression analysis was performed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Compared with inpatients 19 years old or younger, the medical expenditures of inpatients between 50 and 64 years old were 10% higher among NHI beneficiaries but 40% higher among AID beneficiaries. Males showed higher medical expenditures than did females. Expenditures on inpatients with schizophrenia as compared to expenditures on those with neurotic disorders were 120% higher among NHI beneficiaries but 83% higher among AID beneficiaries. Expenditures on inpatients of psychiatric hospitals were greater on average than expenditures on inpatients of general hospitals. Among AID beneficiaries, institutions owned by private groups treated inpatients with 32% higher costs than did government institutions. Among NHI beneficiaries, inpatients medical expenditures were positively associated with the proportion of patients diagnosed into dementia or schizophrenia categories. However, for AID beneficiaries, inpatient medical expenditures were positively associated with the proportion of all patients with a psychiatric diagnosis that were AID beneficiaries in a medical institution.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study provides evidence that patient and institutional factors are associated with psychiatric inpatient medical expenditures, and that they may have different effects for beneficiaries of different public health insurance programmes. Policy efforts to reduce psychiatric inpatient medical expenditures should be made differently across the different types of public health insurance programmes.</p

Rejection sensitivity as a vulnerability marker for depressive symptom deterioration in men

publishedVersio