Dataset Information

Admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions: a national observational study in the general and COPD population.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Hospital admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs) may be prevented by effective ambulatory management and treatment. ACSC admissions is used as indicator for primary care quality and accessibility. However, debate continues to which extent these admissions are truly preventable. The aim of this study was to provide more objective insight into the preventability of ACSC admissions.

Methods

Observational study using 2012-15 health insurer claim data of 13 182 602 Dutch insured inhabitants. Logistic multilevel regression analyses were conducted to investigate factors (ambulatory care and characteristics of inhabitants) possibly associated with ACSC admissions. Prior ambulatory care use was examined for patients with an ACSC contributing to the highest number of ACSC admissions: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Results

In 2014, 89.8 hospital admissions for ACSCs per 10 000 insured inhabitants were claimed. Percentage of inhabitants with ACSC admissions varied between general practices from 0.58-0.84%. ASCS admissions were hardly associated with ambulatory care. One month prior to admission, 97% of admitted COPD patients had at least one ambulatory care contact.

Conclusions

Variation in ACSC admissions between general practitioners was observed, indicating that certain hospital admissions may be prevented. However, we found no indication that ACSC admissions were preventable, as no link was found with the provision of ambulatory care and ACSC admissions. This may indicate that this indicator is country and health care system specific. Before including ACSC admission as quality indicator of primary care in the Netherlands, more insight into the causes of variation is required.

SUBMITTER: Paul MC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6426039 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Reducing unplanned hospital admissions is a key priority within the UK and other healthcare systems, however it remains uncertain how this can be achieved. This paper explores the relationship between unplanned ambulatory care sensitive condition (ACSC) admission rates and population, general practice and hospital characteristics. Additionally, we investigated if these factors had a differential impact across 28 conditions.We used the English Hospital Episode Statistics to calculate the number of unplanned ACSC hospital admissions for 28 conditions at 8,029 general practices during 2011/12. We used multilevel negative binomial regression to estimate the influence of population (deprivation), general practice (size, access, continuity, quality, A&E proximity) and hospital (bed availability, % day cases) characteristics on unplanned admission rates after adjusting for age, sex and chronic disease prevalence.Practices in deprived areas (at the 90th centile) had 16% (95% confidence interval: 14 to 18) higher admission rates than those in affluent areas (10th centile). Practices with poorer care continuity (9%; 8 to 11), located closest to A&E (8%; 6 to 9), situated in areas with high inpatient bed availability (14%; 10 to 18) or in areas with a larger proportion of day case admissions (17%; 12 to 21) had more admissions. There were smaller associations for primary care access, clinical quality, and practice size. The strength of associations varied by ACSC. For example, deprivation was most strongly associated with alcohol related diseases and COPD admission rates, while continuity of primary care was most strongly associated with admission rates for chronic diseases such as hypertension and iron-deficiency anaemia.The drivers of unplanned ACSC admission rates are complex and include population, practice and hospital factors. The importance of these varies markedly across conditions suggesting that multifaceted interventions are required to avoid hospital admissions and reduce costs. Several of the most important drivers of admissions are largely beyond the control of GPs. However, strategies to improve primary care continuity and avoid unnecessary short-stay admissions could lead to improved efficiency.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In 2016, the Irish acute hospital system operated well above internationally recommended occupancy targets. Investment in primary care can prevent hospital admissions of ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs). OBJECTIVE:To measure the impact of ACSCs on acute hospital capacity in the Irish public system and identify specific care areas for enhanced primary care provision. DESIGN:National Hospital In-patient Enquiry System data were used to calculate 2011-2016 standardised bed day rates for selected ACSC conditions. A prioritisation exercise was undertaken to identify the most significant contributors to bed days within our hospital system. Poisson regression was used to determine change over time using incidence rate ratios (IRR). RESULTS:In 2016 ACSCs accounted for almost 20% of acute public hospital beds (n=871 328 bed days) with adults over 65 representing 69.1% (n=602 392) of these. Vaccine preventable conditions represented 39.1% of ACSCs. Influenza and pneumonia were responsible for 99.8% of these, increasing by 8.2% (IRR: 1.02; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.03) from 2011 to 2016. Pyelonephritis represented 47.6% of acute ACSC bed days, increasing by 46.5% (IRR: 1.07; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.08) over the 5 years examined. CONCLUSIONS:Prioritisation for targeted investment in integrated care programmes is enabled through analysis of ACSC's in terms of acute hospital bed days. This analysis demonstrates that primary care investment in integrated care programmes for respiratory ACSC's from prevention to rehabilitation at scale could assist with bed capacity in acute hospitals in Ireland. In adults 65 years and over, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, the current analysis supports targeting community based pulmonary rehabilitation including pneumococcal and influenza vaccination programmes in order to reduce the burden of infection and hospitalisations. Further exploration of pyelonephritis is necessary in order to ascertain patient profile and appropriateness of admissions.

Project description:ObjectiveWe aimed to spatially describe hospital admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC) in England at small-area geographical level and assess whether recorded practice performance under one of the world's largest primary care pay-for-performance schemes led to reductions in these potentially avoidable hospitalisations for chronic conditions incentivised in the scheme.SettingWe obtained numbers of ACSC hospital admissions from the Hospital Episode Statistics database and information on recorded practice performance from the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) administrative dataset for 2015/2016. We fitted three sets of negative binomial models to examine ecological associations between incentivised ACSC admissions, general practice performance, deprivation, urbanity and other sociodemographic characteristics.ResultsHospital admissions for QOF incentivised ACSCs varied within and between regions, with clusters of high numbers of hospital admissions for incentivised ACSCs identified across England. Our models indicated a very small effect of the QOF on reducing admissions for incentivised ACSCs (0.993, 95% CI 0.990 to 0.995), however, other factors, such as deprivation (1.021, 95% CI 1.020 to 1.021) and urbanicity (0.875, 95% CI 0.862 to 0.887), were far more important in explaining variations in admissions for ACSCs. People in deprived areas had a higher risk of being admitted in hospital for an incentivised ACSC condition.ConclusionSpatial analysis based on routinely collected data can be used to identify areas with high rates of potentially avoidable hospital admissions, providing valuable information for targeting resources and evaluating public health interventions. Our findings suggest that the QOF had a very small effect on reducing avoidable hospitalisation for incentivised conditions. Material deprivation and urbanicity were the strongest predictors of the variation in ACSC rates for all QOF incentivised conditions across England.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions (ACSCs) are health conditions for which adequate management, treatment and interventions delivered in the ambulatory care setting could potentially prevent hospitalization. Which conditions are sensitive to ambulatory care varies according to the scope of health care services and the context in which the indicator is used. The need for a country-specific validated list for Portugal has already been identified, but currently no national list exists. The objective of this study was to develop a list of Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions for Portugal. METHODS:A modified web-based Delphi panel approach was designed, in order to determine which conditions can be considered ACSCs in the Portuguese adult population. The selected experts were general practitioners and internal medicine physicians identified by the most relevant Portuguese scientific societies. Experts were presented with previously identified ACSC and asked to select which could be accepted in the Portuguese context. They were also asked to identify other conditions they considered relevant. We estimated the number and cost of ACSC hospitalizations in 2017 in Portugal according to the identified conditions. RESULTS:After three rounds the experts agreed on 34 of the 45 initially proposed items. Fourteen new conditions were proposed and four achieved consensus, namely uterine cervical cancer, colorectal cancer, thromboembolic venous disease and voluntary termination of pregnancy. In 2017 133,427 hospitalizations were for ACSC (15.7% of all hospitalizations). This represents a rate of 1685 per 100,000 adults. The most frequent diagnosis were pneumonia, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease/chronic bronchitis, urinary tract infection, colorectal cancer, hypertensive disease atrial fibrillation and complications of diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSIONS:New ACSC were identified. It is expected that this list could be used henceforward by epidemiologic studies, health services research and for healthcare management purposes. ACSC lists should be updated frequently. Further research is necessary to increase the specificity of ACSC hospitalizations as an indicator of healthcare performance.