Dataset Information

Sex Differences in Factors Affecting Hospital Outpatient Department Visits: Korea Health Panel Survey Data from 2009 to 2016.

ABSTRACT: This study intends to inspect the sex differences in proportion of hospital outpatient department (OPD) visits in overall outpatient (OP) visits using national panel data and to explore factors that influence the proportions by sex. This study analyzed data of the 2009-2016 Korea Health Panel Survey. Fractional logit regression was applied to analyze factors that affect proportion of hospital visits among outpatient visits. Analysis of related factors was carried out first for all analysis subjects and then by sex. The study data were provided by 7470 women (52.2%) and 6846 men (47.8%). The overall average number of OP visits was 13.0, and women showed a much higher frequency of visits (15.8) than men (9.9). The average proportion of hospital OPD visits among overall OP visits was 21.9%, and men showed a higher rate (25.1%) than women (19.5%). The analysis model including sociodemographic factors, economic factors, and health-related factors confirmed that men showed a higher rate of hospital usage than women. Type of medical security, household income, participation in economic activities, disability, and serious illnesses were significant variables for both sexes. Age, education level, marital status, and subscription to voluntary private health insurance were significant only for women, whereas region of residence was significant only for men. This study confirmed that there is a sex difference in proportion of hospital OPD visits and in the factors that affect the proportion of hospital OPD visits. Universal health coverage is provided through social health insurance, but there is a sex difference in hospital OPD visits, and factors related to socioeconomic status have a significant effect, especially on women's selection of health care institutions. More attention should be given to sex differences in factors affecting health care utilization.

SUBMITTER: You CH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6950096 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Sex Differences in Factors Affecting Hospital Outpatient Department Visits: Korea Health Panel Survey Data from 2009 to 2016.

You Chang Hoon CH Kwon Young Dae YD Kang Sungwook S

International journal of environmental research and public health 20191210 24

This study intends to inspect the sex differences in proportion of hospital outpatient department (OPD) visits in overall outpatient (OP) visits using national panel data and to explore factors that influence the proportions by sex. This study analyzed data of the 2009-2016 Korea Health Panel Survey. Fractional logit regression was applied to analyze factors that affect proportion of hospital visits among outpatient visits. Analysis of related factors was carried out first for all analysis subje ...[more]

PMID: 31835589

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has critically affected healthcare delivery in the United States. Little is known on its impact on the utilization of emergency department (ED) services, particularly for conditions that might be medically urgent. The objective of this study was to explore trends in the number of outpatient (treat and release) ED visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional, retrospective study of outpatient emergency department visits from January 1, 2019 to August 31, 2020 using data from a large, urban, academic hospital system in Utah. Using weekly counts and trend analyses, we explored changes in overall ED visits, by patients' area of residence, by medical urgency, and by specific medical conditions.ResultsWhile outpatient ED visits were higher (+6.0%) in the first trimester of 2020 relative to the same period in 2019, the overall volume between January and August of 2020 was lower (-8.1%) than in 2019. The largest decrease occurred in April 2020 (-30.4%), followed by the May to August period (-12.8%). The largest declines were observed for visits by out-of-state residents, visits classified as non-emergent, primary care treatable or preventable, and for patients diagnosed with hypertension, diabetes, headaches and migraines, mood and personality disorders, fluid and electrolyte disorders, and abdominal pain. Outpatient ED visits for emergent conditions, such as palpitations and tachycardia, open wounds, syncope and collapse remained relatively unchanged, while lower respiratory disease-related visits were 67.5% higher in 2020 relative to 2019, particularly from March to April 2020. However, almost all types of outpatient ED visits bounced back after May 2020.ConclusionsOverall outpatient ED visits declined from mid-March to August 2020, particularly for non-medically urgent conditions which can be treated in other more appropriate care settings. Our findings also have implications for insurers, policymakers, and other stakeholders seeking to assist patients in choosing more appropriate setting for their care during and after the pandemic.

Project description:Importance:The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 brought attention to adverse drug events in national patient safety efforts. Updated, detailed, nationally representative data describing adverse drug events can help focus these efforts. Objective:To describe the characteristics of emergency department (ED) visits for adverse drug events in the United States in 2013-2014 and describe changes in ED visits for adverse drug events since 2005-2006. Design, Setting, and Participants:Active, nationally representative, public health surveillance in 58 EDs located in the United States and participating in the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System-Cooperative Adverse Drug Event Surveillance project. Exposures:Drugs implicated in ED visits. Main Outcomes and Measures:National weighted estimates of ED visits and subsequent hospitalizations for adverse drug events. Results:Based on data from 42?585 cases, an estimated 4.0 (95% CI, 3.1-5.0) ED visits for adverse drug events occurred per 1000 individuals annually in 2013 and 2014 and 27.3% (95% CI, 22.2%-32.4%) of ED visits for adverse drug events resulted in hospitalization. An estimated 34.5% (95% CI, 30.3%-38.8%) of ED visits for adverse drug events occurred among adults aged 65 years or older in 2013-2014 compared with an estimated 25.6% (95% CI, 21.1%-30.0%) in 2005-2006; older adults experienced the highest hospitalization rates (43.6%; 95% CI, 36.6%-50.5%). Anticoagulants, antibiotics, and diabetes agents were implicated in an estimated 46.9% (95% CI, 44.2%-49.7%) of ED visits for adverse drug events, which included clinically significant adverse events, such as hemorrhage (anticoagulants), moderate to severe allergic reactions (antibiotics), and hypoglycemia with moderate to severe neurological effects (diabetes agents). Since 2005-2006, the proportions of ED visits for adverse drug events from anticoagulants and diabetes agents have increased, whereas the proportion from antibiotics has decreased. Among children aged 5 years or younger, antibiotics were the most common drug class implicated (56.4%; 95% CI, 51.8%-61.0%). Among children and adolescents aged 6 to 19 years, antibiotics also were the most common drug class implicated (31.8%; 95% CI, 28.7%-34.9%) in ED visits for adverse drug events, followed by antipsychotics (4.5%; 95% CI, 3.3%-5.6%). Among older adults (aged ?65 years), 3 drug classes (anticoagulants, diabetes agents, and opioid analgesics) were implicated in an estimated 59.9% (95% CI, 56.8%-62.9%) of ED visits for adverse drug events; 4 anticoagulants (warfarin, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and enoxaparin) and 5 diabetes agents (insulin and 4 oral agents) were among the 15 most common drugs implicated. Medications to always avoid in older adults according to Beers criteria were implicated in 1.8% (95% CI, 1.5%-2.1%) of ED visits for adverse drug events. Conclusions and Relevance:The prevalence of emergency department visits for adverse drug events in the United States was estimated to be 4 per 1000 individuals in 2013 and 2014. The most common drug classes implicated were anticoagulants, antibiotics, diabetes agents, and opioid analgesics.

Project description:BackgroundEmergency department (ED) visits show a high volatility over time. Therefore, EDs are likely to be crowded at peak-volume moments. ED crowding is a widely reported problem with negative consequences for patients as well as staff. Previous studies on the predictive value of weather variables on ED visits show conflicting results. Also, no such studies were performed in the Netherlands. Therefore, we evaluated prediction models for the number of ED visits in our large the Netherlands teaching hospital based on calendar and weather variables as potential predictors.MethodsData on all ED visits from June 2016 until December 31, 2019, were extracted. The 2016-2018 data were used as training set, the 2019 data as test set. Weather data were extracted from three publicly available datasets from the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute. Weather observations in proximity of the hospital were used to predict the weather in the hospital's catchment area by applying the inverse distance weighting interpolation method. The predictability of daily ED visits was examined by creating linear prediction models using stepwise selection; the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) was used as measurement of fit.ResultsThe number of daily ED visits shows a positive time trend and a large impact of calendar events (higher on Mondays and Fridays, lower on Saturdays and Sundays, higher at special times such as carnival, lower in holidays falling on Monday through Saturday, and summer vacation). The weather itself was a better predictor than weather volatility, but only showed a small effect; the calendar-only prediction model had very similar coefficients to the calendar+weather model for the days of the week, time trend, and special time periods (both MAPE's were 8.7%).ConclusionsBecause of this similar performance, and the inaccuracy caused by weather forecasts, we decided the calendar-only model would be most useful in our hospital; it can probably be transferred for use in EDs of the same size and in a similar region. However, the variability in ED visits is considerable. Therefore, one should always anticipate potential unforeseen spikes and dips in ED visits that are not shown by the model.

Project description:The US federal government is spending billions of dollars in physician incentives to encourage the meaningful use of electronic health records (EHRs). Although the use of EHRs has potential to improve patient health outcomes, the existing evidence has been limited and inconsistent.To examine the association between implementing a commercially available outpatient EHR and emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, and office visits for patients with diabetes mellitus.Staggered EHR implementation across outpatient clinics in an integrated delivery system (Kaiser Permanente Northern California) between 2005 and 2008 created an opportunity for studying changes associated with EHR use. Among a population-based sample of 169,711 patients with diabetes between 2004 and 2009, we analyzed 4,997,585 person-months before EHR implementation and 4,648,572 person-months after an EHR was being used by patients' physicians.We examined the association between EHR use and unfavorable clinical events (ED visits and hospitalizations) and office visit use among patients with diabetes, using multivariable regression with patient-level fixed-effect analyses and adjustment for trends over time.In multivariable analyses, use of the EHR was associated with a statistically significantly decreased number of ED visits, 28.80 fewer visits per 1000 patients annually (95% CI, 20.28 to 37.32), from a mean of 519.12 visits per 1000 patients annually without using the EHR to 490.32 per 1000 patients when using the EHR. The EHR was also associated with 13.10 fewer hospitalizations per 1000 patients annually (95% CI, 7.37 to 18.82), from a mean of 251.60 hospitalizations per 1000 patients annually with no EHR to 238.50 per 1000 patients annually when using the EHR. There were similar statistically significant reductions in nonelective hospitalizations (10.92 fewer per 1000 patients annually) and hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (7.08 fewer per 1000 patients annually). There was no statistically significant association between EHR use and office visit rates.Among patients with diabetes, use of an outpatient EHR in an integrated delivery system was associated with modest reductions in ED visits and hospitalizations but not office visit rates. Further studies are needed to quantify the association of EHR use with changes in costs.

Project description:PurposeTo determine the frequency of emergency department (ED) visits for nonurgent and urgent ocular conditions and risk factors associated with ED use for nonurgent and urgent ocular problems.DesignRetrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis.ParticipantsAll enrollees aged 21 years or older in a United States managed care network during 2001-2014.MethodsWe identified all enrollees visiting an ED for ocular conditions identified by International Classification of Diseases, billing codes. Diagnosis is well-described as urgent, nonurgent, or other. We assessed the frequency of ED visits for urgent and nonurgent ocular conditions and how they changed over time. Next, we performed multivariable Cox regression modeling to determine factors associated with visiting an ED for urgent or nonurgent ocular conditions.Main outcome measuresHazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of visiting an ED for urgent or nonurgent ocular conditions.ResultsOf the 11 160 833 enrollees eligible for this study, 376 680 (3.4%) had 1 or more ED visit for an eye-related problem over a mean ± standard deviation of 5.4±3.3 years' follow-up. Among these enrolled, 86 473 (23.0%) had 1 or more ED visits with a nonurgent ocular condition and 25 289 (6.7%) had at least 1 ED visit with an urgent ocular condition. Use of the ED for nonurgent ocular problems was associated with younger age (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons), black race or Latino ethnicity (P < 0.0001 for both), male sex (P < 0.0001), lower income (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons), and those who frequently sought treatment at an ED for nonophthalmologic medical problems in a given year (P < 0.0001). Enrollees with established eye care professionals had a 10% reduced hazard of visiting the ED for nonurgent ocular conditions (adjusted HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.88-0.92; P < 0.0001).ConclusionsNearly one-quarter of enrollees who visited the ED for an ocular problem received a diagnosis of a nonurgent condition. Better educating and incentivizing patients to seek care for nonurgent ocular diseases in an office-based setting could yield considerable cost savings without adversely affecting health outcomes and could allow EDs to better serve patients with more severe conditions.

Dataset Information

Sex Differences in Factors Affecting Hospital Outpatient Department Visits: Korea Health Panel Survey Data from 2009 to 2016.

Publications

Sex Differences in Factors Affecting Hospital Outpatient Department Visits: Korea Health Panel Survey Data from 2009 to 2016.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets