Health Policy and Management (보건행정학회지)

Korean Academy of Health Policy and Management (한국보건행정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Differences between Diabetic Patients' Tertiary Hospital and Non-tertiary Hospital Utilization According to Comorbidity Score

당뇨병 환자의 동반상병 점수에 따른 상급종합병원 이용 차이

  • 조수진 (건강보험심사평가원 심사평가연구소) ;
  • 정설희 (건강보험심사평가원 심사평가연구소) ;
  • 오주연 (건강보험심사평가원 심사평가연구소)
  • Received : 2011.06.15
  • Accepted : 2011.12.20
  • Published : 2011.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Some patients tend to visit tertiary hospitals instead of non-tertiary hospitals for minor illnesses, which is a chronic problem within the Korean health care delivery system. In order to reduce the number of patients with minor severity diseases unnecessarily utilizing the tertiary medical services in Korea, the Ministry of Health and Welfare raised the outpatient co-insurance rate for the tertiary hospitals in July, 2009. Another increase in the prescription drug co-insurance rate by the general and tertiary hospitals is scheduled to take place in the second half of 2011. An increase in copayments may discourage the utilization rate of medical services among the underprivileged or patients who require complicated procedures. This study aims to analyze the diabetic patients' utilization rates of tertiary hospitals according to the Comorbidity score. Diabetic patients' data was gathered from the Health Insurance Claims Records in the Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service between 2007-2009. Comorbidity scores are measured by the Charlson Comorbidity Index and the Elixhauser Index. Chi-square and logistic regressions were performed to compare the utilization rates of both insulin-dependents (n=94,026) and non-insulin-dependents (n=1,424,736) in tertiary hospitals. The higher Comorbidity outcomes in the insulin-dependent diabetic patients who didn't visit tertiary hospitals compared to those who did, was expected. However, after adjusting the gender, age, location, first visits and complications, the groups that scored >=1 on the comorbidity scale utilized the tertiary hospitals more than the O score group. Non-insulin-diabetic patients with higher Comorbidity scores visited tertiary hospitals more than patients who received lower grades. This study found that patients suffering from severe diabetes tend to frequently visit the tertiary hospitals in Korea. This result implied that it is important for Korea to improve the quality of its primary health care as well as to consider a co-insurance rate increase.

Keywords

References

  1. 건강보험심사평가원. 진료비통계지표 2010년. 서울: 건강보험심사평가원; 2011.
  2. 국민건강보험 요양급여의 기준에 관한 규칙. (일부개정 2010.4.30, 보건복지부령 제9호)
  3. 국민건강보험법 시행령. (일부개정 2011.6.30, 대통령령 제22997호)
  4. 김경훈, 안이수. 건강보험 청구자료에서 동반질환 보정방법과 관찰기간 비교 연구: 경피적 관상동맥 중재술을 받은 환자를 대상으로. 예방의학회지 2009; 42(4): 267-273.
  5. 김경훈. Charlson 동반질환의 ICD-10 알고리즘 예측력 비교연구. 예방의학회지 2010; 43(1): 42-49.
  6. 김명화, 권순만. 노인의 외래본인부담제도에 따른 의료이용의 변화. 예방의학회지 2010; 43(6): 496-504.
  7. 김정희, 정현진, 이호용. 건강보험 급여구조 개편방안 연구. 서울: 국민건강보험공단; 2008.
  8. 김재용, 김혜영, 김화영, 민경완, 박석원, 박이병 등. 우리나라 당뇨병환자의 외래이용 지속성이 건강결과와 의료비에 미치는 영향: 건강보험자료 분석결과. 당뇨병 2006; 30(5): 377-387. https://doi.org/10.4093/jkda.2006.30.5.377
  9. 김창엽, 이진석, 강길원, 김용익. 의료보험 환자가 병원진료시 부담하는 본인부담 크기. 보건행정학회지 1999; 9(4): 1-14.
  10. 박기동. 한국의 일차 진료 의사. 가정의학회지 2002; 23(6): 677-687.
  11. 박기동. 일차 의료 강화를 위한 의료체계 및 건강보험체계 개선 방향: 한국, 일본, 대만의 비교 분석. 가정의학회지 2003; 24(4): 328-345.
  12. 박지연, 채희율. 건강보험 본인부담률의 인상이 건강보험재정에 미치는 영향. 보험학회지 2003; 64(4): 109-136.
  13. 박혜경. 상급종합병원 외래 본인부담률 인상이 외래의료이용에 영향을 미치는 영향: 감기와 고혈압을 중심으로[석사학위논문]. 서울: 연세대학교 보건대학원; 2011.
  14. 박혜정. 6세 미만 아동의 입원 본인부담금 면제 후 10% 부과가 의료이용량에 미치는 영향: 급성 호흡기 감염증 및 암 상병을 대상으로[석사학위논문]. 서울: 연세대학교 보건대학원; 2010.
  15. 보건복지부. 7월부터 고소득자 보험료 상한액 인상된다 - 국민건강보험법 시행령 개정안 국무회의 통과. 보도자료 2011년 6월 28일자
  16. 이용재. 본인부담경감이 암 환자의 건강보험이용에 미친 영향. 재정정책논집 2009; 11(1): 3-25.
  17. 임지혜, 김건엽. 급성뇌졸중 환자의 의료이용 및 건강결과 추적연구. 서울: 건강보험심사평가원; 2008.
  18. 전경수, 윤석준, 안형식, 신현웅, 윤영혜, 황세민 등. 6세 미만 입원 법정본인부담금 면제정책이 의료이용에 미치는 영향. 예방의학회지 2008;41(5):295-299.
  19. 정설희. 우리나라 보건의료이용실태 및 문제점. 의료기관기능재정립 기자연찬회 자료집. 서울:보건복지부;2011
  20. 조재국. 의료전달체계의 발전방향과 정책과제. 보건복지포럼 2010; 169: 6-15.
  21. 한달선. 의료전달체계에 관한 정책의제의 재조명. 보건행정학회지 2010; 20(4): 1-18 https://doi.org/10.4332/kjhpa.2010.20.4.001
  22. 홍재석, 강희정. 우리나라 성인 2형 당뇨환자에게서의 외래 투약 순응도와 관련요인 분석. 보건행정학회지 2010; 20(2): 128-143. https://doi.org/10.4332/kjhpa.2010.20.2.128
  23. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Refinement of the HCUP quality indicators. MD;AHRQ Publication: 2001.
  24. Caminal J, Starfield B, Sanchez E, Casanova C, Morales M. The role of primary care in preventing ambulatory care sensitive conditions. Eur J Public Health 2004; 14(3): 246-51. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/14.3.246
  25. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, Mackenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies development and validation. J Chron Dis 1987; 40(5): 373-383 https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8
  26. Dominick KL, Dudley TK. Coffman CJ, Bosworth HB. Comparison of three comorbidity measures for predicting health service use in patients with osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2005: 53(5); 666-72. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.21440
  27. Farley JF, Harley CR, Devine, JW. A comparison of comorbidity measurements to predict healthcare expenditures. Am J Manag Care 2006; 12(2): 110-9.
  28. Gibson TB, Ozminkowski RJ, Goetzel RZ. The effects of prescription drug cost sharing: a review of the evidence. Am J Manag Care 2005; 11(11): 730-740.
  29. Institute of Medicine. Access to health care in America. Washington;IOM, 1993.
  30. Kim J, Ko S, Yang B. The effects of patient cost sharing on ambulatory utilization in South Korea. Health Policy 2005; 72: 293-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2004.09.002
  31. Krop JS, Powe NR, Weller WE, Shaffer TJ, Saudek CD, Anderson GF. Patterns of expenditures and use of services among older adults with diabetes. Implications for the transition to capitated managed care. Diabetes Care 1998; 21(5): 747-52. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.21.5.747
  32. Monami ML, Lambertucci L, Lamanna C, Lotti E, Marsili A, Masotti G, et al. Are comorbidity indices useful in predicting all-cause mortality in Type 2 diabetic patients? Comparison between Charlson index and disease count. Aging Clin Exp Res 2007; 19(6): 492-496. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03324736
  33. Quan H, Sundararajan V, Halfon P, Fong A, Burnand B, Luthi, JC. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Med Care 2005: 43(11); 1130-1139. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000182534.19832.83
  34. Public Health Division Victorian Government Department of Human Service. The Victorian ambulatory care sensitive conditions study: Preliminary analyses. state of Victoria; Public Health Division Victorian Government Department of Human Service, 2001.
  35. Sundararajan V, Quan H, Halfon P, Fushimi K, Luthi JC, Burnand B. Cross-national comparative performance of three versions of the ICD-10 Charlson index. Med Care 2007: 45(12); 1210-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181484347

Cited by

  1. Factors associated with diabetes outpatient use of tertiary or general hospitals as their usual source of care in Korea vol.55, pp.12, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5124/jkma.2012.55.12.1215
  2. Comorbidity Adjustment in Health Insurance Claim Database vol.26, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4332/KJHPA.2016.26.1.71
  3. Evidence of a Broken Healthcare Delivery System in Korea: Unnecessary Hospital Outpatient Utilization among Patients with a Single Chronic Disease Without Complications vol.29, pp.12, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2014.29.12.1590