Reliability and Validity of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol for Public Hospitals in Korea / 예방의학회지

OBJECTIVES@#This study was conducted to assess the applicability of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol (AEP) for public hospitals in Korea.@*METHODS@#In May 2016, 1500 admission claims were collected from Korean public district hospitals using stratified random sampling. Of these claims, 560 admissions to 37 hospitals were retrieved for analysis. Medical records administrators determined the appropriateness of admission using the criteria detailed in the AEP, and a physician separately assessed the appropriateness of admission based on her clinical judgment. To examine the applicability of the AEP, the concordance of the decisions made between a pair of AEP reviewers and between an AEP reviewer and a physician reviewer was compared.@*RESULTS@#The results showed an almost perfect inter-rater agreement between the AEP reviewers and a moderate agreement between the AEP reviewers and the physician. The sensitivity and specificity of the AEP were calculated as 0.86 and 0.56, respectively.@*CONCLUSIONS@#Our findings suggest that the AEP could potentially be applied to Korean public hospitals as a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the appropriateness of admissions.

Impact of Continuous Care on Health Outcomes and Cost for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Analysis Using National Health Insurance Cohort Database

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to determine the impact of continuous care on health outcomes and cost of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Korea.METHODS: A nationwide retrospective, observational case-control study was conducted. Continuity of treatment was measured using Continuity of Care (COC) score. Information of all patients newly diagnosed with T2DM in 2004 was retrieved from the National Health Insurance database for the period of 2002 to 2013. The study examined 2,373 patients after applying exclusion criteria, such as for patients who died from conditions not related to T2DM. Statistical analyses were performed using frequency distribution, simple analysis (t-test and chi-squared test), and multi-method analysis (simple linear regression, logistic regression, and survival analysis).RESULTS: The overall COC score was 0.8±0.24. The average incidence of diabetic complications was 0.39 per patient with a higher COC score, whereas it was 0.49 per patient with a lower COC score. In both survival and logistic analyses, patients who had high COC score were significantly less likely to have diabetic complications (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.88). The average medical cost was approximately 3,496 United States dollar (USD) per patient for patients with a higher COC score, whereas it was 3,973 USD per patient for patients with a lower COC score during the 2006 to 2013 period, with a difference of around 477 USD, which is statistically significant after adjusting for other factors (β=−0.152).CONCLUSION: Continuity of care for diabetes significantly reduced health complications and medical costs from patients with T2DM.

Reliability and Validity of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol for Public Hospitals in Korea / 예방의학회지

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to assess the applicability of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol (AEP) for public hospitals in Korea. METHODS: In May 2016, 1500 admission claims were collected from Korean public district hospitals using stratified random sampling. Of these claims, 560 admissions to 37 hospitals were retrieved for analysis. Medical records administrators determined the appropriateness of admission using the criteria detailed in the AEP, and a physician separately assessed the appropriateness of admission based on her clinical judgment. To examine the applicability of the AEP, the concordance of the decisions made between a pair of AEP reviewers and between an AEP reviewer and a physician reviewer was compared. RESULTS: The results showed an almost perfect inter-rater agreement between the AEP reviewers and a moderate agreement between the AEP reviewers and the physician. The sensitivity and specificity of the AEP were calculated as 0.86 and 0.56, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the AEP could potentially be applied to Korean public hospitals as a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the appropriateness of admissions.

Utilization of Hospitals Located Outside Patients' Residential Areas among Those with Acute Cerebral Infarction / 보건행정학회지

BACKGROUND: The current study evaluated the hospital utilization and characteristics of patients who received health care services for acute cerebral infarction outside their own residential area. METHODS: Using the 2014 national patient survey data, information on 2,982 patients diagnosed with acute cerebral infarction through emergency department were retrieved for the analyses. Multiple logistic regression was performed to investigate the characteristics associated with using hospitals outside residential area among patients diagnosed with acute cerebral infarction. RESULTS: Fifteen point nine percent of patients admitted for acute cerebral infarction utilized hospitals outside their residential area. Patients residing in a province were 7.7 times more likely to utilize hospitals located outside their residential areas compared to those living in Seoul metropolitan city. Patients living in Gangwon and Jeolla were 0.26 times and 0.48 times more likely to go to hospitals in different geographical areas. Also, patients within the age group of 80 years and over were 0.65 times less likely to be admitted to hospitals outside their residential area compared to those in their 40s–50s. CONCLUSION: The use of hospitals outside patient's residential area is shown to be substantial, given that the acute cerebral infarction requires immediate recognition and treatment. The findings on the geographical differences in the hospital utilization suggest further investigation.

Comparative study on medical fees: caesarean section, cataract, and appendectomy surgeries among OECD countries

The question has been raised whether the medical fee schedule is very low in Korea. However, studies that empirically address this matter on a national scale are rare. This study attempted to determine the level of Korea's medical fees for caesarean section (C-section), cataract, and appendectomy surgeries by comparing and analyzing them with other Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries' medical cost data obtained from other studies. There are two ways to compare the level of medical fees: one is a direct comparison, which obtains each country's medical fee schedule and compares them with each other. Another is indirect comparison, a method which compares data such as physician income. For direct comparison, fees were calculated using data provided by the OECD and Health Insurance Review and Assessment. For indirect comparison by physician income, data obtained from Korea Employment Information Services were used to represent Korean physician income. When compared with other OECD countries, the results suggest that, overall, the Korean fee schedule could be low, based on the fees for C-section, cataract, and appendectomy surgeries. The study results also confirm that Korean physicians' average earnings ranked relatively low among OECD countries. These results are meaningful in that they empirically support the contention that Korean medical fees could be low. In addition, under what is known as national health insurance, in which the medical fee schedule is determined by a single payer, an empirical analysis on medical fee levels, as in this study, has substantial political implications because it may be utilized for medical fee schedule negotiation in the near future. An attempt to directly research fees and the range of services of OECD countries is still needed in order to provide more established data.

Patient satisfaction versus political support: Korea's drug-dispensing law revisited

In 2000, Korea enacted a controversial law prohibiting doctors from dispensing drugs. Doctors have opposed this law, and in theory, the law inconveniences patients. We assessed the relationship between patients' satisfaction with drug dispensation and their overall support for the law by using a logit model to determine the effects of the law on patients and which patients are likely to support the law. We employed random digit dialing and obtained a sample of 540 adults who had used drugs since the law was enacted. We collected the data through phone interviews. The results indicate that the respondents were generally dissatisfied with the law regardless of sociodemographic or regional characteristics. However, with other factors controlled for, those respondents from the same region as the ruling political party were significantly more likely to support the law. This implies that regional politics influenced the policymaking process through which the law was crafted and enacted.