ABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Humans , Administrative Personnel , Hospitals, District , Hospitals, Public , Judgment , Korea , Medical Records , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
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.
ABSTRACT
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.