Access to medical care in a medically indigent population.

OBJECTIVE: To study nature and extent of barriers to access to medical care in a single county and to define the nature of the illnesses in a population affected by those barriers. DESIGN: Descriptive study of consecutive patients not able to obtain medical care because of financial or other barriers. Financial barriers and medical diagnoses were categorized and the severity of illness and impact of unavailability of medical services were judged by a panel of internists using consensus analysis. The likelihood of obtaining care after refusal of assistance was also evaluated. SETTING: A social services eligibility office on the grounds of an urban, university teaching hospital that serves a largely medically indigent population. PATIENTS: 200 patients who presented to eligibility workers seeking financial assistance. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Sixty percent could not obtain care because they were illegal aliens, 40% could not obtain care because they did not meet the strict criteria of the assistance programs. Sixty percent of patients had a moderate to high likelihood of long-term disability from their illnesses; 38% of a subgroup were not able to find care four weeks after entering the study, and these patients appeared to have more severe disease than those who were able to find care. CONCLUSIONS: Many medically indigent persons with significant illnesses face serious financial barriers to access to medical care.

Financial barriers to medical care: a prospective study in a university-affiliated community clinic.

Access to medical care in the United States is deteriorating, particularly for the poor. The authors evaluated patients who could not afford medical care recommended by physicians in a university-affiliated clinic that serves a predominantly indigent population. The authors determined the patients' demographic characteristics, their medical problems, and the types of care for which financial barriers existed. In addition, the authors compared the patients' demographic characteristics and medical illnesses with those of a control group of patients from the clinic who did not experience financial barriers to medical care. Of the 1,950 patients evaluated, 94 (4.8%) were unable to afford care recommended by their physicians. Sixty-seven percent were US citizens, 73% were unemployed, 63% had monthly family incomes of less than $500, and only 33% had health insurance. The patients had a variety of medical problems, ranging from hearing loss, for which they could not obtain hearing aids, to breast masses, for which they could not obtain mammographies or biopsies. When compared to patients who did not experience financial barriers to recommended care, the study patients tended to be poorer, more likely to be undocumented, more likely to be uninsured, and less likely to have acute, self-limited illnesses. Our findings support the argument that the nation's current piecemeal approach to providing indigent health care may lead to serious financial barriers to access in some localities.

Routine admission laboratory testing for general medical patients.

We evaluated the usefulness of commonly ordered routine admission laboratory tests in 301 patients admitted consecutively to the internal medicine wards of a university teaching hospital. Using a consensus analysis approach, three Department of Medicine faculty members reviewed the charts of admitted patients to determine the impact of the test results on patient care. The evaluated tests were the urinalysis, hematocrit, white blood cell count, platelet count, six-factor automated multiple analysis (serum sodium, potassium, chloride, bicarbonate, glucose, and blood urea nitrogen), prothrombin time, partial thromboplastin time, chest x-ray, and electrocardiogram. Forty-five percent of the 3,684 tests were ordered for patients without recognizable medical indications. Twelve percent of these routine tests were abnormal, 5% led to additional laboratory testing, but only 0.5% led to change in the treatment of patients. We conclude that the impact of routine admission laboratory testing on patient care is very small and that there is little justification for ordering tests solely because of hospital admission.

Usefulness of routine admission complete blood cell counts on a general medical service.

The usefulness of three components of the routine admission complete blood cell count (leukocyte count, hematocrit, and platelet count) was evaluated in 301 patients consecutively admitted to the internal medicine wards of a university teaching hospital. Using a consensus analysis approach, three faculty members reviewed the patients' charts to determine which tests were performed routinely, which tests were abnormal, and which routine tests led to diagnostic or therapeutic changes. Overall, 55.3% of the tests were considered routine admission tests. Abnormalities were detected in 13.6% of the routine leukocyte counts, in 8.2% of the routine hematocrit levels, and in 12.4% of the routine platelet counts. However, treatment was changed for only three patients, all of whom had low hematocrits; this amounted to 0.6% of all tests. Furthermore, only one of the three patients received appropriate treatment that might have been withheld if a routine hematocrit determination had not been ordered. The authors conclude that the impact of routine admission complete blood cell counts on patient management is small and that the practice of ordering this test for all hospitalized patients could be eliminated with little adverse effect on patient care.

Electrolyte, blood urea nitrogen and glucose level screening in medical admissions. Impact on patient management.

Investigators have failed to show the usefulness of screening electrolyte-sodium, potassium, chloride and bicarbonate-blood urea nitrogen and glucose levels. In spite of this, we observed that that practice continues to be widely used at our university medical center. Using a form of consensus analysis, we examined the records of 301 admissions to the medicine service to determine whether laboratory tests were done for diagnostic or screening purposes and whether screening test results led to changes in patient management. Of the 1,764 tests done, 716 (40.6%) were for screening purposes. Only 2 (0.3%) screening test abnormalities led to any therapeutic changes, and many false-positive tests led to unnecessary diagnostic retesting.

Efficacy of the routine admission urinalysis.

The clinical efficacy of routine admission urinalyses was evaluated in 301 patients admitted to the internal medicine wards of a university teaching hospital. Using a consensus analysis approach, three Department of Medicine faculty members reviewed the patients' charts to determine which tests were performed routinely and which test results led to diagnostic or therapeutic management changes. Of the 243 urinalyses performed, 123 (51 percent) were ordered routinely for patients without recognizable medical indications. Results of the routine urinalyses were abnormal in 42 (34 percent) of the patients and led to additional laboratory testing in 20 (16 percent) of the cases. However, the test results led to therapeutic changes in only three (2.4 percent) of the patients, and in two of these patients, the treatment instituted probably was unnecessary. It is concluded that the impact of routine admission urinalysis on patient care is very small and that there is little justification for ordering this test for all patients admitted to the hospital.