Geographical discrepancy in oral food challenge utilization based on Canadian billing data.

Ala El Baba, Samira Jeimy, Lianne Soller, Harold Kim, Philippe Begin, Edmond S Chan
{"title":"Geographical discrepancy in oral food challenge utilization based on Canadian billing data.","authors":"Ala El Baba,&nbsp;Samira Jeimy,&nbsp;Lianne Soller,&nbsp;Harold Kim,&nbsp;Philippe Begin,&nbsp;Edmond S Chan","doi":"10.1186/s13223-022-00751-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Oral food challenges (OFC) confer the highest sensitivity and specificity in diagnosis; however, uptake has been variable across clinical settings. Numerous barriers were identified in literature from inadequate training to resource access. OFC utilization patterns using billing data have not been previously studied.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study is to explore the geographic differences in utilization of OFCs across Ontario and Québec using anonymized billing data from 2013 to 2017.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Anonymized OFC billing data were obtained between 2013 and 2017 from Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) and Régie de l'Assurance Maladie du Québec (RAMQ). The number of OFCs was extracted by location, billings, and physician demographics for clinic and hospital-based challenges.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over the period studied, the number of OFCs increased by 92% and 85% in Ontario clinics and Québec hospitals, respectively. For Ontario hospitals, the number of OFCs increased by 194%. While Québec performed exclusively hospital-based OFCs, after controlling for the population, the number of OFCs per 100,000 residents annually were similar to Ontario at 50 and 49 OFCs, respectively. The number of OFCs varied across the regions studied with an annual rate reaching up to 156 OFCs per 100,000 residents in urban regions and as low as 0.1 in regions furthest from city centers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>OFC utilization has steadily increased over the last decade. There has been marked geographical discrepancies in OFC utilization which could be driven by the location of allergists and heterogeneity in their practices. More research is needed to identify barriers and propose solutions to them.</p>","PeriodicalId":7702,"journal":{"name":"Allergy, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology : Official Journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology","volume":"19 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9843933/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Allergy, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology : Official Journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13223-022-00751-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Oral food challenges (OFC) confer the highest sensitivity and specificity in diagnosis; however, uptake has been variable across clinical settings. Numerous barriers were identified in literature from inadequate training to resource access. OFC utilization patterns using billing data have not been previously studied.

Objective: The objective of this study is to explore the geographic differences in utilization of OFCs across Ontario and Québec using anonymized billing data from 2013 to 2017.

Methods: Anonymized OFC billing data were obtained between 2013 and 2017 from Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) and Régie de l'Assurance Maladie du Québec (RAMQ). The number of OFCs was extracted by location, billings, and physician demographics for clinic and hospital-based challenges.

Results: Over the period studied, the number of OFCs increased by 92% and 85% in Ontario clinics and Québec hospitals, respectively. For Ontario hospitals, the number of OFCs increased by 194%. While Québec performed exclusively hospital-based OFCs, after controlling for the population, the number of OFCs per 100,000 residents annually were similar to Ontario at 50 and 49 OFCs, respectively. The number of OFCs varied across the regions studied with an annual rate reaching up to 156 OFCs per 100,000 residents in urban regions and as low as 0.1 in regions furthest from city centers.

Conclusion: OFC utilization has steadily increased over the last decade. There has been marked geographical discrepancies in OFC utilization which could be driven by the location of allergists and heterogeneity in their practices. More research is needed to identify barriers and propose solutions to them.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于加拿大账单数据的口腔食品挑战利用的地理差异。
背景:口腔食物挑战(OFC)在诊断中具有最高的敏感性和特异性;然而,在不同的临床环境中,摄取情况是不同的。文献中确定了从培训不足到资源获取的许多障碍。以前没有研究过使用计费数据的OFC使用模式。目的:本研究的目的是利用2013年至2017年的匿名账单数据,探讨安大略省和魁省OFCs使用情况的地理差异。方法:从安大略健康保险计划(OHIP)和quimac (RAMQ)中获取2013年至2017年匿名OFC账单数据。OFCs的数量是根据诊所和医院的位置、账单和医生人口统计数据提取的。结果:在研究期间,安大略省诊所和魁省医院的OFCs数量分别增加了92%和85%。对于安大略省的医院,ofc的数量增加了194%。在控制人口因素后,虽然quamesbec只进行以医院为基础的离岸金融中心,但每年每10万居民的离岸金融中心数量与安大略省相似,分别为50和49个。离岸金融中心的数量在研究的地区各不相同,城市地区的年比率高达每10万居民156个离岸金融中心,而离市中心最远的地区则低至每10万居民0.1个。结论:OFC的使用在过去十年中稳步增长。OFC的使用存在明显的地理差异,这可能是由过敏症专家的位置和其实践的异质性所驱动的。需要更多的研究来确定障碍并提出解决办法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Immunoglobulin utilization in Canada: a comparative analysis of provincial guidelines and a scoping review of the literature. Mental health problems associated with idiopathic anaphylaxis. Validity of fractional exhaled nitric oxide and small airway lung function measured by IOS in the diagnosis of cough variant asthma in preschool children with chronic cough. Treatment of idiopathic anaphylaxis with dupilumab: a case report. PRevalence of the Eosinophilic Phenotype Among SeveRE asthma patients in Lebanon: results of the PREPARE study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1