Impact of family doctor system on diabetic patients with distinct service utilisation patterns: a difference-in-differences analysis based on group-based trajectory modelling.

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BMJ Global Health Pub Date : 2024-09-23 DOI:10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014717
Xinyi Liu, Luying Zhang, Xianqun Fan, Wen Chen
{"title":"Impact of family doctor system on diabetic patients with distinct service utilisation patterns: a difference-in-differences analysis based on group-based trajectory modelling.","authors":"Xinyi Liu, Luying Zhang, Xianqun Fan, Wen Chen","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014717","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study examines the impact of China's family doctor system (FDS) on healthcare utilisation and costs among diabetic patients with distinct long-term service utilisation patterns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Conducted in City A, eastern China, this retrospective cohort study used data from the Health Information System and Health Insurance Claim Databases, covering diabetic patients from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2019.Patients were categorised into service utilisation trajectories based on quarterly outpatient visits to community health centres (CHCs) and secondary/tertiary hospitals from 2014 to 2017 using group-based trajectory models. Propensity score matching within each trajectory group matched FDS-enrolled patients (intervention) with non-enrolled patients (control). Difference-in-differences analysis compared outcomes between groups, with a SUEST test for cross-model comparison. Outcomes included outpatient visits indicator, costs indicator and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 17 232 diabetic patients (55.21% female, mean age 62.85 years), 13 094 were enrolled in the FDS (intervention group) and 4138 were not (control group). Patients were classified into four trajectory groups based on service utilisation from 2014 to 2017: (1) low overall outpatient utilisation, (2) high CHC visits, (3) high secondary/tertiary hospital visits and (4) high overall outpatient utilisation. After enrolled in FDS From 2018 to 2019, the group with high secondary/tertiary hospital visits saw a 6.265 increase in CHC visits (225.4% cost increase) and a 3.345 decrease in hospital visits (55.5% cost reduction). The high overall utilisation group experienced a 4.642 increase in CHC visits (109.5% cost increase) and a 1.493 decrease in hospital visits. OOP expenses were significantly reduced across all groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The FDS in China significantly increases primary care utilisation and cost, while reducing hospital visits and costs among diabetic patients, particularly among patients with historically high hospital usage. Policymakers should focus on enhancing the FDS to further encourage primary care usage and improve chronic disease management.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11418535/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014717","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study examines the impact of China's family doctor system (FDS) on healthcare utilisation and costs among diabetic patients with distinct long-term service utilisation patterns.

Methods: Conducted in City A, eastern China, this retrospective cohort study used data from the Health Information System and Health Insurance Claim Databases, covering diabetic patients from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2019.Patients were categorised into service utilisation trajectories based on quarterly outpatient visits to community health centres (CHCs) and secondary/tertiary hospitals from 2014 to 2017 using group-based trajectory models. Propensity score matching within each trajectory group matched FDS-enrolled patients (intervention) with non-enrolled patients (control). Difference-in-differences analysis compared outcomes between groups, with a SUEST test for cross-model comparison. Outcomes included outpatient visits indicator, costs indicator and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses.

Results: Among 17 232 diabetic patients (55.21% female, mean age 62.85 years), 13 094 were enrolled in the FDS (intervention group) and 4138 were not (control group). Patients were classified into four trajectory groups based on service utilisation from 2014 to 2017: (1) low overall outpatient utilisation, (2) high CHC visits, (3) high secondary/tertiary hospital visits and (4) high overall outpatient utilisation. After enrolled in FDS From 2018 to 2019, the group with high secondary/tertiary hospital visits saw a 6.265 increase in CHC visits (225.4% cost increase) and a 3.345 decrease in hospital visits (55.5% cost reduction). The high overall utilisation group experienced a 4.642 increase in CHC visits (109.5% cost increase) and a 1.493 decrease in hospital visits. OOP expenses were significantly reduced across all groups.

Conclusion: The FDS in China significantly increases primary care utilisation and cost, while reducing hospital visits and costs among diabetic patients, particularly among patients with historically high hospital usage. Policymakers should focus on enhancing the FDS to further encourage primary care usage and improve chronic disease management.

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
家庭医生制度对具有不同服务使用模式的糖尿病患者的影响:基于群体轨迹模型的差异分析。
导言:本研究探讨了中国家庭医生制度(FDS)对具有独特长期服务使用模式的糖尿病患者医疗服务使用和成本的影响:这项回顾性队列研究在中国东部A市进行,使用了卫生信息系统和医疗保险报销数据库中的数据,涵盖2014年1月1日至2019年12月31日期间的糖尿病患者。根据2014年至2017年社区卫生服务中心(CHC)和二级/三级医院的季度门诊量,使用基于组的轨迹模型将患者划分为服务利用轨迹。在每个轨迹组内进行倾向得分匹配,将加入 FDS 的患者(干预组)与未加入 FDS 的患者(对照组)进行匹配。差异分析比较了组间结果,并使用 SUEST 检验进行了跨模型比较。结果包括门诊量指标、费用指标和自付费用(OOP):在 17 232 名糖尿病患者(55.21% 为女性,平均年龄 62.85 岁)中,有 13 094 人参加了 FDS(干预组),4138 人未参加(对照组)。根据2014年至2017年的服务使用情况,将患者分为四个轨迹组:(1)门诊总体使用率低;(2)CHC就诊率高;(3)二级/三级医院就诊率高;(4)门诊总体使用率高。加入 FDS 后,从 2018 年到 2019 年,二级/三级医院就诊次数多的组别,其 CHC 就诊次数增加了 6.265 次(费用增加 225.4%),医院就诊次数减少了 3.345 次(费用减少 55.5%)。总体使用率高组的社区健康中心就诊次数增加了 4.642 次(费用增加 109.5%),医院就诊次数减少了 1.493 次。所有组别的自付费用均大幅减少:结论:在中国,基础医疗服务大大提高了糖尿病患者的基础医疗利用率和费用,同时减少了糖尿病患者的医院就诊次数和费用,尤其是在历来医院就诊次数较多的患者中。政策制定者应重点加强基础医疗服务,进一步鼓励基层医疗机构的使用,改善慢性病管理。
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
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
期刊最新文献
The impact of a multi-faceted intervention on non-prescription dispensing of antibiotics by urban community pharmacies in Indonesia: a mixed methods evaluation. Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH): the evolution of a global health and development sector. Cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and critical analysis of recent evidence. Learning from the Montreal Protocol to improve the global governance of antimicrobial resistance. Leveraging investments, promoting transparency and mobilising communities: a qualitative analysis of news articles about how the Ebola outbreak informed COVID-19 response in five African countries.
×
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