在州援助计划覆盖范围内,无保险患者接受肝脏移植手术的可接受结果。

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Liver Transplantation Pub Date : 2024-09-27 DOI:10.1097/LVT.0000000000000495
Flavio Paterno, Grace S Lee-Riddle, Raquel Olivo, Arpit N Amin, Baburao Koneru, Nikolaos T Pyrsopoulos, Keri E Lunsford, James V Guarrera
{"title":"在州援助计划覆盖范围内,无保险患者接受肝脏移植手术的可接受结果。","authors":"Flavio Paterno, Grace S Lee-Riddle, Raquel Olivo, Arpit N Amin, Baburao Koneru, Nikolaos T Pyrsopoulos, Keri E Lunsford, James V Guarrera","doi":"10.1097/LVT.0000000000000495","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The lack of health insurance is a major barrier to access to health care, even in the case of life-saving procedures such as liver transplantation (LT). Concerns about worse outcomes in uninsured patients have also discouraged the evaluation and transplantation of patients without adequate health insurance coverage. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes from the largest cohort of uninsured patients who underwent LT with the support of a state payment assistance program (also called charity care). This study included all consecutive patients who underwent LT at a single center from 2002 to 2020. Demographic, clinical, and social variables and outcome metrics were collected and compared between insured and uninsured patients. Among a total of 978 LT recipients, 594 had private insurance, 324 government insurance (Medicare/Medicaid), and 60 were uninsured and covered under a state charity care program. In the charity care group, there was a higher proportion of Hispanic subjects, single marital status, younger age, and high-MELD score patients. The 1- and 3-year patient survival rates were 89.0% and 81.8% in private insurance patients, 88.8% and 80.1% in government insurance recipients, and 93.3% and 79.6% in those with charity care ( p =0.49). There was no difference in graft survival between insured and uninsured patients ( p =0.62). The 3 insurance groups presented similar hospital length-of-stay and 30-day readmission rates. In both univariate and multivariate analysis, uninsured status (charity care) was not associated with worse patient survival (HR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.84-1.80, p =0.29) or graft survival (HR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.84-1.78, p =0.29). In conclusion, there was no difference in outcomes after LT between insured and uninsured patients. A charity care program may be an effective tool to mitigate socioeconomic disparities in both outcomes and access to LT.</p>","PeriodicalId":18072,"journal":{"name":"Liver Transplantation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acceptable outcomes of liver transplantation in uninsured patients under the coverage of a state assistance program.\",\"authors\":\"Flavio Paterno, Grace S Lee-Riddle, Raquel Olivo, Arpit N Amin, Baburao Koneru, Nikolaos T Pyrsopoulos, Keri E Lunsford, James V Guarrera\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/LVT.0000000000000495\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The lack of health insurance is a major barrier to access to health care, even in the case of life-saving procedures such as liver transplantation (LT). Concerns about worse outcomes in uninsured patients have also discouraged the evaluation and transplantation of patients without adequate health insurance coverage. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes from the largest cohort of uninsured patients who underwent LT with the support of a state payment assistance program (also called charity care). This study included all consecutive patients who underwent LT at a single center from 2002 to 2020. Demographic, clinical, and social variables and outcome metrics were collected and compared between insured and uninsured patients. Among a total of 978 LT recipients, 594 had private insurance, 324 government insurance (Medicare/Medicaid), and 60 were uninsured and covered under a state charity care program. In the charity care group, there was a higher proportion of Hispanic subjects, single marital status, younger age, and high-MELD score patients. The 1- and 3-year patient survival rates were 89.0% and 81.8% in private insurance patients, 88.8% and 80.1% in government insurance recipients, and 93.3% and 79.6% in those with charity care ( p =0.49). There was no difference in graft survival between insured and uninsured patients ( p =0.62). The 3 insurance groups presented similar hospital length-of-stay and 30-day readmission rates. In both univariate and multivariate analysis, uninsured status (charity care) was not associated with worse patient survival (HR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.84-1.80, p =0.29) or graft survival (HR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.84-1.78, p =0.29). In conclusion, there was no difference in outcomes after LT between insured and uninsured patients. A charity care program may be an effective tool to mitigate socioeconomic disparities in both outcomes and access to LT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Liver Transplantation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Liver Transplantation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/LVT.0000000000000495\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Liver Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/LVT.0000000000000495","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

缺乏医疗保险是获得医疗服务的一大障碍,即使是肝移植(LT)等挽救生命的手术也不例外。人们担心没有医疗保险的患者的治疗效果会更差,这也阻碍了对没有足够医疗保险的患者进行评估和移植手术。本研究旨在评估在州政府支付援助计划(也称慈善护理)支持下接受肝移植手术的最大一批无保险患者的治疗效果。这项研究纳入了 2002 年至 2020 年期间在一个中心接受过腹腔镜手术的所有连续患者。研究人员收集了人口统计学、临床、社会变量和结果指标,并对参保和未参保患者进行了比较。在总共978名接受LT治疗的患者中,594人有私人保险,324人有政府保险(医疗保险/医疗补助),60人没有保险,但享受州慈善护理计划。在慈善护理组中,西班牙裔受试者、单身婚姻状况、年龄较小、MMELD 分数较高的患者比例较高。私人保险患者的 1 年和 3 年存活率分别为 89.0% 和 81.8%,政府保险患者的 1 年和 3 年存活率分别为 88.8% 和 80.1%,慈善护理患者的 1 年和 3 年存活率分别为 93.3% 和 79.6%(P=0.49)。参保和未参保患者的移植物存活率没有差异(P=0.62)。三个保险组的住院时间和 30 天再入院率相似。在单变量和多变量分析中,未投保状态(慈善护理)与患者存活率(HR:1.23,95%CI:0.84-1.80,P=0.29)或移植物存活率(HR:1.22,95%CI:0.84-1.78,P=0.29)的降低无关。总之,投保和未投保的患者在LT术后的结果上没有差异。慈善护理计划可能是一种有效的工具,可减轻LT治疗效果和获取机会方面的社会经济差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Acceptable outcomes of liver transplantation in uninsured patients under the coverage of a state assistance program.

The lack of health insurance is a major barrier to access to health care, even in the case of life-saving procedures such as liver transplantation (LT). Concerns about worse outcomes in uninsured patients have also discouraged the evaluation and transplantation of patients without adequate health insurance coverage. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes from the largest cohort of uninsured patients who underwent LT with the support of a state payment assistance program (also called charity care). This study included all consecutive patients who underwent LT at a single center from 2002 to 2020. Demographic, clinical, and social variables and outcome metrics were collected and compared between insured and uninsured patients. Among a total of 978 LT recipients, 594 had private insurance, 324 government insurance (Medicare/Medicaid), and 60 were uninsured and covered under a state charity care program. In the charity care group, there was a higher proportion of Hispanic subjects, single marital status, younger age, and high-MELD score patients. The 1- and 3-year patient survival rates were 89.0% and 81.8% in private insurance patients, 88.8% and 80.1% in government insurance recipients, and 93.3% and 79.6% in those with charity care ( p =0.49). There was no difference in graft survival between insured and uninsured patients ( p =0.62). The 3 insurance groups presented similar hospital length-of-stay and 30-day readmission rates. In both univariate and multivariate analysis, uninsured status (charity care) was not associated with worse patient survival (HR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.84-1.80, p =0.29) or graft survival (HR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.84-1.78, p =0.29). In conclusion, there was no difference in outcomes after LT between insured and uninsured patients. A charity care program may be an effective tool to mitigate socioeconomic disparities in both outcomes and access to LT.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Liver Transplantation
Liver Transplantation 医学-外科
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
6.50%
发文量
254
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Since the first application of liver transplantation in a clinical situation was reported more than twenty years ago, there has been a great deal of growth in this field and more is anticipated. As an official publication of the AASLD, Liver Transplantation delivers current, peer-reviewed articles on liver transplantation, liver surgery, and chronic liver disease — the information necessary to keep abreast of this evolving specialty.
期刊最新文献
Management of the liver transplant candidate with high cardiac risk: Multidisciplinary best practices and recommendations. An international, multicenter, survey-based analysis of practice and management of acute liver failure. Utility of scores to predict alcohol use after liver transplant: Take them with a grain of salt. Intensive locoregional therapy before liver transplantation for colorectal cancer liver metastasis: A novel pretransplant protocol. Association of psychosocial risk factors and liver transplant evaluation outcomes in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease.
×
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