按 SA3 地区分列的 2022 年澳大利亚全科医生服务的批量计费率和自付费用:医疗保险报销数据分析。

IF 6.7 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Medical Journal of Australia Pub Date : 2024-12-17 DOI:10.5694/mja2.52562
Karinna Saxby, Yuting Zhang
{"title":"按 SA3 地区分列的 2022 年澳大利亚全科医生服务的批量计费率和自付费用:医疗保险报销数据分析。","authors":"Karinna Saxby, Yuting Zhang","doi":"10.5694/mja2.52562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To examine bulk-billing rates and out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner services in Australia at the Statistical Area 3 (SA3) level; to assess differences by area-level socio-economic disadvantage and remoteness.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective analysis of administrative data (Medicare claims data).</p><p><strong>Setting, participants: </strong>All Medicare claims for non-referred general practitioner services in Australia during the 2022 calendar year, as recorded in the Person Level Integrated Data Asset (PLIDA).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Mean proportions of general practitioner services that were bulk-billed and mean patient out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner visits by SA3 region, adjusted for area-level age and sex, both overall and by area-level socio-economic disadvantage (Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage quintile) and remoteness (simplified Modified Monash Model category).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During 2022, 82% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80-83%) of general practitioner services in Australia were bulk-billed; the mean out-of-pocket cost for non-bulk-billed visits was $43 (95% CI, $42-44). By SA3, mean bulk-billing rates ranged between 46% and 99%, mean out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner visit between $16 and $99. Bulk-billing rates were higher in regions in the most socio-economically disadvantaged quintile (86%; 95% CI, 84-88%) than those in the least disadvantaged quintile (73%; 95% CI, 70-76%); the mean rate was not significantly different for remote (86%; 95% CI, 79-92%) and metropolitan areas (81%; 95% CI, 79-83%). Out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner services were higher in remote ($56; 95% CI, $46-66) than in metropolitan areas ($43; 95% CI, $42-44), and lower in areas in the most socio-economically disadvantaged quintile ($42; 95% CI, $40-45) than in those in the least disadvantaged quintile ($47; 95% CI, $45-49).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although most general practitioner services are bulk-billed, out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed services are relatively high, particularly for people in remote and socio-economically disadvantaged areas of Australia.</p>","PeriodicalId":18214,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Australia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bulk-billing rates and out-of-pocket costs for general practitioner services in Australia, 2022, by SA3 region: analysis of Medicare claims data.\",\"authors\":\"Karinna Saxby, Yuting Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.5694/mja2.52562\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To examine bulk-billing rates and out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner services in Australia at the Statistical Area 3 (SA3) level; to assess differences by area-level socio-economic disadvantage and remoteness.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective analysis of administrative data (Medicare claims data).</p><p><strong>Setting, participants: </strong>All Medicare claims for non-referred general practitioner services in Australia during the 2022 calendar year, as recorded in the Person Level Integrated Data Asset (PLIDA).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Mean proportions of general practitioner services that were bulk-billed and mean patient out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner visits by SA3 region, adjusted for area-level age and sex, both overall and by area-level socio-economic disadvantage (Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage quintile) and remoteness (simplified Modified Monash Model category).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During 2022, 82% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80-83%) of general practitioner services in Australia were bulk-billed; the mean out-of-pocket cost for non-bulk-billed visits was $43 (95% CI, $42-44). By SA3, mean bulk-billing rates ranged between 46% and 99%, mean out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner visit between $16 and $99. Bulk-billing rates were higher in regions in the most socio-economically disadvantaged quintile (86%; 95% CI, 84-88%) than those in the least disadvantaged quintile (73%; 95% CI, 70-76%); the mean rate was not significantly different for remote (86%; 95% CI, 79-92%) and metropolitan areas (81%; 95% CI, 79-83%). Out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner services were higher in remote ($56; 95% CI, $46-66) than in metropolitan areas ($43; 95% CI, $42-44), and lower in areas in the most socio-economically disadvantaged quintile ($42; 95% CI, $40-45) than in those in the least disadvantaged quintile ($47; 95% CI, $45-49).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although most general practitioner services are bulk-billed, out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed services are relatively high, particularly for people in remote and socio-economically disadvantaged areas of Australia.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Journal of Australia\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Journal of Australia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.52562\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.52562","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在澳大利亚统计区3 (SA3)级别检查批量计费率和非批量计费全科医生服务的自付费用;根据地区层面的社会经济劣势和偏远程度评估差异。研究设计:回顾性分析行政数据(医疗保险索赔数据)。背景,参与者:记录在个人层面综合数据资产(PLIDA)中的澳大利亚2022日历年期间所有非转诊全科医生服务的医疗保险索赔。主要结果测量:按SA3地区进行的全科医生批量收费服务的平均比例和非批量收费全科医生就诊的平均患者自付费用,根据地区年龄和性别进行调整,包括总体和地区社会经济劣势(相对社会经济劣势指数五分位数)和偏远程度(简化的修改莫纳什模型类别)。结果:2022年,澳大利亚82%(95%置信区间[CI], 80-83%)的全科医生服务采用批量收费;非批量计费就诊的平均自付费用为43美元(95% CI, 42-44美元)。根据SA3,平均批量计费率在46%到99%之间,非批量计费全科医生就诊的平均自付费用在16美元到99美元之间。在社会经济最不利的五分之一(86%;95% CI, 84-88%)比处境最不利的五分之一(73%;95% ci, 70-76%);远端患者的平均检出率无显著差异(86%;95% CI, 79-92%)和大都市地区(81%;95% ci, 79-83%)。非批量计费全科医生服务的自付费用在偏远地区较高(56美元;95% CI, 46-66美元)比大城市地区(43美元;95% CI, 42-44美元),在社会经济最不利的五分之一地区(42美元;95%置信区间,40-45美元)比处境最不利的五分之一(47美元;95% ci, 45-49美元)。结论:尽管大多数全科医生的服务都是批量收费的,但非批量收费服务的自付费用相对较高,特别是对于澳大利亚偏远地区和社会经济不利地区的人们。
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
Bulk-billing rates and out-of-pocket costs for general practitioner services in Australia, 2022, by SA3 region: analysis of Medicare claims data.

Objectives: To examine bulk-billing rates and out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner services in Australia at the Statistical Area 3 (SA3) level; to assess differences by area-level socio-economic disadvantage and remoteness.

Study design: Retrospective analysis of administrative data (Medicare claims data).

Setting, participants: All Medicare claims for non-referred general practitioner services in Australia during the 2022 calendar year, as recorded in the Person Level Integrated Data Asset (PLIDA).

Main outcome measures: Mean proportions of general practitioner services that were bulk-billed and mean patient out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner visits by SA3 region, adjusted for area-level age and sex, both overall and by area-level socio-economic disadvantage (Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage quintile) and remoteness (simplified Modified Monash Model category).

Results: During 2022, 82% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80-83%) of general practitioner services in Australia were bulk-billed; the mean out-of-pocket cost for non-bulk-billed visits was $43 (95% CI, $42-44). By SA3, mean bulk-billing rates ranged between 46% and 99%, mean out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner visit between $16 and $99. Bulk-billing rates were higher in regions in the most socio-economically disadvantaged quintile (86%; 95% CI, 84-88%) than those in the least disadvantaged quintile (73%; 95% CI, 70-76%); the mean rate was not significantly different for remote (86%; 95% CI, 79-92%) and metropolitan areas (81%; 95% CI, 79-83%). Out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner services were higher in remote ($56; 95% CI, $46-66) than in metropolitan areas ($43; 95% CI, $42-44), and lower in areas in the most socio-economically disadvantaged quintile ($42; 95% CI, $40-45) than in those in the least disadvantaged quintile ($47; 95% CI, $45-49).

Conclusion: Although most general practitioner services are bulk-billed, out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed services are relatively high, particularly for people in remote and socio-economically disadvantaged areas of Australia.

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
Medical Journal of Australia
Medical Journal of Australia 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
410
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) stands as Australia's foremost general medical journal, leading the dissemination of high-quality research and commentary to shape health policy and influence medical practices within the country. Under the leadership of Professor Virginia Barbour, the expert editorial team at MJA is dedicated to providing authors with a constructive and collaborative peer-review and publication process. Established in 1914, the MJA has evolved into a modern journal that upholds its founding values, maintaining a commitment to supporting the medical profession by delivering high-quality and pertinent information essential to medical practice.
期刊最新文献
Responding to reports of nitazene toxicity in Australia. Consensus recommendations on multiple sclerosis management in Australia and New Zealand: part 1. Consensus recommendations on multiple sclerosis management in Australia and New Zealand: part 2. Consideration of sex and gender: an analysis of Australian clinical guidelines. Potentially preventable medication-related hospitalisations with cardiovascular disease of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, Queensland, 2013-2017: a retrospective cohort 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