用数据包络分析评价各县提供糖尿病预防保健的效率。

IF 1.6 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology Pub Date : 2021-09-01 Epub Date: 2021-01-06 DOI:10.1007/s10742-020-00237-1
Hyojung Kang, Soyoun Kim, Kevin Malloy, Timothy L McMurry, Rajesh Balkrishnan, Roger Anderson, Anthony McCall, Min-Woong Sohn, Jennifer Mason Lobo
{"title":"用数据包络分析评价各县提供糖尿病预防保健的效率。","authors":"Hyojung Kang,&nbsp;Soyoun Kim,&nbsp;Kevin Malloy,&nbsp;Timothy L McMurry,&nbsp;Rajesh Balkrishnan,&nbsp;Roger Anderson,&nbsp;Anthony McCall,&nbsp;Min-Woong Sohn,&nbsp;Jennifer Mason Lobo","doi":"10.1007/s10742-020-00237-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For patients with diabetes, annual preventive care is essential to reduce the risk of complications. Local healthcare resources affect the utilization of diabetes preventive care. Our objectives were to evaluate the relative efficiency of counties in providing diabetes preventive care and explore potential to improve efficiencies. The study setting is public and private healthcare providers in US counties with available data. County-level demographics were extracted from the Area Health Resources File using data from 2010 to 2013, and individual-level information of diabetes preventive service use was obtained from the 2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. 1112 US counties were analyzed. Cluster analysis was used to place counties into three similar groups in terms of economic wellbeing and population characteristics. Group 1 consisted of metropolitan counties with prosperous or comfortable economic levels. Group 2 mostly consisted of non-metropolitan areas between distress and mid-tier levels, while Group 3 were mostly prosperous or comfortable counties in metropolitan areas. We used data enveopement analysis to assess efficiencies within each group. The majority of counties had modest efficiency in providing diabetes preventive care; 36 counties (57.1%), 345 counties (61.1%), and 263 counties (54.3%) were inefficient (efficiency scores < 1) in Group 1, Group 2, and Group 3, respectively. For inefficient counties, foot and eye exams were often identified as sources of inefficiency. Available health professionals in some counties were not fully utilized to provide diabetes preventive care. Identifying benchmarking targets from counties with similar resources can help counties and policy makers develop actionable strategies to improve performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":45600,"journal":{"name":"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10742-020-00237-1","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating efficiency of counties in providing diabetes preventive care using data envelopment analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Hyojung Kang,&nbsp;Soyoun Kim,&nbsp;Kevin Malloy,&nbsp;Timothy L McMurry,&nbsp;Rajesh Balkrishnan,&nbsp;Roger Anderson,&nbsp;Anthony McCall,&nbsp;Min-Woong Sohn,&nbsp;Jennifer Mason Lobo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10742-020-00237-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>For patients with diabetes, annual preventive care is essential to reduce the risk of complications. Local healthcare resources affect the utilization of diabetes preventive care. Our objectives were to evaluate the relative efficiency of counties in providing diabetes preventive care and explore potential to improve efficiencies. The study setting is public and private healthcare providers in US counties with available data. County-level demographics were extracted from the Area Health Resources File using data from 2010 to 2013, and individual-level information of diabetes preventive service use was obtained from the 2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. 1112 US counties were analyzed. Cluster analysis was used to place counties into three similar groups in terms of economic wellbeing and population characteristics. Group 1 consisted of metropolitan counties with prosperous or comfortable economic levels. Group 2 mostly consisted of non-metropolitan areas between distress and mid-tier levels, while Group 3 were mostly prosperous or comfortable counties in metropolitan areas. We used data enveopement analysis to assess efficiencies within each group. The majority of counties had modest efficiency in providing diabetes preventive care; 36 counties (57.1%), 345 counties (61.1%), and 263 counties (54.3%) were inefficient (efficiency scores < 1) in Group 1, Group 2, and Group 3, respectively. For inefficient counties, foot and eye exams were often identified as sources of inefficiency. Available health professionals in some counties were not fully utilized to provide diabetes preventive care. Identifying benchmarking targets from counties with similar resources can help counties and policy makers develop actionable strategies to improve performance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45600,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10742-020-00237-1\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-020-00237-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-020-00237-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

对于糖尿病患者来说,每年进行预防性护理对于减少并发症的风险至关重要。地方卫生保健资源影响糖尿病预防保健的利用。我们的目的是评估各县在提供糖尿病预防保健方面的相对效率,并探讨提高效率的潜力。研究背景是美国各县有可用数据的公共和私人医疗保健提供者。从2010年至2013年的区域卫生资源文件中提取县级人口统计数据,从2010年行为风险因素监测系统中获得糖尿病预防服务使用的个人水平信息,分析了美国1112个县。采用聚类分析,根据经济福利和人口特征将县分为三个相似的组。第1组是经济繁荣或舒适的都市郡。第2组主要是处于贫困和中等水平之间的非首都地区,而第3组主要是首都地区的繁荣或舒适县。我们使用数据包络分析来评估每组的效率。大多数县在提供糖尿病预防保健方面效率一般;分组1、分组2、分组3效率低下县分别为36个(57.1%)、345个(61.1%)、263个(54.3%)。在效率低下的县,足部和眼科检查往往被认为是效率低下的根源。一些县现有的保健专业人员没有充分利用来提供糖尿病预防保健。确定具有类似资源的县的基准目标可以帮助县和决策者制定可操作的战略以提高绩效。
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
Evaluating efficiency of counties in providing diabetes preventive care using data envelopment analysis.

For patients with diabetes, annual preventive care is essential to reduce the risk of complications. Local healthcare resources affect the utilization of diabetes preventive care. Our objectives were to evaluate the relative efficiency of counties in providing diabetes preventive care and explore potential to improve efficiencies. The study setting is public and private healthcare providers in US counties with available data. County-level demographics were extracted from the Area Health Resources File using data from 2010 to 2013, and individual-level information of diabetes preventive service use was obtained from the 2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. 1112 US counties were analyzed. Cluster analysis was used to place counties into three similar groups in terms of economic wellbeing and population characteristics. Group 1 consisted of metropolitan counties with prosperous or comfortable economic levels. Group 2 mostly consisted of non-metropolitan areas between distress and mid-tier levels, while Group 3 were mostly prosperous or comfortable counties in metropolitan areas. We used data enveopement analysis to assess efficiencies within each group. The majority of counties had modest efficiency in providing diabetes preventive care; 36 counties (57.1%), 345 counties (61.1%), and 263 counties (54.3%) were inefficient (efficiency scores < 1) in Group 1, Group 2, and Group 3, respectively. For inefficient counties, foot and eye exams were often identified as sources of inefficiency. Available health professionals in some counties were not fully utilized to provide diabetes preventive care. Identifying benchmarking targets from counties with similar resources can help counties and policy makers develop actionable strategies to improve performance.

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
Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology
Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The journal reflects the multidisciplinary nature of the field of health services and outcomes research. It addresses the needs of multiple, interlocking communities, including methodologists in statistics, econometrics, social and behavioral sciences; designers and analysts of health policy and health services research projects; and health care providers and policy makers who need to properly understand and evaluate the results of published research. The journal strives to enhance the level of methodologic rigor in health services and outcomes research and contributes to the development of methodologic standards in the field. In pursuing its main objective, the journal also provides a meeting ground for researchers from a number of traditional disciplines and fosters the development of new quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods by statisticians, econometricians, health services researchers, and methodologists in other fields. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology publishes: Research papers on quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods; Case Studies describing applications of quantitative and qualitative methodology in health services and outcomes research; Review Articles synthesizing and popularizing methodologic developments; Tutorials; Articles on computational issues and software reviews; Book reviews; and Notices. Special issues will be devoted to papers presented at important workshops and conferences.
期刊最新文献
Limitations of the Inter-Unit Reliability: A Set of Practical Examples. Home- and community-based care in the new generation of Medicaid administrative data Entropy balancing versus vector-based kernel weighting for causal inference in categorical treatment settings A terminal trend model for longitudinal medical cost data and survival Multimodal mental state analysis
×
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