人口密集和稀疏的中心地区工伤补偿患者的护理可及性

Blair A Skylar M Rhode, Skylar M Rhode Skylar M Rhode
{"title":"人口密集和稀疏的中心地区工伤补偿患者的护理可及性","authors":"Blair A Skylar M Rhode, Skylar M Rhode Skylar M Rhode","doi":"10.15406/mojor.2020.12.00517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Workers’ compensation was originated to provide a no-fault, timely access to appropriate medical care. Unfortunately, we have found that the system fails the injured worker in certain environments. By implementing procedural roadblocks in the form of initial claim denial and delay methods, the injured worker finds himself/herself in a battle of attrition. By delaying treatment and compensation benefits, the injured workers are “starved out” of their access to care and often walk away from their claim or accept a payout without treatment. Methods: We performed a randomized, consecutive case-series where 300 hypothetical patients called medical offices to attempt to arrange a physician consultation. We analyzed the ability of a patient to gain access (an appointment) to a primary care (N=100), orthopedic (N=100) and neurology (N=100) physician after stating that they were injured at work. We analyzed two cohorts, one as an injured worker that was given a claim number (N=150) and the other that was injured at work but not yet given a claim number (N=150). Conclusion: This study demonstrates how difficult it is to gain access to care as an injured worker. An injured worker in a low densely populated area without a claim number was unable to gain access to a primary care doctor in our cohort (100% denial rate). Even a patient with an accepted claim number in densely populated Cook County, IL had a 52% chance of being denied access to care with an orthopedic surgeon while a patient without a claim number had an 84% chance of being denied access to orthopedic care.","PeriodicalId":91366,"journal":{"name":"MOJ orthopedics & rheumatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Access to care for workers’ compensation patients in dense and sparse population centers\",\"authors\":\"Blair A Skylar M Rhode, Skylar M Rhode Skylar M Rhode\",\"doi\":\"10.15406/mojor.2020.12.00517\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Workers’ compensation was originated to provide a no-fault, timely access to appropriate medical care. Unfortunately, we have found that the system fails the injured worker in certain environments. By implementing procedural roadblocks in the form of initial claim denial and delay methods, the injured worker finds himself/herself in a battle of attrition. By delaying treatment and compensation benefits, the injured workers are “starved out” of their access to care and often walk away from their claim or accept a payout without treatment. Methods: We performed a randomized, consecutive case-series where 300 hypothetical patients called medical offices to attempt to arrange a physician consultation. We analyzed the ability of a patient to gain access (an appointment) to a primary care (N=100), orthopedic (N=100) and neurology (N=100) physician after stating that they were injured at work. We analyzed two cohorts, one as an injured worker that was given a claim number (N=150) and the other that was injured at work but not yet given a claim number (N=150). Conclusion: This study demonstrates how difficult it is to gain access to care as an injured worker. An injured worker in a low densely populated area without a claim number was unable to gain access to a primary care doctor in our cohort (100% denial rate). Even a patient with an accepted claim number in densely populated Cook County, IL had a 52% chance of being denied access to care with an orthopedic surgeon while a patient without a claim number had an 84% chance of being denied access to orthopedic care.\",\"PeriodicalId\":91366,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MOJ orthopedics & rheumatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MOJ orthopedics & rheumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15406/mojor.2020.12.00517\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MOJ orthopedics & rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15406/mojor.2020.12.00517","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:工人赔偿的起源是为了提供无过错、及时获得适当的医疗保健。不幸的是,我们发现该系统在某些环境中无法保护受伤的工人。通过以初始索赔拒绝和延迟方法的形式实施程序障碍,受伤工人发现自己处于消耗战中。由于延迟治疗和赔偿,受伤的工人被“饿死”了,无法获得护理,他们经常放弃索赔,或者在没有治疗的情况下接受赔偿。方法:我们进行了一个随机的、连续的病例系列,其中300名假设的患者打电话给医疗办公室,试图安排医生会诊。我们分析了一名患者在陈述他们在工作中受伤后获得(预约)初级保健(N=100)、骨科(N=100)和神经病学(N=100)医生的能力。我们分析了两个队列,一个是受伤的工人,得到了索赔号码(N=150),另一个是在工作中受伤,但还没有得到索赔号码(N=150)。结论:这项研究表明,作为一名受伤的工人,获得护理是多么困难。在我们的队列中,在人口密度低的地区,一名没有索赔号码的受伤工人无法获得初级保健医生的服务(100%拒绝率)。在人口稠密的伊利诺伊州库克县,即使有接受索赔号码的患者也有52%的机会被拒绝接受整形外科医生的护理,而没有索赔号码的患者有84%的机会被拒绝接受整形外科医生的护理。
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
Access to care for workers’ compensation patients in dense and sparse population centers
Background: Workers’ compensation was originated to provide a no-fault, timely access to appropriate medical care. Unfortunately, we have found that the system fails the injured worker in certain environments. By implementing procedural roadblocks in the form of initial claim denial and delay methods, the injured worker finds himself/herself in a battle of attrition. By delaying treatment and compensation benefits, the injured workers are “starved out” of their access to care and often walk away from their claim or accept a payout without treatment. Methods: We performed a randomized, consecutive case-series where 300 hypothetical patients called medical offices to attempt to arrange a physician consultation. We analyzed the ability of a patient to gain access (an appointment) to a primary care (N=100), orthopedic (N=100) and neurology (N=100) physician after stating that they were injured at work. We analyzed two cohorts, one as an injured worker that was given a claim number (N=150) and the other that was injured at work but not yet given a claim number (N=150). Conclusion: This study demonstrates how difficult it is to gain access to care as an injured worker. An injured worker in a low densely populated area without a claim number was unable to gain access to a primary care doctor in our cohort (100% denial rate). Even a patient with an accepted claim number in densely populated Cook County, IL had a 52% chance of being denied access to care with an orthopedic surgeon while a patient without a claim number had an 84% chance of being denied access to orthopedic care.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Functional outcomes in acute lateral ankle ligament repair using suture tape augmentation Surgical treatments of patients with periprosthetic humeral fracture and comorbidities Interfragmentary approach total hip replacement in unstable intertrochanteric femur fracture in elderly shows better clinical result compare to standard posterior approach Can spectral doppler high specificity and gray scale nail assessment suggest inflammation in psoriatic arthritis patients and control groups? Polypropylene prosthesis as cicatricial adjuvant after fasciotomy for compartment syndrome of the foot: Case report
×
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