Healthcare Utilization and Discrepancies by Income Level among Patients with Newly Diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes: An Analysis of National Health Insurance Sample Cohort Data.

IF 2.8 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Eun Jee Park, Nam Ju Ji, Chang Hoon You, Weon-Young Lee
{"title":"Healthcare Utilization and Discrepancies by Income Level among Patients with Newly Diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes: An Analysis of National Health Insurance Sample Cohort Data.","authors":"Eun Jee Park, Nam Ju Ji, Chang Hoon You, Weon-Young Lee","doi":"10.3961/jpmph.24.165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>: The use of qualitative healthcare services or its discrepancy between different income levels of the type 2 diabetes(T2D) patients has seldom been studied concurrently. The present study is unique that regarding T2D patients of early stages of diagnosis. Aimed to assess the utilization of qualitative healthcare services and influence of income levels on the inequality of care among newly diagnosed patients with T2D.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study of 7590 patients was conducted by the NHIS-NSC2 from 2002 to 2015. Insured employee in 2013 with no history of T2D between 2002 and 2012 were included. The standard of diabetes care includes HbA1c (4 times/year), eyes (once /year) and lipid abnormalities (once/year). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the difference between income levels and inequality of care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From years 1 to 3, rates of appropriate screening fell from 16.9% to 14.1% (HbA1c), 15.8% to 14.5% (eye), and 59.2% to 33.2% (lipid abnormalities). Relative to income class 5 (the highest-income group), HbA1 screening was significantly less common in class 2 (year 2: OR, 0.785; 95% CI, 0.61-0.99; year 3: OR, 0.793; 95% CI, 0.69-0.91). In year 1, lipid screening was less common in class 1 (OR, 0.843; 95% CI, 0.73-0.98) than in class 5, a trend that continued in year 2. Eye screening rates were consistently lower in class 1 than in class 5 (year 1: OR, 0.734; 95% CI, 0.604-0.890; year 2: OR, 0.628; 95% CI, 0.503-0.779; year 3: OR, 0.814; 95% CI, 0.668-0.989).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Newly diagnosed T2D patients have shown low rate of HbA1c and screening for diabetic-related complications and experienced inequality in relation to receiving qualitative diabetes care by income levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":16893,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.24.165","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: : The use of qualitative healthcare services or its discrepancy between different income levels of the type 2 diabetes(T2D) patients has seldom been studied concurrently. The present study is unique that regarding T2D patients of early stages of diagnosis. Aimed to assess the utilization of qualitative healthcare services and influence of income levels on the inequality of care among newly diagnosed patients with T2D.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 7590 patients was conducted by the NHIS-NSC2 from 2002 to 2015. Insured employee in 2013 with no history of T2D between 2002 and 2012 were included. The standard of diabetes care includes HbA1c (4 times/year), eyes (once /year) and lipid abnormalities (once/year). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the difference between income levels and inequality of care.

Results: From years 1 to 3, rates of appropriate screening fell from 16.9% to 14.1% (HbA1c), 15.8% to 14.5% (eye), and 59.2% to 33.2% (lipid abnormalities). Relative to income class 5 (the highest-income group), HbA1 screening was significantly less common in class 2 (year 2: OR, 0.785; 95% CI, 0.61-0.99; year 3: OR, 0.793; 95% CI, 0.69-0.91). In year 1, lipid screening was less common in class 1 (OR, 0.843; 95% CI, 0.73-0.98) than in class 5, a trend that continued in year 2. Eye screening rates were consistently lower in class 1 than in class 5 (year 1: OR, 0.734; 95% CI, 0.604-0.890; year 2: OR, 0.628; 95% CI, 0.503-0.779; year 3: OR, 0.814; 95% CI, 0.668-0.989).

Conclusions: Newly diagnosed T2D patients have shown low rate of HbA1c and screening for diabetic-related complications and experienced inequality in relation to receiving qualitative diabetes care by income levels.

新诊断的 2 型糖尿病患者的医疗保健利用率和收入水平差异:全国健康保险抽样队列数据分析》。
目的::很少有人同时研究 2 型糖尿病(T2D)患者使用定性医疗服务的情况或不同收入水平之间的差异。本研究是针对早期诊断阶段的 2 型糖尿病患者进行的一项独特研究。目的是评估新诊断的 T2D 患者对定性医疗服务的利用情况以及收入水平对医疗不平等的影响:2002年至2015年,NHIS-NSC2对7590名患者进行了回顾性队列研究。研究纳入了在 2002 年至 2012 年期间没有 T2D 病史的 2013 年参保员工。糖尿病护理标准包括 HbA1c(4 次/年)、眼睛(1 次/年)和血脂异常(1 次/年)。为研究收入水平与护理不平等之间的差异,进行了多变量逻辑回归分析:结果:从第 1 年到第 3 年,适当筛查率从 16.9% 降至 14.1%(HbA1c),15.8% 降至 14.5%(眼部),59.2% 降至 33.2%(血脂异常)。相对于收入 5 级(最高收入组),HbA1 筛查在收入 2 级中明显较少(第 2 年:OR,0.785;95% CI,0.61-0.99;第 3 年:OR,0.793;95% CI,0.69-0.91)。第 1 年,血脂筛查在第 1 级(OR,0.843;95% CI,0.73-0.98)比第 5 级少,这一趋势在第 2 年仍在继续。眼科筛查率在 1 级一直低于 5 级(第 1 年:OR,0.734;95% CI,0.604-0.890;第 2 年:OR,0.628;95% CI,0.503-0.779;第 3 年:OR,0.814;95% CI,0.668-0.989):新诊断的 T2D 患者接受 HbA1c 和糖尿病相关并发症筛查的比例较低,而且不同收入水平的患者在接受优质糖尿病护理方面存在不平等。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
60
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信