[Self-help measures as determinants of emergency department utilization among people with and without a migration history in Germany].

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Gesundheitswesen Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-10 DOI:10.1055/a-2098-3597
Jannis Trümmler, Oliver Razum, Anna Rahel Poetter, Odile Sauzet
{"title":"[Self-help measures as determinants of emergency department utilization among people with and without a migration history in Germany].","authors":"Jannis Trümmler, Oliver Razum, Anna Rahel Poetter, Odile Sauzet","doi":"10.1055/a-2098-3597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We analyzed whether there were differences between people with and without migration history in their implementation of self-help measures before they accessed the services of an emergency department and if there was an association between self-help measures and an appropriate utilization of emergency departments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The data basis of this secondary analysis is the EUMaR study, which was conducted from July 2018 to July 2019 and aimed to identify causes contributing to inappropriate and frequent use of emergency departments by migrants. Our study aimed to analyze the differences in self-help measures carried out by the population groups using several multiple logistic regressions. The association between self-help measures implemented and appropriate emergency department utilization was quantified using a multiple logistic regression as well as interactions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The odds of first-generation migrants visiting an emergency department on their own initiative (OR=1.28; 95% CI, 1.01-1.61) was high compared to people without migrant history. Furthermore, the odds of their doing something by themselves against their complaints (OR=0.70; 95% CI, 0.56-0.86) were low. The odds of appropriate utilization of emergency services by respondents who self-initiated a visit to an emergency department were lower (OR=0.41; 95% CI, 0.34-0.50). The odds of appropriate utilization of emergency department services by respondents who had previously measured vital signs (e. g., blood pressure) were higher (OR=1.28; 95% CI, 1.02-1.59).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Barriers to the health care system as well as to general practitioners, medicines or medical aids among first-generation migrants could explain the increased odds of their visiting an emergency department on their own and the lower odds of their doing something by themselves about their complaints. A hypothesis of our study is that measuring vital signs may help to better assess individual health status.</p>","PeriodicalId":47653,"journal":{"name":"Gesundheitswesen","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11077547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gesundheitswesen","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2098-3597","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: We analyzed whether there were differences between people with and without migration history in their implementation of self-help measures before they accessed the services of an emergency department and if there was an association between self-help measures and an appropriate utilization of emergency departments.

Methods: The data basis of this secondary analysis is the EUMaR study, which was conducted from July 2018 to July 2019 and aimed to identify causes contributing to inappropriate and frequent use of emergency departments by migrants. Our study aimed to analyze the differences in self-help measures carried out by the population groups using several multiple logistic regressions. The association between self-help measures implemented and appropriate emergency department utilization was quantified using a multiple logistic regression as well as interactions.

Results: The odds of first-generation migrants visiting an emergency department on their own initiative (OR=1.28; 95% CI, 1.01-1.61) was high compared to people without migrant history. Furthermore, the odds of their doing something by themselves against their complaints (OR=0.70; 95% CI, 0.56-0.86) were low. The odds of appropriate utilization of emergency services by respondents who self-initiated a visit to an emergency department were lower (OR=0.41; 95% CI, 0.34-0.50). The odds of appropriate utilization of emergency department services by respondents who had previously measured vital signs (e. g., blood pressure) were higher (OR=1.28; 95% CI, 1.02-1.59).

Conclusion: Barriers to the health care system as well as to general practitioners, medicines or medical aids among first-generation migrants could explain the increased odds of their visiting an emergency department on their own and the lower odds of their doing something by themselves about their complaints. A hypothesis of our study is that measuring vital signs may help to better assess individual health status.

[在德国有和没有移民史的人中,自助措施是急诊科使用率的决定因素]。
引言:我们分析了有和没有移民史的人在获得急诊科服务之前,在实施自助措施方面是否存在差异,以及自助措施与适当利用急诊科之间是否存在关联。方法:这项二次分析的数据基础是EUMaR研究,该研究于2018年7月至2019年7月进行,旨在确定导致移民不恰当和频繁使用急诊科的原因。我们的研究旨在使用几个多元逻辑回归分析人群在自助措施方面的差异。采用多元逻辑回归和相互作用对实施的自助措施和适当的急诊部门利用率之间的关联进行了量化。结果:与没有移民史的人相比,第一代移民主动去急诊室就诊的几率很高(OR=1.28;95%CI,1.01-1.61)。此外,他们针对自己的投诉自己做某事的几率很低(OR=0.70;95%置信区间,0.56-0.86)。自行到急诊科就诊的受访者适当利用急诊服务的几率较低(OR=0.41;95%CI,0.34-0.50)。 g.,血压)更高(OR=1.28;95%CI,1.02-1.59)。结论:第一代移民在医疗保健系统以及全科医生、药物或医疗辅助方面的障碍可以解释他们自己去急诊室的几率增加,而自己对自己的投诉采取行动的几率较低。我们研究的一个假设是,测量生命体征可能有助于更好地评估个人健康状况。
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
Gesundheitswesen
Gesundheitswesen PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
308
期刊介绍: The health service informs you comprehensively and up-to-date about the most important topics of the health care system. In addition to guidelines, overviews and comments, you will find current research results and contributions to CME-certified continuing education and training. The journal offers a scientific discussion forum and a platform for communications from professional societies. The content quality is ensured by a publisher body, the expert advisory board and other experts in the peer review process.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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