Health Policy and Management (보건행정학회지)

Korean Academy of Health Policy and Management (한국보건행정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Computed Tomography Spending and Utilization for Inpatients with Cerebral Infarction in South Korea

  • Choi, Su Kyung (Department of Health Policy and Management, Yonsei University Graduate School of Public Health) ;
  • Han, Kyu-Tae (Department of Public Health, Yonsei University Graduate School) ;
  • Kim, Sun Jung (Department of Health Administration, Namseoul University) ;
  • Sohn, Tae Yong (Department of Health Services Administration, Yuhan University) ;
  • Jeon, Byungyool (Department of Preventive Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Eun-Cheol (Department of Preventive Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2017.09.12
  • Accepted : 2017.11.13
  • Published : 2017.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: Computed tomography (CT) is one of the most efficient diagnostic methods for stroke patients. The number of CT scanners in South Korea, however, is higher than in other countries, and may cause the overuse of this tool in healthcare. We aim to study the relationship between using CT and various patient and hospital characteristics among patients with cerebral infarction. Methods: We analyzed nationwide health insurance claims data for patients due to cerebral infarction during the second half of 2013 for up to 3 months. We performed multilevel analysis, including both inpatient and hospital-level variables, to determine how factors affect CT spending and utilization. Results: The data used in our study consisted of 17,046 hospitalizations at 583 hospitals. Inpatients who visited more than one hospital had higher CT utilization numbers and cost (number: ${\geq}3$: ${\beta}$ hospitals, 2.27; p < 0.05; 2 hospitals: ${\beta}$, 0.70; p < 0.05; cost: ${\geq}3$ hospitals: ${\beta}$, 251,108; p < 0.05; 2 hospitals: ${\beta}$, 77,299; p < 0.05). People who visited a general hospital had higher numbers and cost of CT utilization than people who visited a smaller hospital. Conclusion: Increased sharing of records and improved continuity of care between hospitals are needed to help curb the overuse of CT.

Keywords

References

  1. World Health Organization. The top 10 causes of death. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.
  2. Jolles PR, Chapman PR, Alavi A. PET, CT, and MRI in the evaluation of neuropsychiatric disorders: current applications. J Nucl Med 1989;30(10):1589-1606.
  3. Knauth M, von Kummer R, Jansen O, Hahnel S, Dorfler A, Sartor K. Potential of CT angiography in acute ischemic stroke. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1997;18(6):1001-1010.
  4. Kung PT, Tsai WC, Yaung CL, Liao KP. Determinants of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging utilization in Taiwan. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2005;21(1):81-88. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462305050105
  5. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, World Health Organization. Health at a glance: Asia/Pacific 2014. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Publishing; 2014.
  6. Oh EH, Imanaka Y, Evans E. Determinants of the diffusion of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2005;21(1):73-80. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462305050099
  7. Broder J, Fordham LA, Warshauer DM. Increasing utilization of computed tomography in the pediatric emergency department, 2000-2006. Emerg Radiol 2007;14(4):227-232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-007-0618-9.
  8. Larson EB, Omenn GS, Loop JW. Computed tomography in patients with cerebrovascular disease: impact of a new technology on patient care. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1978;131(1):35-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.131.1.35.
  9. Sistrom CL, McKay NL. Costs, charges, and revenues for hospital diagnostic imaging procedures: differences by modality and hospital characteristics. J Am Coll Radiol 2005;2(6):511-519. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2004.09.013.
  10. Horwitz JR, Nichols A. Hospital ownership and medical services: market mix, spillover effects, and nonprofit objectives. J Health Econ 2009; 28(5):924-937. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2009.06.008.
  11. Devers KJ, Brewster LR, Casalino LP. Changes in hospital competitive strategy: a new medical arms race? Health Serv Res 2003;38(1 Pt 2):447-469. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.00124.
  12. Saultz JW, Lochner J. Interpersonal continuity of care and care outcomes: a critical review. Ann Fam Med 2005;3(2):159-166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.285.
  13. Van Servellen G, Fongwa M, Mockus D'Errico E. Continuity of care and quality care outcomes for people experiencing chronic conditions: a literature review. Nurs Health Sci 2006;8(3):185-195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2018.2006.00278.x.
  14. Binstock MA, Wolde-Tsadik G. Alternative prenatal care: impact of reduced visit frequency, focused visits and continuity of care. J Reprod Med 1995;40(7):507-512.
  15. Cleverley WO, Harvey RK. Is there a link between hospital profit and quality? Healthc Financ Manage 1992;46(9):40,42,44-45.
  16. Werner RM, Bradlow ET. Relationship between Medicare's hospital compare performance measures and mortality rates. JAMA 2006;296(22): 2694-2702. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.22.2694.
  17. Lansberg MG, Albers GW, Beaulieu C, Marks MP. Comparison of diffusion-weighted MRI and CT in acute stroke. Neurology 2000;54(8):1557-1561. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.54.8.1557.