Access to Urologic Care at Urgent Care Centers - 30/10/21
Abstract |
Objective |
To evaluate Medicaid insurance access disparities for urologic care at urgent care centers (UCCs) in the United States.
Materials and Methods |
We conducted a cross-sectional study using a “secret shopper” methodology. We sampled 240 UCCs across 8 states. Using a standardized script, researchers posed as a patient with either Medicaid or commercial insurance in the clinical setting of obstructing nephrolithiasis. The primary study endpoint was whether a patient's insurance (Medicaid vs commercial) was accepted. We assessed factors associated with Medicaid acceptance using logistic regression models adjusted for state-level and facility-level characteristics. Additionally, we calculated triage rates, emergency department referral rates, and the ability of a UCC to refer the patient to a specialist.
Results |
Of 240 UCCs contacted, 239 (99.6%) accepted commercial insurance and 159 (66.2%) accepted Medicaid. UCCs in Medicaid expansion states more frequently accepted patients with Medicaid insurance (74.2% vs 58.3%, respectively, P < .01). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, state Medicaid expansion (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.04-3.26, P = .04) and affiliation with an institution (OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.59-5.57, P < .01) were independently associated with greater odds of accepting Medicaid. Medicaid-insured patients were significantly less likely to be triaged or referred to the emergency department compared to commercial patients.
Conclusion |
We identified significant disparities in access to UCCs for Medicaid patients presenting with a urologic condition. Given the expanding national role of UCCs, these findings highlight potential sources of insurance disparity in the context of a urologic emergency.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Abbreviations : UCC, ACA
Plan
Conflict of Interest: None of the authors has a conflict of interest to declare. |
|
Financial Disclosure: The authors declare that they have no relevant financial interests. |
|
Accepted at: AUA Annual Meeting 2020. Presented virtually. |
Vol 156
P. 124-128 - octobre 2021 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?