BACKGROUND: There is little objective evidence to support concerns that patients are transferred between hospitals based on insurance status. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between patients' insurance coverage and interhospital transfer. DESIGN: Data analyzed from the 2010 Nationwide Inpatient Sample. PATIENTS: All patients aged 18 to 64 years discharged alive from U.S. acute care hospitals with 1 of 5 common diagnoses (biliary tract disease, chest pain, pneumonia, septicemia, and skin or subcutaneous infection). MEASUREMENTS: For each diagnosis, the proportion of hospitalized patients who were transferred to another acute care hospital based on insurance coverage (private, Medicare, Medicaid, or uninsured) was compared. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of transfer for uninsured patients (reference category, privately insured) while patient- and hospital-level factors were adjusted for. All analyses incorporated sampling and poststratification weights. RESULTS: Among 315 748 patients discharged from 1051 hospitals with any of the 5 diagnoses, the percentage of patients transferred to another acute care hospital varied from 1.3% (skin infection) to 5.1% (septicemia). In unadjusted analyses, uninsured patients were significantly less likely to be transferred for 3 diagnoses (P 0.05). In adjusted analyses, uninsured patients were significantly less likely to be transferred than privately insured patients for 4 diagnoses: biliary tract disease (odds ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.96]), chest pain (odds ratio, 0.63 [CI, 0.44 to 0.89]), septicemia (odds ratio, 0.76 [CI, 0.64 to 0.91]), and skin infections (odds ratio, 0.64 [CI, 0.46 to 0.89]). Women were significantly less likely to be transferred than men for all diagnoses. LIMITATION: This analysis relied on administrative data and lacked clinical detail. CONCLUSION: Uninsured patients (and women) were significantly less likely to undergo interhospital transfer. Differences in transfer rates may contribute to health care disparities. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.
BACKGROUND: There is little objective evidence to support concerns that patients are transferred between hospitals based on insurance status. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between patients' insurance coverage and interhospital transfer. DESIGN: Data analyzed from the 2010 Nationwide Inpatient Sample. PATIENTS: All patients aged 18 to 64 years discharged alive from U.S. acute care hospitals with 1 of 5 common diagnoses (biliary tract disease, chest pain, pneumonia, septicemia, and skin or subcutaneous infection). MEASUREMENTS: For each diagnosis, the proportion of hospitalized patients who were transferred to another acute care hospital based on insurance coverage (private, Medicare, Medicaid, or uninsured) was compared. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of transfer for uninsured patients (reference category, privately insured) while patient- and hospital-level factors were adjusted for. All analyses incorporated sampling and poststratification weights. RESULTS: Among 315 748 patients discharged from 1051 hospitals with any of the 5 diagnoses, the percentage of patients transferred to another acute care hospital varied from 1.3% (skin infection) to 5.1% (septicemia). In unadjusted analyses, uninsured patients were significantly less likely to be transferred for 3 diagnoses (P 0.05). In adjusted analyses, uninsured patients were significantly less likely to be transferred than privately insured patients for 4 diagnoses: biliary tract disease (odds ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.96]), chest pain (odds ratio, 0.63 [CI, 0.44 to 0.89]), septicemia (odds ratio, 0.76 [CI, 0.64 to 0.91]), and skin infections (odds ratio, 0.64 [CI, 0.46 to 0.89]). Women were significantly less likely to be transferred than men for all diagnoses. LIMITATION: This analysis relied on administrative data and lacked clinical detail. CONCLUSION: Uninsured patients (and women) were significantly less likely to undergo interhospital transfer. Differences in transfer rates may contribute to health care disparities. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.
Authors: Lenny López; Andrew P Wilper; Marina C Cervantes; Joseph R Betancourt; Alexander R Green Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Colin R Cooke; Brahmajee Nallamothu; Jeremy M Kahn; John D Birkmeyer; Theodore J Iwashyna Journal: Med Care Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Annica Ravn-Fischer; Thomas Karlsson; Marco Santos; Bo Bergman; Johan Herlitz; Per Johanson Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2012-03-03 Impact factor: 2.469
Authors: Bryn E Mumma; Brigitte M Baumann; Deborah B Diercks; Kevin M Takakuwa; Caren F Campbell; Frances S Shofer; Anna Marie Chang; Molly K Jones; Judd E Hollander Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2010-12-13 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Marc Heincelman; Mulugeta Gebregziabher; Elizabeth Kirkland; Samuel O Schumann; Andrew Schreiner; Phillip Warr; Jingwen Zhang; Patrick D Mauldin; William P Moran; Don C Rockey Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-01-21 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Michael J Ward; Sunil Kripalani; Yuwei Zhu; Alan B Storrow; Thomas J Wang; Theodore Speroff; Daniel Munoz; Robert S Dittus; Frank E Harrell; Wesley H Self Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2016-05-14 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Kristy Kummerow Broman; Sharon Phillips; Rachel M Hayes; Jesse M Ehrenfeld; Michael D Holzman; Kenneth Sharp; Sunil Kripalani; Benjamin K Poulose Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2015-08-20 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Lauge Sokol-Hessner; Andrew A White; Katherine F Davis; Shoshana J Herzig; Samuel F Hohmann Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2015-11-20 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Charles Hobson; John Dortch; Tezcan Ozrazgat Baslanti; Daniel R Layon; Alina Roche; Alison Rioux; Jeffrey S Harman; Brenda Fahy; Azra Bihorac Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-08-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Michael G Usher; Christine Fanning; Vivian W Fang; Madeline Carroll; Amay Parikh; Anne Joseph; Dana Herrigel Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 6.473