Shiu-Dong Chung1, Jau-Der Ho, Herng-Ching Lin, Li-Ting Kao, Ming-Chieh Tsai. 1. *Department of Surgery, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, New Taipei City †Sleep Research Center, Taipei Medical University Hospital ‡Department of Ophthalmology, Taipei Medical University Hospital §Department of Ophthalmology, Taipei Medical University ∥School of Health Care Administration, Taipei Medical University ¶Graduate Institute of Life Science, National Defense Medical Center #Department of Internal Medicine, Cathay General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate differences in the utilization of healthcare services between subjects with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and comparison subjects without OAG using Taiwan's National Health Insurance population-based database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study comprised 2204 subjects with OAG and 2204 sex-matched and age-matched subjects without OAG. We individually followed each subject for a 1-year period to evaluate their healthcare resource utilization. Outcome variables of the healthcare resource utilization were as follows: numbers of outpatient visits and inpatient days and the mean costs of outpatient and inpatient treatment. In addition, we divided healthcare resource utilization into ophthalmologic and nonophthalmologic services. RESULTS: As for the utilization of ophthalmologic services, OAG subjects had significantly more outpatient visits (7.4 vs. 1.3, P<0.001) and significantly higher outpatient costs (US$272 vs. US$39, P<0.001) than comparison subjects. For nonophthalmologic services, OAG subjects also had significantly more outpatient visits (29.4 vs. 21.8, P<0.001) and significantly higher outpatient costs (US$1263 vs. US$847, P<0.001) than comparison subjects. Furthermore, OAG subjects incurred significantly higher inpatient costs compared with comparison subjects (US$434 vs. US$234, P<0.001). For all healthcare services, OAG subjects had significantly more outpatient visits (36.8 vs. 23.1, P<0.001) and significantly higher outpatient (US$1535 vs. US$887, P<0.001) and total (US$2245 vs. US$1122, P<0.001) costs than comparison subjects. In other words, the total cost was about 2-fold greater for OAG subjects than comparison subjects. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that subjects with OAG had significantly higher utilization of all healthcare services than comparison subjects.
PURPOSE: To investigate differences in the utilization of healthcare services between subjects with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and comparison subjects without OAG using Taiwan's National Health Insurance population-based database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study comprised 2204 subjects with OAG and 2204 sex-matched and age-matched subjects without OAG. We individually followed each subject for a 1-year period to evaluate their healthcare resource utilization. Outcome variables of the healthcare resource utilization were as follows: numbers of outpatient visits and inpatient days and the mean costs of outpatient and inpatient treatment. In addition, we divided healthcare resource utilization into ophthalmologic and nonophthalmologic services. RESULTS: As for the utilization of ophthalmologic services, OAG subjects had significantly more outpatient visits (7.4 vs. 1.3, P<0.001) and significantly higher outpatient costs (US$272 vs. US$39, P<0.001) than comparison subjects. For nonophthalmologic services, OAG subjects also had significantly more outpatient visits (29.4 vs. 21.8, P<0.001) and significantly higher outpatient costs (US$1263 vs. US$847, P<0.001) than comparison subjects. Furthermore, OAG subjects incurred significantly higher inpatient costs compared with comparison subjects (US$434 vs. US$234, P<0.001). For all healthcare services, OAG subjects had significantly more outpatient visits (36.8 vs. 23.1, P<0.001) and significantly higher outpatient (US$1535 vs. US$887, P<0.001) and total (US$2245 vs. US$1122, P<0.001) costs than comparison subjects. In other words, the total cost was about 2-fold greater for OAG subjects than comparison subjects. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that subjects with OAG had significantly higher utilization of all healthcare services than comparison subjects.