Karen M Clements1,2, Monika Mitra3, Jianying Zhang3. 1. 1 Center for Health Policy and Research, University of Massachusetts Medical School , Shrewsbury, Massachusetts. 2. 2 Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School , Worcester, Massachusetts. 3. 3 Lurie Institute for Disability Policy, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University , Waltham, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the effect of potentially disabling health conditions on healthcare utilization during pregnancy. Using hospital discharge data, we identified women at risk for disability and evaluated antenatal hospital utilization, including emergency department (ED), observational stay (OS), and inpatient (IP) visits, by underlying health condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Massachusetts Pregnancy to Early Life Longitudinal data system linked 2007-2009 birth certificates to 2006-2009 discharges. Access Risk Classification System categorized ICD-9-CM/Current Procedural Terminology codes recorded at delivery into disability risk groups (no/low vs. medium/high). Women were further categorized based on delivery diagnoses. Cox models evaluated the association between disability risk and utilization. Utilization by prenatal care and visit reason was examined. RESULTS: Of 221,867 women, 4.0% were at medium/high risk of disability. Mental illness (26.9%) and circulatory system (25.2%) diagnoses were most common. More than 2% had comorbid mental/physical conditions. Women at risk for disability were more likely than women not at risk to have an antenatal ED (37.1% vs. 25.0%), OS (19.1% vs. 13.1%), or nondelivery IP visit (11.5% vs. 4.0%) (p ≤ 0.001 for each). Utilization varied by diagnosis. In adjusted analyses, women with two or more physical conditions had highest rate of ED visit (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.3, 95% confidence interval 1.8-2.8) and OS/IP visit (HR = 2.9, 95% 2.3-3.6) compared with women not at risk. Inadequate prenatal care was associated with increased utilization across all disability risk groups. ED visits for mental illness were high across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Disability risk identified in discharge data is associated with elevated antenatal hospital utilization. Utilization varies by underlying diagnosis.
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the effect of potentially disabling health conditions on healthcare utilization during pregnancy. Using hospital discharge data, we identified women at risk for disability and evaluated antenatal hospital utilization, including emergency department (ED), observational stay (OS), and inpatient (IP) visits, by underlying health condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Massachusetts Pregnancy to Early Life Longitudinal data system linked 2007-2009 birth certificates to 2006-2009 discharges. Access Risk Classification System categorized ICD-9-CM/Current Procedural Terminology codes recorded at delivery into disability risk groups (no/low vs. medium/high). Women were further categorized based on delivery diagnoses. Cox models evaluated the association between disability risk and utilization. Utilization by prenatal care and visit reason was examined. RESULTS: Of 221,867 women, 4.0% were at medium/high risk of disability. Mental illness (26.9%) and circulatory system (25.2%) diagnoses were most common. More than 2% had comorbid mental/physical conditions. Women at risk for disability were more likely than women not at risk to have an antenatal ED (37.1% vs. 25.0%), OS (19.1% vs. 13.1%), or nondelivery IP visit (11.5% vs. 4.0%) (p ≤ 0.001 for each). Utilization varied by diagnosis. In adjusted analyses, women with two or more physical conditions had highest rate of ED visit (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.3, 95% confidence interval 1.8-2.8) and OS/IP visit (HR = 2.9, 95% 2.3-3.6) compared with women not at risk. Inadequate prenatal care was associated with increased utilization across all disability risk groups. ED visits for mental illness were high across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Disability risk identified in discharge data is associated with elevated antenatal hospital utilization. Utilization varies by underlying diagnosis.
Authors: Lynn Huynh; Mark McCoy; Amy Law; Kevin N Tran; Senta Knuth; Patrick Lefebvre; Sean Sullivan; Mei Sheng Duh Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Monika Mitra; Karen M Clements; Jianying Zhang; Lisa I Iezzoni; Suzanne C Smeltzer; Linda M Long-Bellil Journal: Med Care Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Wanda D Barfield; Karen M Clements; Kimberly G Lee; Milton Kotelchuck; Nancy Wilber; Paul H Wise Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2007-06-12