Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37589972›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Emergency Department Use Across Income Groups Following an Increase in Cost-Sharing.

Yushan Wu, Dorothy Yingxuan Wang, Shi Zhao, Maggie Haitian Wang, Eliza Lai-Yi Wong, Eng-Kiong Yeoh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yushan WuJC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong, China.
Dorothy Yingxuan WangJC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong, China.
Shi ZhaoJC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong, China.
Maggie Haitian WangJC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong, China.
Eliza Lai-Yi WongJC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong, China.
Eng-Kiong YeohJC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: To encourage the appropriate utilization of emergency care, cost-sharing for emergency care was increased from HK$100 (US $12.8) to HK$180 (US $23.1) per visit in June 2017 in all public hospitals in Hong Kong. However, there are concerns that this increase could deter appropriate emergency department (ED) visits and be associated with income-related disparities. Objective: To examine changes in ED visits after the fee increase. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used administrative data from June 2015 to May 2019 from all public hospitals in Hong Kong. Participants included all Hong Kong residents aged 64 years and younger, categorized into low-income, middle-income, and high-income groups according to the median household income in their district of residence. Data analysis was performed from May to June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the ED visit rate per 100 000 people per month, categorized into 3 severity levels (emergency, urgent, and nonurgent). Secondary outcomes include general outpatient (GOP) visit rate, emergency admission rate, and in-hospital mortality rate per month at public hospitals. Segmented regression analyses were used to estimate changes in the level and slope of outcome variables before and after the fee increase. Results: This study included a total of 5 441 679 ED patients (2 606 332 male patients [47.9%]; 2 108 933 patients [38.5%] aged 45-64 years), with 2 930 662 patients (1 407 885 male patients [48.0%]; 1 111 804 patients [37.9%] aged 45-64 years) from the period before the fee increase. The fee increase was associated with an 8.0% (95% CI, 7.1%-9.0%) immediate reduction in ED visits after June 2017, including a 5.9% (95% CI, 3.3%-8.5%) reduction in urgent visits and an 8.9% (95% CI, 8.0%-9.8%) reduction in nonurgent visits. In addition, a 5.7% (95% CI, 4.7%-6.8%) reduction of emergency admissions was found, whereas no significant changes were observed in in-hospital mortality. Specifically, a statistically significant increase in GOP visits (4.1%; 95% CI, 0.9%-7.2%) was found within the low-income group, but this association became insignificant after controlling for the social security group, who were exempted from payment, as a control. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the fee increase was not associated with changes in ED visits for emergency conditions, but there was a negative and significant association with both urgent and nonurgent conditions across all income groups. Considering the marginal increase in public GOP services, further study is warranted to examine strategies to protect low-income people from avoiding necessary care.

Indexed as

Emergency Medical ServicesEmergency Service, HospitalCohort StudiesHumansIncomeMaleRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID37589972
PMCPMC10436128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.