• R Stanford, L Okamoto, and T McLaughlin.
• Glaxo Wellcome Inc, US Medical Affairs, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
• MedGenMed. 2000 Jan 24; 2 (1): E5.

ObjectiveTo compare utilization of emergency department (ED) and inpatient resources for asthmatics across insurance types.MethodsRetrospective cohort analysis consisting of patients over 18 years of age admitted to the ED of 27 hospitals located throughout the United States for asthma between October 1, 1996 and September 30, 1997.Results2738 patients were identified who met all inclusion/exclusion criteria. Approximately 25% of the sample had traditional indemnity insurance, 22% were managed care enrollees, 35% were enrolled in Medicaid or Medicare, and 18% were self-pay. Cost of treatment varied by insurance type in the ED and for inpatient asthma care: Medicare patients tended to have higher ED costs than all other insurance types, while indemnity patients had higher costs than Medicaid and Medicare patients. No significant differences were observed between managed care or indemnity patients for ED or inpatient costs; however, indemnity patients were less likely to be hospitalized for asthma subsequent to visiting the ED than managed care patients (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.31-0.52).ConclusionSignificant differences in types and costs of care were observed across differing insurance types, which may suggest an "insurance effect" on asthma-related treatment in the ED and/or hospital.

36 keywords...

hide…