Bulk-billing rates and out-of-pocket costs for general practitioner services in Australia, 2022, by SA3 region: analysis of Medicare claims data.

 0 Người đánh giá. Xếp hạng trung bình 0

Tác giả: Karinna Saxby, Yuting Zhang

Ngôn ngữ: eng

Ký hiệu phân loại: 343.09482 Military, defense, public property, public finance, tax, commerce (trade), industrial law

Thông tin xuất bản: Australia : The Medical journal of Australia , 2025

Mô tả vật lý:

Bộ sưu tập: NCBI

ID: 89840

 OBJECTIVES: To examine bulk-billing rates and out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner services in Australia at the Statistical Area 3 (SA3) level
  to assess differences by area-level socio-economic disadvantage and remoteness. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of administrative data (Medicare claims data). SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: All Medicare claims for non-referred general practitioner services in Australia during the 2022 calendar year, as recorded in the Person Level Integrated Data Asset (PLIDA). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean proportions of general practitioner services that were bulk-billed and mean patient out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner visits by SA3 region, adjusted for area-level age and sex, both overall and by area-level socio-economic disadvantage (Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage quintile) and remoteness (simplified Modified Monash Model category). RESULTS: During 2022, 82% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80-83%) of general practitioner services in Australia were bulk-billed
  the mean out-of-pocket cost for non-bulk-billed visits was 3 (95% CI, 2-44). By SA3, mean bulk-billing rates ranged between 46% and 99%, mean out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner visit between 6 and 9. Bulk-billing rates were higher in regions in the most socio-economically disadvantaged quintile (86%
  95% CI, 84-88%) than those in the least disadvantaged quintile (73%
  95% CI, 70-76%)
  the mean rate was not significantly different for remote (86%
  95% CI, 79-92%) and metropolitan areas (81%
  95% CI, 79-83%). Out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed general practitioner services were higher in remote (6
  95% CI, 6-66) than in metropolitan areas (3
  95% CI, 2-44), and lower in areas in the most socio-economically disadvantaged quintile (2
  95% CI, 0-45) than in those in the least disadvantaged quintile (7
  95% CI, 5-49). CONCLUSION: Although most general practitioner services are bulk-billed, out-of-pocket costs for non-bulk-billed services are relatively high, particularly for people in remote and socio-economically disadvantaged areas of Australia.
Tạo bộ sưu tập với mã QR

THƯ VIỆN - TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC CÔNG NGHỆ TP.HCM

ĐT: (028) 36225755 | Email: tt.thuvien@hutech.edu.vn

Copyright @2024 THƯ VIỆN HUTECH