Repeat retail clinic visits: Impact of insurance coverage and age of patient

Kurt B. Angstman, Matthew E. Bernard, James E. Rohrer, Gregory M. Garrison, Kathy L. MacLaughlin

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

As retail clinics provide a less costly alternative for health care, it would be reasonable to expect an increase in multiple (repeat) retail visits by those patients who may have expenses for receiving primary care. If costs were not a significant factor, then repeat visits should not be significantly different between these patients and those with coverage for primary care visits. The hypothesis for this study was that patients with the potential for out-of-pocket expenses would have a higher frequency of repeat retail clinic visits within 180 days compared to those with primary care coverage. A retrospective chart review was conducted of 5703 patients utilizing a retail clinic in Rochester, Minnesota from January 1, 2009 through June 30, 2009. The first visit to the retail clinic was considered the index visit and the chart was reviewed for repeat retail clinic visits within the next 180 days. Using a multiple logistic regression model, the odds of a pediatric patient (N=2344) having a repeat retail visit within 180 days of the index visit were not significantly impacted by insurance coverage (P=0.4209). Of the 3359 adult patients, those with unknown coverage had a 25.6% higher odds ratio of repeat retail clinic visits than those with insurance coverage (odds ratio 1.2557, confidence interval 1.0421-1.5131). This study suggested that when cost is an issue, the adult patient may favor retail clinics for episodic, low-acuity health care. In contrast, the pediatric population did not, suggesting that other factors, such as convenience, may play more of a role in the choice of episodic health care for this age group.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)358-361
Number of pages4
JournalPopulation Health Management
Volume15
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2012

Fingerprint

Insurance Coverage
Ambulatory Care
Primary Health Care
Delivery of Health Care
Logistic Models
Odds Ratio
Pediatrics
Costs and Cost Analysis
Health Expenditures
Age Groups
Confidence Intervals
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Leadership and Management
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Repeat retail clinic visits : Impact of insurance coverage and age of patient. / Angstman, Kurt B.; Bernard, Matthew E.; Rohrer, James E.; Garrison, Gregory M.; MacLaughlin, Kathy L.

In: Population Health Management, Vol. 15, No. 6, 01.12.2012, p. 358-361.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Angstman, Kurt B. ; Bernard, Matthew E. ; Rohrer, James E. ; Garrison, Gregory M. ; MacLaughlin, Kathy L. / Repeat retail clinic visits : Impact of insurance coverage and age of patient. In: Population Health Management. 2012 ; Vol. 15, No. 6. pp. 358-361.
@article{13eed0416f6840fdaa4e4f8b3cf24ded,
title = "Repeat retail clinic visits: Impact of insurance coverage and age of patient",
abstract = "As retail clinics provide a less costly alternative for health care, it would be reasonable to expect an increase in multiple (repeat) retail visits by those patients who may have expenses for receiving primary care. If costs were not a significant factor, then repeat visits should not be significantly different between these patients and those with coverage for primary care visits. The hypothesis for this study was that patients with the potential for out-of-pocket expenses would have a higher frequency of repeat retail clinic visits within 180 days compared to those with primary care coverage. A retrospective chart review was conducted of 5703 patients utilizing a retail clinic in Rochester, Minnesota from January 1, 2009 through June 30, 2009. The first visit to the retail clinic was considered the index visit and the chart was reviewed for repeat retail clinic visits within the next 180 days. Using a multiple logistic regression model, the odds of a pediatric patient (N=2344) having a repeat retail visit within 180 days of the index visit were not significantly impacted by insurance coverage (P=0.4209). Of the 3359 adult patients, those with unknown coverage had a 25.6{\%} higher odds ratio of repeat retail clinic visits than those with insurance coverage (odds ratio 1.2557, confidence interval 1.0421-1.5131). This study suggested that when cost is an issue, the adult patient may favor retail clinics for episodic, low-acuity health care. In contrast, the pediatric population did not, suggesting that other factors, such as convenience, may play more of a role in the choice of episodic health care for this age group.",
author = "Angstman, {Kurt B.} and Bernard, {Matthew E.} and Rohrer, {James E.} and Garrison, {Gregory M.} and MacLaughlin, {Kathy L.}",
year = "2012",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/pop.2011.0088",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
pages = "358--361",
journal = "Population Health Management",
issn = "1942-7891",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Repeat retail clinic visits

T2 - Impact of insurance coverage and age of patient

AU - Angstman, Kurt B.

AU - Bernard, Matthew E.

AU - Rohrer, James E.

AU - Garrison, Gregory M.

AU - MacLaughlin, Kathy L.

PY - 2012/12/1

Y1 - 2012/12/1

N2 - As retail clinics provide a less costly alternative for health care, it would be reasonable to expect an increase in multiple (repeat) retail visits by those patients who may have expenses for receiving primary care. If costs were not a significant factor, then repeat visits should not be significantly different between these patients and those with coverage for primary care visits. The hypothesis for this study was that patients with the potential for out-of-pocket expenses would have a higher frequency of repeat retail clinic visits within 180 days compared to those with primary care coverage. A retrospective chart review was conducted of 5703 patients utilizing a retail clinic in Rochester, Minnesota from January 1, 2009 through June 30, 2009. The first visit to the retail clinic was considered the index visit and the chart was reviewed for repeat retail clinic visits within the next 180 days. Using a multiple logistic regression model, the odds of a pediatric patient (N=2344) having a repeat retail visit within 180 days of the index visit were not significantly impacted by insurance coverage (P=0.4209). Of the 3359 adult patients, those with unknown coverage had a 25.6% higher odds ratio of repeat retail clinic visits than those with insurance coverage (odds ratio 1.2557, confidence interval 1.0421-1.5131). This study suggested that when cost is an issue, the adult patient may favor retail clinics for episodic, low-acuity health care. In contrast, the pediatric population did not, suggesting that other factors, such as convenience, may play more of a role in the choice of episodic health care for this age group.

AB - As retail clinics provide a less costly alternative for health care, it would be reasonable to expect an increase in multiple (repeat) retail visits by those patients who may have expenses for receiving primary care. If costs were not a significant factor, then repeat visits should not be significantly different between these patients and those with coverage for primary care visits. The hypothesis for this study was that patients with the potential for out-of-pocket expenses would have a higher frequency of repeat retail clinic visits within 180 days compared to those with primary care coverage. A retrospective chart review was conducted of 5703 patients utilizing a retail clinic in Rochester, Minnesota from January 1, 2009 through June 30, 2009. The first visit to the retail clinic was considered the index visit and the chart was reviewed for repeat retail clinic visits within the next 180 days. Using a multiple logistic regression model, the odds of a pediatric patient (N=2344) having a repeat retail visit within 180 days of the index visit were not significantly impacted by insurance coverage (P=0.4209). Of the 3359 adult patients, those with unknown coverage had a 25.6% higher odds ratio of repeat retail clinic visits than those with insurance coverage (odds ratio 1.2557, confidence interval 1.0421-1.5131). This study suggested that when cost is an issue, the adult patient may favor retail clinics for episodic, low-acuity health care. In contrast, the pediatric population did not, suggesting that other factors, such as convenience, may play more of a role in the choice of episodic health care for this age group.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84870782292&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84870782292&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/pop.2011.0088

DO - 10.1089/pop.2011.0088

M3 - Review article

C2 - 22788953

AN - SCOPUS:84870782292

VL - 15

SP - 358

EP - 361

JO - Population Health Management

JF - Population Health Management

SN - 1942-7891

IS - 6

ER -