English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

There has been growing evidence in trauma literature that differences in insurance status lead to inequality in treatment and outcome. Most studies comparing uninsured to insured patients were done in the USA. We sought to gain further insights into differences in the outcomes of trauma patients in a healthcare system with mandatory public health coverage by comparing publicly versus privately insured patients. Methods We used a prospective national quality assessment database from the  Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Qualitätssicherung in der Chirurgie  (AQC). More than 80 surgical departments in Switzerland are part of this quality program. We included all patients in the AQC database with any S- or T-code diagnosis according to the International Classification of Diseases ICD-10 (any injuries) who were treated during the 11-year period of 2004–2014. Missing insurance status information was an exclusion criterion. In total, 30,175 patients were included for analysis. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included overall and intra- and postoperative complications. Bi- and multivariate analyses were performed, adjusted for insurance status, age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status category, type of injury, and surgeon’s level of experience. Results In total, 76.8% ( n  = 23,196) of the patients were publicly insured. Patients with public insurance were significantly younger ( p  &lt; 0.001), more often male ( p  &lt; 0.001), and in better general health according to the ASA physical status category ( p  &lt; 0.001). Length of pre- and postoperative stay and the number of operations per case were similar in the two groups. Patients with public insurance had a lower mortality rate (1.3% vs. 1.9%,  p  &lt; 0.001), but after adjusting for confounders, insurance status was not a predictor of mortality. Overall complication rates were significantly higher for publicly insured patients (8.4% vs. 6.2%,  p  &lt; 0.001), and after adjusting for confounders, insurance status was identified as an independent risk factor for overall complications ( p  &lt; 0.001). Conclusion Differences exist with respect to patient and procedural characteristics: publicly insured patients were younger, more often male, and scored better on ASA physical status. Insurance status seems not to be a predictor for fatal outcome after trauma, although it is associated with complications.

Does the insurance status influence in-hospital outcome? A retrospective assessment in 30,175 surgical trauma patients in Switzerland