Nurse Staffing and Health Outcomes of Psychiatric Inpatients: A Secondary Analysis of National Health Insurance Claims Data

Park, Suin; Park, Sohee; Lee, Young Joo; Park, Choon Seon; Jung, Young Chul; Kim, Sun Ah

doi:10.4040/jkan.19203

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because we operationally defined TMD in this study, defining TMD patient groups solely based on diagnosis would diminish the accuracy. However, because the diagnostic accuracy of the HIRA–NPS claims is on average about 70%, 45 it has little effect on our findings. Therefore, subsequent studies utilising claims data should pay close attention to diagnostic accuracy.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

“…It has been reported that diagnosis is more accurate for inpatients, severely ill patients and patients in general/tertiary hospitals than it is for outpatients, patients with frequently mild diseases and patients in clinics, respectively. 45 Furthermore, we used the data of patients who were assigned corresponding diagnostic codes. However, it is possible that the data set included patients who had been assigned an incorrect code or excluded patients due to misdiagnosis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Healthcare utilisation and costs for temporomandibular disorders: a descriptive, cross-sectional study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTemporomandibular joint disorder (TMD) requires long-term management and can be a financial burden for patients. Here, we investigated the treatment received by people diagnosed with TMD and its relevant costs.DesignA descriptive, cross-sectional study.Setting and participantsWe performed secondary data analysis of health insurance claims data provided by the Health Insurance Assessment and Review (HIRA) of the Republic of Korea. We reviewed the records of 10 041 patients who were diagnosed with TMD and who utilised outpatient healthcare service at least once between January and December 2017.Primary and secondary outcome measuresData on use of medical services, hospitalisations, sociodemographic factors, treatment and medication were retrieved and analysed. Cost was defined as the cost of care incurred by a health insurance beneficiary at a care facility.ResultsWe reported the characteristics as medians, frequencies and percentages and found that most TMD patients were outpatients, women (58.9%) and in their 20s (46.4%). For visit type, 85.9% of all patients had an outpatient dental medical visit, with most visiting dental clinics and dental hospitals. Western medicine (WM; 9.8%) was prescribed more often, followed by Korean medicine (KM; 8.2%). The median expense per patient was highest among those in their 20s (58.00, 23.90, 53.40, 65.90 US$ for overall, WM, dental medicine (DM) and KM, respectively). Consultation fees accounted for the greatest percentage (42.8%) of DM and WM care expenses, while injection/non-surgical intervention fees accounted for the greatest percentage of KM care expenses. The most commonly used treatments for TMD were temporomandibular joint stimulation therapy (51.1%) and acupuncture (19.9%), considered as the most basic care for TMD. Psychosomatic agents (86.4%) were the most commonly used medications in outpatients.ConclusionsWhile people with TMD most commonly received temporomandibular stimulation therapy, the costs and duration of treatment varied significantly for these patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Healthcare utilisation and costs for temporomandibular disorders: a descriptive, cross-sectional study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fukasawa et al (2018), however, found the opposite, that a higher number of nurses per 10 beds were associated with increased use of restraints (OR = 1.74 95% CI: 1.35‐2.24). In other studies, nurse–patient ratio was not associated with restraint use (Bak et al, 2015; Donat, 2003; Khalil et al, 2017; Park et al, 2020). Bak et al (2015) also found no relationship between restraints and use of substitute staff.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 77%

Developing nurse‐sensitive outcomes in acute inpatient mental health settings—A systematic review

Ngune

Myers

Cole

et al. 2023

Journal of Clinical Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWhile nurse‐sensitive outcomes (NSOs) are well established in numerous health settings, to date there is no indicator suite of NSOs for inpatient mental health settings.AimTo assess the relationship between nursing variables and patient outcomes in acute inpatient mental health settings to determine which outcomes can be used as indicators of the quality of nursing care.MethodsDatabases accessed were CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE, last searched in May 2022. The review followed the 2020 PRISMA checklist for systematic reviews. Papers published between 1995 and 2022, conducted in acute mental health care units were included. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool. A meta‐analysis was not possible because of the large number of variables and measurement inconsistencies.ResultsA total of 57 studies were reviewed. Studies were categorised according to whether they found a significant or non‐significant relationship between nurse variables and patient outcomes. Seven outcomes—aggression, seclusion, restraint, absconding, pro‐re‐nata medications, special observations and self‐harm—were identified. For each outcome, there were significant findings for several nurse variables indicating that all included outcomes could be used as NSOs. However, evidence for aggression, seclusion and restraint use as suitable NSOs was more robust than the evidence for self‐harm, absconding, pro‐re‐nata medications and special observations.ConclusionAll the seven outcomes can all be used to develop an NSO indicator suite in mental health inpatient settings. More work is needed to establish high‐quality studies to clearly demonstrate the relationship between these outcome measures and changes in nurse variables such as nurse staffing, skill mix, work environment, nurse education and nurse experience.Patient and Public ContributionPatient or public contribution was not possible because of the type of the variables being explored.

show abstract

“…Firstly, we defined underlying health conditions using administrative claims data generated only when patients visited healthcare facilities. Although claims data can be useful for certain types of healthcare research, it is important to be aware of its limitations, including potential inaccuracies, lack of clinical detail, and incomplete information on patient outcomes [ 59 ]. Consequently, the prevalence in our study would be underestimated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk factors for critical COVID-19 illness during Delta- and Omicron-predominant period in Korea; using K-COV-N cohort in the National health insurance service

Lee,

Go,

Choi

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study evaluated the clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 in Korea, and examined the relationship between severe COVID-19 cases and underlying health conditions during the Delta (September 20, 2021 to December 4, 2021) and the Omicron (February 20, 2022 to March 31, 2022) predominant period. Methods This study assessed the association between critical COVID-19 illness and various risk factors, including a variety of underlying health conditions, using multiple logistic regression models based on the K-COV-N cohort, a nationwide data of confirmed COVID-19 cases linked with COVID-19 vaccination status and the National Health Insurance claim information. Results We analyzed 137,532 and 8,294,249 cases of COVID-19 infection during the Delta and the Omicron variant dominant periods, respectively. During the Delta as well as the Omicron period, old age (≥80 years) showed the largest effect size among risk factors for critical COVID-19 illness (aOR = 18.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 14.71–22.23 for the Delta; aOR = 24.07; 95% CI = 19.03–30.44 for the Omicron period). We found that patients with solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, unvaccinated, and interstitial lung disease had more than a two-fold increased risk of critical COVID-19 outcomes between the Delta and Omicron periods. However, risk factors such as urban residence, underweight, and underlying medical conditions, including chronic cardiac diseases, immunodeficiency, and mental disorders, had different effects on the development of critical COVID-19 illness between the Delta and Omicron periods. Conclusion We found that the severity of COVID-19 infection was much higher for the Delta variant than for the Omicron. Although the Delta and the Omicron variant shared many risk factors for critical illness, several risk factors were found to have different effects on the development of critical COVID-19 illness between those two variants. Close monitoring of a wide range of risk factors for critical illness is warranted as new variants continue to emerge during the pandemic.

show abstract

Nurse Staffing and Health Outcomes of Psychiatric Inpatients: A Secondary Analysis of National Health Insurance Claims Data

Cited by 13 publications

References 34 publications

Healthcare utilisation and costs for temporomandibular disorders: a descriptive, cross-sectional study

Healthcare utilisation and costs for temporomandibular disorders: a descriptive, cross-sectional study

Developing nurse‐sensitive outcomes in acute inpatient mental health settings—A systematic review

Risk factors for critical COVID-19 illness during Delta- and Omicron-predominant period in Korea; using K-COV-N cohort in the National health insurance service

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About