Adolescent and Young Adult Preventive Care Comparing National Survey Rates
Adolescent and Young Adult Preventive Care Comparing National Survey Rates
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.amepre.2015.02.022
复制
发表时间：
2015-08-01
影响因子：
5.5
通讯作者：
Irwin, Charles E., Jr.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Adams, Sally H.;Park, M. Jane;Irwin, Charles E., Jr.
简介：《平价医疗法》的预防性医疗规定有可能增加青少年和年轻人接受推荐的预防性服务。要评估这种潜力是否得到实现，就需要在若干领域提供有效的监测数据，包括每年接受一次预防性访问。本研究的目的是描述和比较预防访问率在全国调查的青少年和年轻adult.Methods：本研究，在2014年进行：（1）确定全国调查与去年的预防访问措施;（2）比较调查的特点，包括管理模式、被访者、回应率、人口概况（单变量分析）、预防性访视措施措辞和构建方法;（3）比较预防性访视率，包括社会人口统计学亚组之间的比率结果：2011年确定了四项调查：全国健康访谈调查、全国儿童健康调查（2011-2012年）、针对青少年的医疗支出专门小组调查（MEPS）以及针对年轻成年人的MEPS和行为风险因素监测系统。调查因大多数评估特征而异;人口统计学特征相似。预防性就诊率在青少年（43%-81%）和年轻人（26%-58%）之间存在显著差异。访问率的最大差异是主观评估与根据答复者保存的具体访问记录编码的更详细评估的比较。访问率的社会人口学差异是一致的跨surveys.Conclusions：需要进一步的研究，以评估全国调查的预防性访问的不同估计的原因。那些监测青少年和年轻人接受推荐护理趋势的人应该考虑调查差异。还需要监测护理内容。(C)2015年美国预防医学杂志
Introduction: The Affordable Care Act's preventive healthcare provisions have the potential to increase adolescents' and young adults' receipt of recommended preventive services. Assessing whether this potential is realized requires valid monitoring data in several areas, including receipt of an annual preventive visit. The purpose of this study is to describe and compare preventive visit rates across national surveys for adolescents and young adults.Methods: This study, conducted in 2014: (1) identified national surveys with past-year preventive visit measures; (2) compared survey features, including mode of administration, respondent, response rate, demographic profile (univariate analysis), preventive visit measure wording, and method of construction; and (3) compared preventive visit rates, including rates among socio-demographic subgroups (bivariate analyses).Results: Four 2011 surveys were identified: National Health Interview Survey, National Survey of Children's Health (2011-2012), and Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) for adolescents, and MEPS and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System for young adults. Surveys varied by most assessed features; demographic profiles were similar. Preventive visit rates varied significantly across adolescents (43%-81%) and young adults (26%-58%). The largest differences in visit rates were in comparisons of subjective assessments to a more detailed assessment coded from specific records of visits kept by respondents. Sociodemographic differences in visit rates were consistent across surveys.Conclusions: Further research is needed to assess reasons for the different estimates of preventive visits across national surveys. Those who monitor trends in receipt of recommended care for adolescents and young adults should take survey differences into account. Monitoring content of care is also needed. (C) 2015 American Journal of Preventive Medicine