Health insurance status linked to mortality risk in PA ICUs

May 17, 2010

Adult patients without health insurance admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in Pennsylvania hospitals are at a 21 percent increased risk of death compared to similar patients with private insurance, according to researchers from the University of Pennsylvania. The difference in mortality risk was not explained by patient characteristics or differences in care at the hospital level, suggesting that uninsured patients might receive poorer quality care.

The findings will be presented at the ATS 2010 International Conference in New Orleans.

Compared to similar patients with or Medicaid, uninsured ICU patients were also less likely to receive certain common critical care procedures, including placement of central venous catheters, tracheostomies and acute hemodialysis.

"Previous studies suggested that uninsured critically ill patients may have a higher mortality, and may be less likely to receive certain critical care procedures. But we found that these differences are primarily due to differences in quality within hospitals rather than across hospitals," said Sarah M. Lyon, M.D., pulmonary and fellow at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. "The higher mortality for uninsured patients does not appear to be caused by uninsured patients tending to go to hospitals with poor overall quality. Instead, we found that even when admitted to the same hospitals, and controlling for other differences between patients, critically ill individuals without insurance are less likely to survive than those with private or Medicaid insurance."

Dr. Lyon and colleagues analyzed 30-day mortality, and the use of several key ICU procedures, in all adult patients under 65 admitted to Pennsylvania ICUs from 2005 to2006 using state hospital discharge data. They categorized the 166,995 patients as having private (67.7 percent), Medicaid (28.5 percent), or being uninsured (3.8 percent.) When the researchers analyzed mortality at 30 days, they found that uninsured patients were 21 percent more likely to die than patients with private insurance; those with had a 3 percent greater risk of death. Only the mortality difference between private insurance and was statistically significant.

"Our findings suggest that ICU patients without insurance have a higher risk of death and receive less intense treatment in the ICU. Expanding and standardizing health care coverage through health care reform may improve outcomes in critically ill patients," said Dr. Lyon. "We still do not understand all the reasons for differences in survival between the insured and uninsured. Critically ill patients without insurance may arrive to the hospital in more advanced stages of illness, perhaps in ways we could not control for in our study. Patients without insurance may also have different preferences for intensity of care at the end of life, and may not wish to be kept alive on life support as long as patients with insurance. Another, more concerning explanation is that physicians and hospitals treat patients without insurance differently than those with insurance. More work is needed before we can say with certainty that treatment biases caused these results."

Explore further: Obama offers new accommodations on birth control

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Race and insurance status associated with death from trauma

Oct 20, 2008

African American and Hispanic patients are more likely to die following trauma than white patients, and uninsured patients have a higher death risk when compared with those who have health insurance, according to a report ...

Uninsured more likely to die after trauma

Nov 16, 2009

Americans without health insurance appear more likely to die following admission to the hospital for trauma than those with health care coverage, according to a report in the November issue of Archives of Surgery.

Studies link insurance coverage to more advanced cancers

Jun 11, 2007

Two new studies find the uninsured and people with certain types of public health insurance are more likely to be diagnosed with more advanced cancer compared to those with private insurance. The studies, published in the ...

Recommended for you

Obama offers new accommodations on birth control

30 minutes ago

The Obama administration will offer a new accommodation to religious nonprofits that object to covering birth control for their employees. The measure allows those groups to notify the government, rather than their insurance ...

Use a rule of thumb to control how much you drink

1 hour ago

Sticking to a general rule of pouring just a half glass of wine limits the likelihood of overconsumption, even for men with a higher body mass index. That's the finding of a new Iowa State and Cornell University ...

Many patients are discharged without a diagnosis

4 hours ago

Chest pain, breathing difficulties, fainting. Each year approx. 265,000 Danes are acutely admitted to medical departments with symptoms of serious illness. New research from Aarhus University and Aarhus University Hospital ...

Wellness visits, physicals need different documentation

4 hours ago

(HealthDay)—Documentation rules for annual wellness visits (AWVs) for Medicare differ from those for preventive visits, which are not covered by Medicare, according to an article published Aug. 5 in Medical Ec ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

akotlar
not rated yet May 17, 2010
Haha really? I would have thought that Health Insurance patients get worse coverage, but I suppose that there are few people rich enough to afford $80/hr hospital stays and $3000/hr surgery.

No joke, but a hospital typically bills your insurance company ~30k for a 2.5 hour orthopedic surgery, although you are typically only responsible for ~11k. Funny right? It's almost like they drive up the price when they know someone with deep pockets is paying! Hail Hit... unregulated capitalism!
VOR
not rated yet May 18, 2010
actually if there's a difference its been my experience that they usually charge more if you want to pay cash without insurance. That should definately be illegal. That 30k is what they would say you owe if you didnt have insurance. the insurance gets a better deal, which is wrong.