ライフサイエンスコーパス: ambulatory care

1 nfluenced by the type of physician providing ambulatory care.

2 understand the effect of ambient scribing on ambulatory care.

3 (68.3%) reported payer-based segregation in ambulatory care.

4 am can be taken to scale and integrated into ambulatory care.

5 requent rehospitalizations and a high use of ambulatory care.

6 dividuals treated with immunosuppressants in ambulatory care.

7 sicians were mainly general practitioners in ambulatory care.

8 I in both children and adults presenting for ambulatory care.

9 ta from community hospital and postdischarge ambulatory care.

10 uticals and 23.5% (UI, 21.7%-25.7%) spent on ambulatory care.

11 own about how physician time is allocated in ambulatory care.

12 ases, yet little is known about their use of ambulatory care.

13 to 64 years, White individuals used far more ambulatory care (2.6 [95% CI, 2.4-2.8] more visits per y

14 hese expenditures were inpatient care (39%), ambulatory care (29%), and prescriptions (14%).

15 Of all antibiotics, 54.1% were from ambulatory care (95% CI, 52.6%-55.7%), 38.0% were from t

16 Six patient-reported measures of ambulatory care access (whether a beneficiary had a usua

17 436,440) of the total cost of RA care, while ambulatory care accounted for 21% ($150,938), and hospit

18 ications accounted for 32% ($1,509,637), and ambulatory care accounted for 22% ($1,047,898).

19 of growth in spending in absolute terms were ambulatory care among all types of care and inpatient we

20 Raising cost sharing for ambulatory care among elderly patients may have adverse

21 Medicare plans that increased copayments for ambulatory care and enrollees in matched control plans--

22 surance was associated with a greater use of ambulatory care and fewer reported barriers.

23 zed, placebo-controlled clinical trial in an ambulatory care and home training setting.

24 ractions, social determinants of health, and ambulatory care and hospitalization records were compile

25 from mild to severe DR tracked from standard ambulatory care and investigated using Cox models.

26 gery, primarily due to higher utilization of ambulatory care and readmissions.

27 ith cardiologists may improve the quality of ambulatory care and reduce disparities for patients with

28 elehealth as a percentage of total volume of ambulatory care and use of asynchronous testing for opht

29 with SLE in HMOs utilized substantially less ambulatory care and were less likely to have outpatient

30 dividuals treated with immunosuppressants in ambulatory care are at increased risk of IPD caused by a

31 t cases of acute rhinosinusitis diagnosed in ambulatory care are caused by uncomplicated viral upper

32 When copayments for ambulatory care are increased, elderly patients may forg

33 overage for children on access to and use of ambulatory care are poorly understood.

34 was conducted at the clinical offices in the ambulatory care area of a hospital.

35 s, including 64 (55%) of 117 patients in the ambulatory care arm and 46 (39%) of 119 in the standard

36 is known about variations in the quality of ambulatory care between urban and rural communities for

37 ess spending than the all-population mean on ambulatory care but received 19% (95% UI, 3%-32%; P = .0

38 es, and the date of the first utilization of ambulatory care by patients without ED during the index

39 comorbid conditions, had more visits to the ambulatory care center (9.2 compared with 7.8; P < 0.001

40 special procedures; number of visits to the ambulatory care center or emergency department; and numb

41 cohort study using medical claims data from ambulatory care centers across the United States that we

42 Cohorts from ambulatory care centers across the United States were cr

43 domized, double-blind trial was conducted at ambulatory care centers at the University of Minnesota (

44 there are an estimated 11 million visits to ambulatory care centers for pharyngitis in children betw

45 opia was defined by those who had at least 2 ambulatory care claims (International Classification of

46 lent myopia was defined as those who had >=2 ambulatory care claims (International Classification of

47 In a cross-sectional study, conducted in an ambulatory care clinic and hospital, comparing 69 cirrho

48 as conducted in patients undergoing HD at an ambulatory care clinic at the University of Illinois at

49 While in short supply and high demand, ambulatory care clinicians spend more time on administra

50 of several levels of care, including primary ambulatory care clinics in each prison unit, 16 infirmar

51 presented with acute respiratory illness at ambulatory care clinics in geographically diverse U.S. s

52 ent cohort of more than 1,200 adults seen at ambulatory care clinics in Italy, with observed HIV sero

53 ly of cellulitis account for $3.7 billion in ambulatory care costs alone.

54 ss index category, diabetes status, baseline ambulatory care costs, region of the United States, and

55 Four (8%) patients who received ambulatory care crossed over to overnight hospital surve

56 ears of the COVID-19 pandemic, inpatient and ambulatory care declined dramatically.

57 ss the burden of chronic symptomatic FBDs on ambulatory care delivery in the United States and evalua

58 s, and technologies that enable high-quality ambulatory care delivery while minimizing EHR burden.

59 Ambulatory care, dental care, emergency department care,

60 a randomized clinical trial was conducted in ambulatory care dermatologic offices from June 6, 2011,

61 quality measures for 2 common conditions in ambulatory care: diabetes and hypertension.

62 Following reductions in US ambulatory care early in the pandemic, it remains unclea

63 rse events occurred in patients who received ambulatory care, eight (57%) of which were related to th

64 Data were derived from US ambulatory care electronic health records from the Unive

65 sing as hospitalist programs are to occur in ambulatory care, employers and other health care purchas

66 EHR data included ambulatory care encounters.

67 ered by attending physicians in a variety of ambulatory care environments.

68 ses of </= 7 days' duration were enrolled at ambulatory care facilities in 5 communities.

69 become a chronic disease requiring long-term ambulatory care follow-up.

70 he surveyed LVPs, 368 (29%) provided routine ambulatory care for 2323 persons living with HIV/AIDS, a

71 582) and $30965 ($629) and mainly accrued in ambulatory care for ART (70% of mean costs).

72 r asthma medications, and amount and type of ambulatory care for asthma did not substantially affect

73 licies on access to high-quality primary and ambulatory care for children.

74 hey used hospital, emergency, or unscheduled ambulatory care for pain on the previous day (utilizatio

75 sed of patients diagnosed with NAION seeking ambulatory care from 2000 to 2011.

76 nic care model designed to shift delivery of ambulatory care from acute, episodic, and reactive encou

77 an NDI was 13.3% (95% CI, 9.3%-17.3%) in the ambulatory care group and 12.2% (95% CI, 8.2%-16.2%) in

78 Ambulatory Care Group assignment was independently assoc

79 diagnostic test charges when controlling for Ambulatory Care Group assignment.

80 The Ambulatory Care Group case-mix approach, which is based

81 Ambulatory Care Groups based on diagnoses performed bett

82 study analyzed the deidentified metadata of ambulatory care health systems in the US, Canada, Northe

83 ergoing breast reconstruction at an academic ambulatory care hospital.

84 are a well-studied measure of the quality of ambulatory care; however, they may also be associated wi

85 Setting: U.S. ambulatory care in 4 specialties in 4 states (Illinois,

86 dmission to an intensive care unit (ICU), or ambulatory care in an emergency department or urgent car

87 Trends of SGLT2i use in cardiovascular ambulatory care in the US remain unknown.

88 ry committees, data from national surveys of ambulatory care indicate that antimicrobial agents conti

89 fically on nurse-patient rapport in oncology ambulatory care indicates a notable gap in our empirical

90 Ambulatory care, inpatient care, nursing care facility s

91 s with physicians and clinicians who provide ambulatory care is becoming a small number of locally in

92 on secondary prevention measures for CAD in ambulatory care is unknown.

93 of the COVID-19 pandemic with the quality of ambulatory care is unknown.

94 ization across the spectrum of inpatient and ambulatory care is useful to prioritize antibiotic stewa

95 cribing nurse-patient rapport, especially in ambulatory care, is lacking.

96 (P<0.001), and for visits to physicians for ambulatory care it was 0.89 (P<0.001).

97 The benefits of the IDSs observed for ambulatory care may not extend to inpatient surgery.

98 to better inpatient care, improved access to ambulatory care may represent an opportunity to reduce c

99 In plans that increased copayments for ambulatory care, mean copayments nearly doubled for both

100 Using data from the 2007-2010 National Ambulatory Care Medical Survey, we found that $13.3 bill

101 years; 54 women [50%]) randomly assigned to ambulatory care (n = 52) or overnight hospital surveilla

102 h, 2019, 236 (30%) were randomly assigned to ambulatory care (n=117) and standard care (n=119).

103 ion and electronic health records in a large ambulatory care network.

104 insurance was associated with greater use of ambulatory care (odds ratio [OR], 2.54; 95% confidence i

105 uals) were civilians working in hospitals or ambulatory care; of the weighted population, 12 156 988

106 articipants were randomly assigned to either ambulatory care or overnight hospital surveillance.

107 significantly associated with utilization of ambulatory care (OR, 0.77 [CI, 0.57 to 1.04]), hospitali

108 ed HIV clinical trials, received HIV-focused ambulatory care, or had adequate prenatal care visits.

109 The Flu VE Network enrolled ambulatory care patients aged >=6 months with acute resp

110 lower hospitalizations in ethnically diverse ambulatory care patients who have heart failure with sys

111 atform for clinical note documentation among ambulatory care physicians and advanced practice practit

112 y one third of all antibiotic prescribing by ambulatory care physicians.

113 e speakers, community-dwelling patients, and ambulatory care practice patients.

114 onfederal outpatient physician offices at US ambulatory care practices (January 1, 1989-December 26,

115 e aimed to improve antibiotic prescribing in ambulatory care practices by engaging clinicians and sta

116 in ambulatory care throughout the US in 389 ambulatory care practices from December 1, 2019, to Nove

117 implementation of antibiotic stewardship in ambulatory care practices.

118 Ambulatory care prescription records from 2 state Medica

119 analysis is limited to available measures of ambulatory care quality and includes only 2 states.

120 produce valid, reliable, and stable ranks of ambulatory care quality for health care systems in Minne

121 with diabetes mellitus who were part of the Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project in Alabama.

122 The association between EHR time and ambulatory care quality outcomes is unclear.

123 Publicly reported measures of ambulatory care quality.

124 iation between EHR time and some measures of ambulatory care quality.

125 at insurance status influences the amount of ambulatory care received by children, but few have asses

126 Nurse-patient rapport in oncology ambulatory care requires additional research @paula_kopp

127 -We conducted the Cardiovascular Health in Ambulatory Care Research Team (CANHEART) Immigrant study

128 The CArdiovascular HEalth in Ambulatory care Research Team (CANHEART) is conducting a

129 used the CANHEART (Cardiovascular Health in Ambulatory Care Research Team) cohort, created from link

130 using the CANHEART (Cardiovascular Health in Ambulatory Care Research Team) dataset, which was create

131 overnight hospital surveillance after ACDF, ambulatory care resulted in noninferior functional outco

132 caled QMRA model to measurement data from an ambulatory care room to estimate the risk reduction resu

133 Annual individual-level outcomes (mortality, ambulatory care sensitive condition [ACSC] hospitalizati

134 g hospital readmissions, with many due to an ambulatory care sensitive condition.

135 readmission in the post-ICU period, 24% were ambulatory care sensitive condition.

136 artment (ED) visits and hospitalizations for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC) from VA reco

137 ents aged 6 to 17 years related to pediatric ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs), were ident

138 ality, hospital readmissions (categorized by ambulatory care sensitive conditions and emergency depar

139 Only 11.5% of readmissions were for ambulatory care sensitive conditions compared with 23% o

140 alizations were determined by admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions using predefined cr

141 multiple hospitals, and hospitalization for ambulatory care sensitive conditions were substantially

142 for Healthcare Research and Quality-defined ambulatory care sensitive conditions.

143 a small proportion of readmissions were for ambulatory care sensitive conditions.

144 9 to 2.92), and chronic (1.80, 1.31 to 2.48) ambulatory care sensitive hospital admissions.

145 for TPM; IRR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.85 to 0.94]), ambulatory care sensitive visits and admissions (3.3 for

146 ave significantly different performance on 4 ambulatory care-sensitive admission outcomes.

147 ith a higher risk for hospitalization for an ambulatory care-sensitive condition (adjusted hazard rat

148 ecreased for readmissions associated with an ambulatory care-sensitive condition (from 23.1% [62,847/

149 tion with the risk of hospitalization for an ambulatory care-sensitive condition in the last 90 days

150 Time to hospitalization for an ambulatory care-sensitive condition.

151 alization in the last 90 days of life for an ambulatory care-sensitive condition.

152 patients annually) and hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (7.08 fewer per 100

153 ality on pediatric hospitalization rates for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs) and whether

154 Hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs) are a well-

155 nt and associated 30-day postacute costs for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs).

156 se associated with 4 kidney disease-specific ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (hyperkalemia, hear

157 Although ED visit rates for adults with ambulatory care-sensitive conditions remained stable, ED

158 The 3 most common ambulatory care-sensitive conditions resulting in a hosp

159 department visits, and hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions.

160 of hospital readmissions compared with other ambulatory care-sensitive conditions.

161 hospitalizations for cardiovascular-related ambulatory care-sensitive conditions.

162 D-9), were used to extract visits related to ambulatory care-sensitive conditions.

163 ed with a higher rate of hospitalization for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions.

164 Quality measures were ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations (ACSHs), meas

165 Ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations are hospitali

166 No differences in ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations were found (0

167 office and emergency department (ED) visits, ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations, and total co

168 ions between ESF coverage and mortality from ambulatory-care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs) in black/pa

169 In this retrospective cohort study examining ambulatory care service patterns from January 1, 2019, t

170 h 2020 and February 2021, aggregate use of 6 ambulatory care services increased after the preceding d

171 zation of hospital, emergency department, or ambulatory care services or total costs over 3 years.

172 owever, the rate of increase in use of these ambulatory care services was significantly lower for par

173 icate that anticoagulation management in our ambulatory care setting has the potential for further op

174 h a median follow-up time of 35 months in an ambulatory care setting in 5 US academic referral instit

175 cobalamin (Cbl)-responsive disorders in the ambulatory care setting is essential to prevent irrevers

176 ients with cancer and their nurses within an ambulatory care setting were included.

177 from an academic, tertiary, hospital-based, ambulatory care setting who were healthy or had confirme

178 In the ambulatory care setting, both symptomatic and asymptomat

179 le application for conscious sedation in the ambulatory care setting.

180 Rates of visits by race varied by ambulatory care setting.

181 The latter approach can be performed in the ambulatory care setting.

182 cute respiratory symptoms (eg, cough) in the ambulatory care setting.

183 opic appendectomy in either the inpatient or ambulatory care setting.

184 etter on measures of quality and cost in the ambulatory care setting; however, the benefits of this m

185 al and nonfederal personnel in hospitals and ambulatory care settings from the American Community Sur

186 disease relapse in 742 children with ALL in ambulatory care settings of 94 participating institution

187 Patients in 12 ambulatory care settings were eligible if they were age

188 ed vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates from ambulatory care settings were markedly decreased.

189 Lack of testing for CM in ambulatory care settings within a region endemic for CM

190 treatment and cure with rates comparable to ambulatory care settings, implementation of ED HCV scree

191 do not encompass buprenorphine prescribed in ambulatory care settings, prisons, or jails.

192 higher than reports from similar studies in ambulatory care settings, suggesting that the 2014-2015

193 Pharmaceutical samples are commonly used in ambulatory care settings.

194 s that can usually be effectively managed in ambulatory care settings.

195 irector perceptions of care quality in these ambulatory care settings.

196 view of influenza POCTs versus usual care in ambulatory care settings.

197 tudy focused on the effect of changeovers in ambulatory care settings.

198 assachusetts health-care settings, including ambulatory care sites and emergency departments at terti

199 evaluate antibiotic use across inpatient and ambulatory care sites in an integrated healthcare system

200 a should always be considered, especially in ambulatory care situations where patients have no rapid

201 ation of hospital, emergency department, and ambulatory care; standardized costs of care.

202 ng data from the 2012-2015 National Hospital Ambulatory Care Survey.

203 visits from the 2003-2007 National Hospital Ambulatory Care Survey.

204 ust gain access to a complex, interdependent ambulatory care system currently structured around the c

205 ting sited at the emergency department in an ambulatory care team (ACT) model, but a reliable cost an

206 (95% UI, 13%-17%; P < .001) more spending on ambulatory care than the all-population mean.

207 %-37%; P < .001) less spending per person on ambulatory care than the all-population mean.

208 lyze data from all 3473 physicians providing ambulatory care through a large New England health care

209 luated a quality improvement intervention in ambulatory care throughout the US in 389 ambulatory care

210 ho had at least 1 medication e-prescribed in ambulatory care to a health system pharmacy and disconti

211 spital use was not offset by improvements in ambulatory care, urgent care visits would increase or su

212 source of care, insurance status, barriers), ambulatory care use (general physician, eye doctor, dent

213 dy of 13,995 patients with CAD seen at eight ambulatory care Veteran Affairs facilities from 1998 to

214 At the ambulatory care visit, patients underwent pulmonary func

215 U) were invited for further assessment at an ambulatory care visit.

216 eumatic conditions account for about as many ambulatory care visits as cardiovascular disease or esse

217 For instance, the White-Black gap in ambulatory care visits decreased from 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0-1

218 Overall, 62.8% of subjects had 1 or more ambulatory care visits during the preceding year, 32.2%

219 urveys (1997-2005) to estimate the number of ambulatory care visits for abdominal pain, constipation,

220 We conducted active surveillance for ambulatory care visits for acute respiratory illness (AR

221 lowering medications and had a total of 3625 ambulatory care visits from July 1, 2011, to June 30, 20

222 adults aged 45 years or older with 2 or more ambulatory care visits in 2 or more distinct years at 65

223 rates of hospital, emergency department, and ambulatory care visits that were, respectively, 63%, 85%

224 timates, rates, and other characteristics of ambulatory care visits were calculated from a national s

225 An estimated 36.5 million ambulatory care visits were related to arthritis and oth

226 t medical expenditures included payments for ambulatory care visits, hospital outpatient services, ho

227 osts were estimated on the basis of reported ambulatory care visits, hospitalizations, diagnostic tes

228 n insurance claims, emergency department and ambulatory care visits, inpatient and nursing care facil

229 ospital visits, emergency department visits, ambulatory care visits, long-term care residence places,

230 mab, metronidazole, hospitalizations, higher ambulatory care visits, shorter duration of IBD, and hig

231 in spending due to greater readmissions and ambulatory care visits.

232 % of emergency department visits, and 21% of ambulatory care visits; filled 35% of long-term care pla

233 f hospitalizations, emergency department, or ambulatory care visits; proportion who contacted a partn

234 In this RCT comparing functional outcomes of ambulatory care vs overnight hospital surveillance after

235 F requiring oral diuretic intensification in ambulatory care was frequent, adversely prognostic, and

236 The costs for hospital and ambulatory care were estimated from Health Care Financin

237 s, diagnostics, HPN therapy, medication, and ambulatory care were included.

238 Patients randomly assigned to ambulatory care were kept under surveillance for 6 to 8

239 The effects of increases in copayments for ambulatory care were magnified among enrollees living in

240 spending, 42.2% (95% CI, 42.2%-42.2%) was on ambulatory care, while 23.8% (95% CI, 23.8%-23.8%) was o

241 cations in children presenting in primary or ambulatory care with influenza or influenza-like illness

242 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing ambulatory care with inpatient care after any spinal sur