ライフサイエンスコーパス: ambulatory care

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

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

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

4 nfluenced by the type of physician providing ambulatory care.

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

6 436,440) of the total cost of RA care, while ambulatory care accounted for 21% ($150,938), and hospit

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

41 Ambulatory Care Group assignment was independently assoc

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

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

44 Ambulatory Care Groups based on diagnoses performed bett

45 ergoing breast reconstruction at an academic ambulatory care hospital.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

61 Ambulatory care prescription records from 2 state Medica

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

81 Ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations are hospitali

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

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

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

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

86 In the ambulatory care setting, both symptomatic and asymptomat

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

97 Pharmaceutical samples are commonly used in ambulatory care settings.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

116 % of emergency department visits, and 21% of ambulatory care visits; filled 35% of long-term care pla

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

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

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

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