Télécharger le rapport (152 p.) - KCE

KCE reports vol. 19B Urgences 117
symptoms(4 sy. low
scaled).
o The second are serious
sy.(5 sy,high scaled)
o There is a
discongruence in the
ratings of MDÊs and the
patients to estimate the
seriousness degree .(for
minor more than for
major sy).???
o The % of pat. receiving
treatment for serious
and minor sy. was
clculated 2 ways.
a) Nr.of times
treatment was received
by the nr. Of months
surveyed.
b) % of persons who
visit a MD among those
who reported at least 1
symptom. This gives an
estimate about the
prevalence of the sy.
and the frequency of
seeking care, linked to a
cat. Of the insurance
plan(? Not mentioned).
Also adjusted to demo-
,social and personal
attitudes .
sympt. Although this data
give an added value to argue
in favour of cosha for minor
sy., the effects for this 2 cat.
Sy. are not stat. different at
the conventional
level.(p=0,73).
Important also to note is the
difference of 4,4 % less visits
for serious cases is too large
to ignore!!
In terms of symptoms
prevalence there was no
benefit of free care or
deleterious effect of cosha
on the higher social cat. In
contrast the benefit of free
care was substantial in the
lower social cat., because the
decrease in prevalence of
serious sy. was about 24 % in
the free caregrp. The reasons
for this could have been , at a
baseline overall easier access
for lower grps. To ED, a
better prevention strategy, a
better supervision by the
physician, better control of
the diseases with accessible
and affordable drugs.
Hence one has to be careful
in the health consequences of
a cosha-policy, especially for
the most disadvantaged grps.