Waiting times and hospitalizations for ambulatory care sensitive conditions

  • Julia C. PrenticeEmail author
  • Steven D. Pizer


Long waits for health care are hypothesized to cause negative health outcomes due to delays in diagnosis and treatment. This study uses administrative data to examine the relationship between time spent waiting for outpatient care and the risk of hospitalization for an ambulatory care sensitive condition (ACSC). Data on the number of days until the next available appointment were extracted from Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers. Two methodological issues arose. First, the simultaneous determination of individual health status and wait times due to medical triage was overcome by developing an exogenous wait time measure. Second, selection bias due to unobserved case mix differences was minimized by separating in time the sample selection period from the period when wait times and outcomes were measured. Exogenous facility-level wait time was the main variable of interest in a fixed effects stacked heteroskedastic probit regression model that predicted the probability of ACSC hospitalization in each month of a six-month period. There was a significant and positive relationship between facility-level wait times and the probability of experiencing an ACSC hospitalization, especially for facility-level wait times of 29 days or more. Further research is needed to replicate these findings in other populations and among those with different clinical histories. As well, policymakers and researchers need an improved understanding of the causes of long wait times and interventions to decrease wait times.


Access to care ACSC hospitalization Wait times 



Salary support for Dr. Prentice was provided by a Health Services Research Fellowship from the Center for Health Quality, Outcomes and Economic Research in the Department of Veteran Affairs. Additional support was provided under Grant Nos. IIR-04-233-1 & IAD-06-112-3 from the Department of Veterans Affairs, Health Services Research & Development Service. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position or policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs.


  1. Baar, B.: New patient montitor: data definitions. Veteran Health Administration Support Services Center (2005a)Google Scholar
  2. Baar, B.: Next available detail data: Data definitions. Veterans Health Administration Support Services Center (2005b)Google Scholar
  3. Berlowitz, D.R., Brandeis, G.H., Anderson, J., Du, W., Brand, H.: Effect of pressure ulcers on the survival of long-term care residents. J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 52(2), M106–M10 (1997)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Charlson, M.E., Pompei, P., Ales, K.L., MacKenzie, C.R.: A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J. Chronic Dis. 40(5), 373–383 (1987)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Culler, S.D., Parchman, M.L., Przybylski, M.: Factors related to potentially preventable hospitalizations among elderly. Med. Care 36(6), 804–817 (1998)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deyo, R.A., Cherkin, D.C., Ciol, M.A.: Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J.Clin. Epidemiol. 45(6), 613–619 (1992)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gordon, P., Chin, M.: Achieving a New Standard in Primary Care for Low-income Populations: Case Studies of Redesign and Change Through a Learning Collaborative. pp. 17. The Commonwealth Fund, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  8. Greene, W.H.: Econometric Analysis, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1993)Google Scholar
  9. Institute of Medicine (IOM): The Committee on the Quality of Health Care in America, Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Institute of Medicine, Washington D.C. (2004)Google Scholar
  10. Kenagy, J.W., Berwick, D.M., Shore, M.F.: Service quality in health Care. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 281(7), 661–65 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mukamel, D.B., Spector, W.D.: Nursing home costs and risk-adjusted outcome measures of quality. Med. Care 38(1), 78–89 (2000)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Murray, M., Berwick, D.M.: Advanced access: reducing waiting and delays in primary care. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 289, 1035–40 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Murray, M., Bodenheimer, T., Rittenhouse, D., Grumbach, K.: Improving timely access to primary care: case studies of the advanced access model. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 289(8), 1042–46 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Porell, F., Caro, F.G., Silva, A., Monane, M.: A longitudinal analysis of nursing home outcomes. Health Serv. Res. 33(4), 835–65 (1998)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Prentice, J.C., Pizer, S.D.: Delayed access to health care and mortality. Health Serv. Res. 42(2), 644–662 (2007)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. AHRQ: Quality indicators-guide to prevention quality indictors: hospital admission for ambulatory care sensitive conditions. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Rockville; AHRQ Pub No. 02-R0203 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. Rosen, A., Wu, J., Chang, B.H., Berlowitz, D., Ash, A., Moskowitz, M.: Does diagnostic information contribute to predicting functional decline in long-term care? Med. Care 38(6), 647–59 (2000)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Selim, A.J., Berlowitz, D.R., Fincke, G., Rosen, A.K., Ren, X.S., Christiansen, C.L., Cong, Z., Lee, A., Kazis, L.: Risk-adjusted mortality rates as a potential outcome indicator for outpatient quality assessments. Medical Care 40(3), 237–45 (2002)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. StataCorp. STATA (release 9.0) Statistical Software. StataCorp, College Station, TX (2005)Google Scholar
  20. United States Government Accounting Office (U.S. GAO): More national action needed to reduce waiting times, but some clinics have made progress. United States General Accounting Office. GAO-01–953, (2001)Google Scholar
  21. VanDeusen Lukas, C., Meterko, M., Mohr, D., Seibert, M.N.: The Implementation and Effectiveness of Advanced Clinic Access. Health Services Research and Development Management Decision and Research Center. Office of Research and Development, Department of Veteran Affairs, Boston (2004)Google Scholar
  22. Veterans Health Administration (VHA): Decision support office, “summary of active stop codes; Reference I.,” Washington D.C., 2004. [accessed on January 15, 2005]. Available at
  23. Wilcox, S., Seddon, M., Dunn S., Edwards, R.T., Pearse, J., Tu, J.V.: Measuring and reducing waiting times: a cross-national comparison of strategies. Health Affairs 26(4), 1078–1087 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Health Care Financing and Economics, VA Boston Health Care SystemDepartment of Veterans AffairsBostonUSA
  2. 2.Health Care Financing and Economics, VA Boston Health Care SystemDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Boston University School of Public HealthBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations