Skip to main content

Table 3 Subgroup analysis for the association continuity of care with occurrence of secondary diabetic complication by patient-level and hospital-level factors

From: The effect of continuity of care on the incidence of end-stage renal disease in patients with newly detected type 2 diabetic nephropathy: a retrospective cohort study

 

Continuity of care

p-value

Good (0.75 ≤ COC index)

Bad (COC index < 0.75)

Hazard ratio (Ref.)

Hazard ratio

95% CI

ESRD incidence

Patient-level

Sex

 Male

1.00

2.04

(1.09

–

3.82)

0.03

 Female

1.00

1.86

(0.96

–

3.60)

0.07

Age

 Under 50

1.00

3.00

(0.75

–

11.98)

0.12

 50–59

1.00

3.83

(0.36

–

1.95)

0.83

 60–69

1.00

4.24

(1.78

–

10.09)

0.00

 70–79

1.00

4.39

(1.59

–

12.07)

0.00

 80 and more

1.00

1.41

(0.20

–

10.01)

0.73

Residence area

 Metropolitan

1.00

2.11

(1.04

–

5.30)

0.04

 Urban

1.00

1.70

(0.62

–

4.65)

0.24

 Rural

1.00

1.92

(1.06

–

3.48)

0.04

Health insurance type

 Health insurance

1.00

1.91

(1.21

–

3.03)

0.01

 Medical aid

1.00

1.93

(0.17

–

21.57)

0.59

Income

 Q1 (Low)

1.00

2.04

(0.92

–

4.52)

0.08

 Q2

1.00

1.70

(1.38

–

4.82)

0.02

 Q3

1.00

0.94

(0.36

–

2.45)

0.91

 Q4 (High)

1.00

2.27

(1.01

–

5.14)

0.05

Disabled type

 Yes

1.00

2.08

(0.96

–

4.48)

0.06

 No

1.00

2.23

(1.43

–

3.49)

0.00

Hospital-level

Hospital classification

 General hospital

1.00

1.86

(1.15

–

2.99)

0.01

 Hospital

1.00

2.11

(0.64

–

6.91)

0.22

 Clinic

1.00

2.73

(0.79

–

9.42)

0.11

Number of beds

 Q1 (Low)

1.00

2.60

(1.03

–

6.59)

0.04

 Q2

1.00

1.39

(0.54

–

3.60)

0.50

 Q3 (High)

1.00

2.00

(1.11

–

3.61)

0.02

Number of doctors

 Q1 (Low)

1.00

1.99

(0.72

–

5.48)

0.18

 Q2

1.00

1.87

(0.67

–

5.25)

0.24

 Q3 (High)

1.00

1.86

(1.06

–

3.27)

0.03

Location

 Metropolitan

1.00

1.96

(0.79

–

4.86)

0.15

 Urban

1.00

3.46

(1.52

–

7.91)

0.00

 Rural

1.00

2.05

(1.09

–

3.85)

0.03