How ‘healthy’ are healthcare organizations? Exploring employee healthcare utilization rates among Dutch healthcare organizations
Occupational health and safety research rarely makes use of data on employee healthcare utilization to gain insight into the physical and mental health of healthcare staff. This paper aims to fill this gap by examining the prevalence of two relevant types of healthcare utilization among staff working in healthcare organizations: physical therapy and mental healthcare utilization. The paper furthermore explores what role employee and organizational characteristics play in explaining differences in healthcare utilization between organizations. A Dutch healthcare insurance company provided healthcare utilization records for a sample of 417 organizations employing 136,804 healthcare workers in the Netherlands. The results showed that there are large differences between and within healthcare industries when it comes to employee healthcare utilization. Multivariate regression analyses revealed that employee characteristics such as age and gender distributions, and healthcare industry, explain some of the variance between healthcare organizations. Nevertheless, the results of the analyses showed that for all healthcare utilization indicators there is still a large amount of unexplained variance. Further research into the subject of organizational differences in employee healthcare utilization is needed, as finding possibilities to influence employee health and subsequent healthcare utilization is beneficial to employees, employers and society as a whole.
|Keywords||healthcare costs, healthcare insurance, healthcare use, mental healthcare, occupational health, physical therapy, worker health|
|Persistent URL||dx.doi.org/10.1177/0951484817715031, hdl.handle.net/1765/101090|
|Journal||Health Services Management Research|
Bronkhorst, B.A.C. (2017). How ‘healthy’ are healthcare organizations? Exploring employee healthcare utilization rates among Dutch healthcare organizations. Health Services Management Research, 30(3), 156–167. doi:10.1177/0951484817715031