Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Oct 11.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Manag Care. 2018 May;24(5):225–231.

TABLE 1.

Study Patient Variables for Phone Intervention Group, Mail Intervention Group, and Their Respective Matched Controls

Phone Intervention Matched Control for Phone Intervention (no contact) Mail Intervention Matched Control for Mail Intervention (no contact)
Patients, n 609 1827 771 1542
Age, years, median (mean ± SD) 64 (58.9 ± 21.5) 63 (58.7 ± 21.1) 71 (66.7 ± 19.8) 71 (66.4 ± 19.4)
Male, % 45 45 45 45
COPS2, median (mean ± SD) 10 (27.2 ± 32.6) 10 (27.5 ± 31.2) 17 (32.6 ± 34.7) 17 (33.0 ± 34.9)
CCI score, median (IQR) 1 (0–2) 1 (0–2) 1 (0–3) 1 (0–3)
LAPS2, median (mean ± SD) 16 (19.2 ± 13.1) 19 (19.6 ± 12.6) 19 (20.0 ± 13.1) 19 (20.4 ± 12.5)
Utilization Per Person for 6-Month Interval Before Index ED Visit, Median (mean ± SD)
Days with calls to AACC 2 (3.3 ± 5.2) 2 (3.3 ± 5.0) 2 (3.4 ± 4.6) 2 (3.7 ± 5.3)
ED visits 0 (0.8 ± 2.3) 0 (0.7 ± 1.8) 0 (0.8 ± 1.7) 0 (0.8 ± 1.9)
Outpatient encounters 4 (7.3 ± 9.0) 4 (7.3 ± 10.4) 5 (7.7 ± 9.5) 5 (7.9 ± 10.3)
For 6-Month Interval After Index ED Visit
Mortality, % 3 4 5 5

AACC indicates Appointment and Advice Call Center; CCI, Charlson Comorbidity Index; COPS2, COmorbidity Point Score, version 2; ED, emergency department; IQR, interquartile range; LAPS2, Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score, version 2.