Ambulance diversion and ED destination by race/ethnicity: evaluation of Massachusetts’ ambulance diversion ban

Table 2 Change in proportion of EMS transports to reference ED associated with Massachusetts AD ban

Patient cohort	% EMS transports to reference ED in Massachusetts			% EMS transports to reference ED in comparison states			Unadjusted relative change (%)	Adjusted relative change [95% CI]	p-value
Patient cohort	Pre-ban	Post-ban	percentage point change	Pre-ban	Post-ban	percentage point change	Unadjusted relative change (%)	Adjusted relative change [95% CI]	p-value
All	65.1%	63.8%	−1.3	60.9%	62.7%	1.8	−3.1%	−2.7 [− 4.0, − 1.4]	0.001
Race/ethnicity
White patients, non-Hispanic	67.2%	66.0%	−1.2	64.1%	65.9%	1.8	− 3.0%	−2.7 [− 4.5, − 1.0]	0.004
Black patients, non-Hispanic	43.6%	41.8%	−1.8	46.2%	49.3%	3.1	−4.9%	− 4.1 [−6.2, − 1.9]	0.001
Hispanic patients	62.5%	62.2%	−0.3	52.7%	52.2%	−0.5	0.2%	1.0 [−1.1, 2.9]	0.359

1) % EMS transports to reference ED in Massachusetts and comparison states are observed measures
2) Unadjusted relative change is the difference in the above %s between Massachusetts and comparison states
3) Adjusted relative change is obtained from the difference-in-differences linear probability models with the dichotmous indicator of transport to reference ED as the outcome. A separate model (two-way difference-in-differences) for “All”. A separate three-way difference-in-differences model was estimated for the estimates by race/ethnicity. See Online Supplement for the estimation model details and eTable 8 for the full model estimates

ISSN: 1472-6963