Dataset Information

Disparities in Travel-Related Barriers to Accessing Health Care From the 2017 National Household Travel Survey.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Geographic access, including mode of transportation, to health care facilities remains understudied.

Objective

To identify sociodemographic factors associated with public vs private transportation use to access health care and identify the respondent, trip, and community factors associated with longer distance and time traveled for health care visits.

Design, setting, and participants

This cross-sectional study used data from the 2017 National Household Travel Survey, including 16 760 trips or a nationally weighted estimate of 5 550 527 364 trips to seek care in the United States. Households that completed the recruitment and retrieval survey for all members aged 5 years and older were included. Data were analyzed between June and August 2022.

Exposures

Mode of transportation (private vs public transportation) used to seek care.

Main outcomes and measures

Survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with public vs private transportation and self-reported distance and travel time. Then, for each income category, an interaction term of race and ethnicity with type of transportation was used to estimate the specific increase in travel burden associated with using public transportation compared a private vehicle for each race category.

Results

The sample included 12 092 households and 15 063 respondents (8500 respondents [56.4%] aged 51-75 years; 8930 [59.3%] females) who had trips for medical care, of whom 1028 respondents (6.9%) were Hispanic, 1164 respondents (7.8%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 11 957 respondents (79.7%) were non-Hispanic White. Factors associated with public transportation use included non-Hispanic Black race (compared with non-Hispanic White: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.54 [95% CI, 1.90-6.61]; P < .001) and household income less than $25 000 (compared with ≥$100 000: aOR, 7.16 [95% CI, 3.50-14.68]; P < .001). The additional travel time associated with use of public transportation compared with private vehicle use varied by race and household income, with non-Hispanic Black respondents with income of $25 000 to $49 999 experiencing higher burden associated with public transportation (mean difference, 81.9 [95% CI, 48.5-115.3] minutes) than non-Hispanic White respondents with similar income (mean difference, 25.5 [95% CI, 17.5-33.5] minutes; P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance

These findings suggest that certain racial, ethnic, and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations rely on public transportation to seek health care and that reducing delays associated with public transportation could improve care for these patients.

SUBMITTER: Labban M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10375305 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Disparities in Travel-Related Barriers to Accessing Health Care From the 2017 National Household Travel Survey.

Labban Muhieddine M Chen Chang-Rong CR Frego Nicola N Nguyen David-Dan DD Lipsitz Stuart R SR Reich Amanda J AJ Rebbeck Timothy R TR Choueiri Toni K TK Kibel Adam S AS Iyer Hari S HS Trinh Quoc-Dien QD

JAMA network open 20230703 7

<h4>Importance</h4>Geographic access, including mode of transportation, to health care facilities remains understudied.<h4>Objective</h4>To identify sociodemographic factors associated with public vs private transportation use to access health care and identify the respondent, trip, and community factors associated with longer distance and time traveled for health care visits.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This cross-sectional study used data from the 2017 National Household Travel Su ...[more]

PMID: 37498602

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionIn the 1930s, Black, working-class, and immigrant neighborhoods were color coded on maps (i.e., redlining) indicating investment risk, which negatively impacted mortgage attainment/homeownership for these groups and led to long-standing segregation by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Limited studies have investigated the health impacts of redlining, particularly among older adults who tend to stay closer to their residences. This study examines whether older adults in historically redlined neighborhoods report less neighborhood walking and whether associations vary by race/ethnicity and income.MethodsThe sample included 4,651 individuals aged ≥65 years from the 2017 U.S. National Household Travel Survey. U.S. Census tract‒based redlining scores were 1=best, 2=still desirable, 3=definitely declining, and 4=hazardous. Multivariable negative binomial regression tested the associations between redlining and neighborhood walking/day in the overall sample and with stratification by poverty status (analyzed in 2022).ResultsParticipants were on average aged 73 years, and 11% were African/American Black, 75% were White, 8% were Hispanic/Latinx, and 6% were of other race/ethnicity. Participants reported a mean of 7.1 neighborhood walking minutes/day (SD=20.6), and 60% lived in definitely declining or hazardous neighborhoods. Individuals in hazardous neighborhoods (versus those in best neighborhoods) reported less neighborhood walking (prevalence ratio=0.64; 95% CI=0.43, 0.97). Among those living in poverty, living in definitely declining and hazardous neighborhoods was associated with less neighborhood walking (prevalence ratio=0.39 [95% CI=0.20, 0.79] and 0.39 [95% CI=0.18, 0.82], respectively).ConclusionsLess neighborhood walking was reported among individuals living in neighborhoods with a historic redlining score of definitely declining or hazardous. Future studies using larger, more diverse cohorts may elucidate whether associations differ by race/ethnicity and geographic location/city.

Project description:BackgroundSingle-center studies have reported residents experience barriers to accessing supervising physicians overnight, but no national dataset has described barriers perceived by residents or the association between supervision models and perceived barriers.ObjectiveTo explore residents' perception of barriers to accessing overnight supervision.DesignQuestions about overnight supervision and barriers to accessing it were included on the American College of Physicians Internal Medicine In-Training Examination® (IM-ITE®) Resident Survey in Fall 2017.ParticipantsAll US-based internal medicine residents who completed the 2017 IM-ITE®. Responses from 20,744 residents (84%) were analyzed.Main measuresFor our main outcome, we calculated percentages of responses for eight barriers and tested for association with the presence or absence of nocturnists. For our secondary outcome, we categorized free-text responses enumerating barriers from all residents into the five Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) categories to elucidate future areas for study or intervention.Key resultsInternal medicine residents working in hospitals without nocturnists more commonly reported having at least one barrier to accessing a supervising physician "always" or "most of the time" (5075/9842, 51.6%) compared to residents in hospitals with nocturnists (3074/10,902, 28.2%, p < 0.001). Among residents in hospitals without nocturnists, the most frequently reported barrier to accessing attending supervision was attendings not being present in the hospital (30.4% "always" or "most of the time"); residents in hospitals with nocturnists most frequently reported desire to make their own decisions as a barrier to contacting attendings (15.7% "always" or "most of the time"). Free-text responses from residents with and without nocturnists most commonly revealed organization (47%) barriers to accessing supervision; 28% cited person barriers, and 23% cited tools/technology barriers.ConclusionsPresence of nocturnists is associated with fewer reported barriers to contacting supervising physicians overnight. Organizational culture, work schedules, desire for independence, interpersonal interactions, and technology may present important barriers.

Project description:BackgroundThe Thailand National Strategic Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) 2017-2021, endorsed by the Thai Cabinet in 2016, aims to increase public knowledge about antibiotics and AMR awareness by 20% by 2021. This study assesses the prevalence of antibiotics use, clinical indications and sources; knowledge and access to information related to antibiotics and AMR; and factors related to level of knowledge and access to information among Thai adult population.MethodsAn AMR module was developed and embedded into the 2017 Health and Welfare Survey; a cross-sectional, two-stage stratified sampling, nationally representative household survey carried out biannually by National Statistical Office. The survey applied a structured interview questionnaire. The survey was conducted in March 2017 where 27,762 Thai adults were interviewed of the AMR module. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.ResultsThe one-month prevalence of antibiotic use was 7.9% for three common conditions; flu (27.0%), fever (19.2%) and sore throat (16.8%). The majority of antibiotics (70.3%) were provided by public or private healthcare facilities, and 26.7% by pharmacies. Thai adults have low levels of knowledge about antibiotics; only 2.6 gave correct answers to all six statements related to antibiotics, while 13.5% gave wrong answers to all six statements. A few factors associated with knowledge and having received information on antibiotics were assessed. People who have higher education levels, and belong to richer wealth quintiles, and receive antibiotics and AMR information have significantly higher levels of knowledge about antibiotics. In the last 12 months, only 17.8% of respondents had heard information about the proper use of antibiotics and AMR; mostly from doctors (36.1%), health workers (24.8%) and pharmacists (17.7%).ConclusionsThere is a large gap of public knowledge about the use of antibiotics. The main communication channel is through healthcare professionals, which indicates they are key persons in communicating information about the proper use of antibiotics to the public.

Project description:IntroductionOver the past decade, the number of refugees arriving in the United States (U.S.) has increased dramatically. Refugees arrive with unmet health needs and may face barriers when seeking care. However, little is known about how refugees perceive and access care when acutely ill. The goal of this study was to understand barriers to access of acute care by newly arrived refugees, and identify potential improvements from refugees and resettlement agencies.MethodsThis was an in-depth, qualitative interview study of refugees and employees from refugee resettlement and post-resettlement agencies in a city in the Northeast U.S. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and coded independently by two investigators. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached. We analyzed transcripts using a modified grounded theory approach.ResultsInterviews were completed with 16 refugees and 12 employees from refugee resettlement/post-resettlement agencies. Participants reported several barriers to accessing acute care including challenges understanding the U.S. healthcare system, difficulty scheduling timely outpatient acute care visits, significant language barriers in all acute care settings, and confusion over the intricacies of health insurance. The novelty and complexity of the U.S. healthcare system drives refugees to resettlement agencies for assistance. Resettlement agency employees express concern with directing refugees to appropriate levels of care and report challenges obtaining timely access to sick visits. While receiving emergency department (ED) care, refugees experience communication barriers due to limitations in consistent interpretation services.ConclusionRefugees face multiple barriers when accessing acute care. Interventions in the ED, outpatient settings, and in resettlement agencies, have the potential to reduce barriers to care. Examples could include interpretation services that allow for clinic phone scheduling and easier access to interpreter services within the ED. Additionally, extending the Refugee Medical Assistance program may limit gaps in insurance coverage and avoid insurance-related barriers to seeking care.

Project description:BackgroundSpecialty care is a critical component of the healthcare system in the United States (US). Despite the frequency and importance of specialty referrals, disparities accessing specialty care have been reported across geographic regions and sociodemographic groups in the US.MethodsThe purpose of this study is to help inform health policy and practical solutions for improving access to specialty care in the US. We examined patients' perspectives and experiences regarding access to specialty care for themselves and family members across 5 specialty areas (oncology, neurology, ophthalmology, endocrinology, and other specialty). Data for access to care were collected from the RAND American Life Panel, a nationally representative probability-based panel of 6,000 participants who are regularly interviewed over the internet.ResultsThe survey population consisted of 2,137 adults, with a specialist referral recommended for 1,391 respondents (65%). The mean age of the population was 59.4 years, 23.0% were rural dwellers, 57.6% were female, 80.8% were White, 59.4% were married or living with a partner, and 85.4% were in good health. Approximately one-third (28%) of the US population experienced a barrier accessing a care specialist (oncologist, neurologist, ophthalmologist, endocrinologist, or other specialist) for themselves or for their families in 2021. Differences in access to specialty care were observed between US census regions. Difficulty accessing specialty care differed according to sociodemographic groups; a greater percentage of respondents who were < 65 years, women, or BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and people of color) experienced a problem accessing a specialist. Numerous barriers were identified that limited access to specialty care in the overall US population, with difficulty getting an appointment and long wait times being identified as primary barriers.ConclusionsPatient access to specialty care may be further complicated by patient-specific compounding factors including the number of specialty referrals, insurance providers, and barriers.

Dataset Information

Disparities in Travel-Related Barriers to Accessing Health Care From the 2017 National Household Travel Survey.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Disparities in Travel-Related Barriers to Accessing Health Care From the 2017 National Household Travel Survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets