Dataset Information

Interpersonal processes of care and patient satisfaction: do associations differ by race, ethnicity, and language?

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Describe association of patient satisfaction with interpersonal processes of care (IPC) by race/ethnicity.

Data sources/study setting

Interview with 1,664 patients (African Americans, English- and Spanish-speaking Latinos, and non-Latino Whites).

Study design/methods

Cross-sectional study of seven IPC measures (communication, patient-centered decision making, and interpersonal style) and three satisfaction measures (satisfaction with physicians, satisfaction with health care, and willingness to recommend physicians). Regression models explored associations, controlling for patient characteristics.

Principal findings

In all groups: patient-centered decision making was positively associated with satisfaction with physicians (B=0.10, p<.0001) and health care (B=0.07, p<.001), and "recommend physicians" (OR=1.23, 95 percent CI 1.06, 1.43); discrimination was negatively associated with satisfaction with physicians (B=0.09, p<.05) and health care (B=0.17, p<.001). Unclear communication was associated with less satisfaction with physicians among Spanish-speaking Latinos. Explaining results was positively associated with all satisfaction outcomes for all groups with one exception (no association with satisfaction with physicians for Latino Spanish-speakers). Compassion/respect was positively associated with all outcomes for all groups with two exceptions (no association with satisfaction with health care among English-speaking Latinos and Whites).

Conclusions

All IPC measures were associated with at least one satisfaction outcome for all groups except for unclear communication.

SUBMITTER: Napoles AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2714869 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective We determine whether racial concordance between postpartum patients and obstetric providers (dyads) impacts the perception of quality of care among people undergoing intrapartum obstetrical procedures.Study design This is a prospective cohort study of postpartum people who underwent operative vaginal or cesarean deliveries in the second stage of labor. Participants were asked to identify the race of their primary provider and complete the Interpersonal Processes of Care (IPC) survey, which assesses communication, patient-centered decision-making, and interpersonal style. The association of participant-identified patient-provider racial concordance with IPC scores was determined. The primary outcome was the IPC subdomain related to discrimination, and secondary outcomes included other IPC subdomains and IPC results by participant racial identity (Black, LatinX vs. White). Sociodemographic and biomedical data were extracted from the medical record. Bivariable analyses were performed.Results Of 168 patients who were approached, 107 (63.6%) agreed to participate and 87 (81.3%) completed the survey. The majority (n=49) identified a racially discordant provider. Participants in racially concordant dyads were more likely to be older, White, use English as a primary language, complete a higher degree of education, and have a higher household income when compared with racially discordant dyads. Intrapartum outcomes were not significantly different between groups. Median IPC subtest scores were not significantly different between groups or between racial/ethnic identities.Conclusion There were no significant differences in perceptions of IPC between racially concordant versus discordant dyads. However, there is an ongoing need to further clarify measures of quality of care in high-acuity obstetrical situations to remediate ongoing racial and ethnic disparities in adverse health outcomes.Key points· Racial concordance between patient and clinician has been associated with improved quality of care.. · There are limited data on racial concordance and perceptions of operative obstetrical care (e.g., operative vaginal delivery).. · Racial concordance was not associated with differences in patient-perceived quality of care associated with operative obstetrics..

Project description:ImportanceHealth care disparities are well-documented among children based on race, ethnicity, and language for care. An agenda that outlines research priorities for disparities in pediatric emergency care (PEC) is lacking.ObjectiveTo investigate research priorities for disparities in PEC among medical personnel, researchers, and health care-affiliated community organizations.Design, setting, and participantsIn this survey study, a modified Delphi approach was used to investigate research priorities for disparities in PEC. An initial list of research priorities was developed by a group of experienced PEC investigators in 2021. Partners iteratively assessed the list through 2 rounds of electronic surveys using Likert-type responses in late 2021 and early 2022. Priorities were defined as achieving consensus if they received a score of highest priority or priority by at least 60% of respondents. Asynchronous engagement of participants via online web-conferencing platforms and email correspondence with electronic survey administration was used. Partners were individuals and groups involved in PEC. Participants represented interest groups, research and medical personnel organizations, health care partners, and laypersons with roles in community and family hospital advisory councils. Participants were largely from the US, with input from international PEC research networks.OutcomeConsensus agenda of research priorities to identify and address health care disparities in PEC.ResultsPEC investigators generated an initial list of 27 potential priorities. Surveys were completed by 38 of 47 partners (80.6%) and 30 of 38 partners (81.1%) in rounds 1 and 2, respectively. Among 30 respondents who completed both rounds, there were 7 family or community partners and 23 medical or research partners, including 4 international PEC research networks. A total of 12 research priorities achieved the predetermined consensus threshold: (1) systematic efforts to reduce disparities; (2) race, ethnicity, and language data collection and reporting; (3) recognizing and mitigating clinician implicit bias; (4) mental health disparities; (5) social determinants of health; (6) language and literacy; (7) acute pain-management disparities; (8) quality of care equity metrics; (9) shared decision-making; (10) patient experience; (11) triage and acuity score assignment; and (12) inclusive research participation.Conclusions and relevanceThese results suggest a research priority agenda that may be used as a guide for investigators, research networks, organizations, and funding agencies to engage in and support high-priority disparities research topics in PEC.

Project description:ImportanceRacial and ethnic disparities in access to health care may result from discrimination.ObjectivesTo identify differences in the rates at which patients belonging to racial/ethnic minority groups are offered primary care appointments and the number of days they wait for their primary care appointment and to understand the mechanisms by which discrimination occurs.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used 7 simulated black, Hispanic, and white patient callers to request appointments from 804 randomized primary care offices in 2 urban centers in Texas from November 2017 to February 2018. Data analysis was conducted between February and December 2018.ExposuresResearch assistants called randomly assigned offices to schedule an appointment, supplying the same basic information. Race and ethnicity were signaled through callers' names and voices.Main outcomes and measuresAppointment offer rates, days to appointment, and questions asked during the call.ResultsOf the 7 callers (age range, 18-29 years), 2 (28.6%) self-identified as non-Hispanic black, 3 (42.9%) self-identified as non-Hispanic white, and 2 (28.6%) self-identified as Hispanic. Of the 804 calls they made, 299 (37.2%) were from simulated white callers, 215 (26.7%) were from simulated black callers, and 290 (36.1%) were from simulated Hispanic callers. Overall, 582 callers (72.4%) were offered appointments. In unadjusted models, black and Hispanic callers were more likely to be offered an appointment than white callers (black callers, 32.2 [95% CI, 25.1-39.3] percentage points more likely; P < .001; Hispanic callers, 21.1 [95% CI, 13.7-28.5] percentage points more likely; P < .001). However, after adjusting for whether insurance status was revealed, this statistical significance was lost. In adjusted models, black callers were 44.0 (95% CI, 36.2-51.8) percentage points more likely to be asked about their insurance status than white callers (P < .001), and Hispanic callers were 25.3 (95% CI, 17.1-33.5) percentage points more likely to be asked about their insurance status (P < .001) than white callers. Black and Hispanic callers received appointments further in the future than white callers (black callers: marginal effect estimate, 3.650; 95% CI, 0.579 to 6.721; P = .08; Hispanic callers: marginal effect estimate, 2.644; 95% CI, -0.496 to 5.784; P = .02).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, black and Hispanic patients were more likely to be offered an appointment, but they were asked more frequently about their insurance status than white callers. Black and Hispanic callers experienced longer wait times than white patients, indicating a barrier to timely access to primary care.

Project description:ImportanceEmergency department (ED) triage substantially affects how long patients wait for care but triage scoring relies on few objective criteria. Prior studies suggest that Black and Hispanic patients receive unequal triage scores, paralleled by disparities in the depth of physician evaluations.ObjectivesTo examine whether racial disparities in triage scores and physician evaluations are present across a multicenter network of academic and community hospitals and evaluate whether patients who do not speak English face similar disparities.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a cross-sectional, multicenter study examining adults presenting between February 28, 2019, and January 1, 2023, across the Mass General Brigham Integrated Health Care System, encompassing 7 EDs: 2 urban academic hospitals and 5 community hospitals. Analysis included all patients presenting with 1 of 5 common chief symptoms.ExposuresEmergency department nurse-led triage and physician evaluation.Main outcomes and measuresAverage Triage Emergency Severity Index [ESI] score and average visit work relative value units [wRVUs] were compared across symptoms and between individual minority racial and ethnic groups and White patients.ResultsThere were 249 829 visits (149 861 female [60%], American Indian or Alaska Native 0.2%, Asian 3.3%, Black 11.8%, Hispanic 18.8%, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander <0.1%, White 60.8%, and patients identifying as Other race or ethnicity 5.1%). Median age was 48 (IQR, 29-66) years. White patients had more acute ESI scores than Hispanic or Other patients across all symptoms (eg, chest pain: Hispanic, 2.68 [95% CI, 2.67-2.69]; White, 2.55 [95% CI, 2.55-2.56]; Other, 2.66 [95% CI, 2.64-2.68]; P < .001) and Black patients across most symptoms (nausea/vomiting: Black, 2.97 [95% CI, 2.96-2.99]; White: 2.90 [95% CI, 2.89-2.91]; P < .001). These differences were reversed for wRVUs (chest pain: Black, 4.32 [95% CI, 4.25-4.39]; Hispanic, 4.13 [95% CI, 4.08-4.18]; White 3.55 [95% CI, 3.52-3.58]; Other 3.96 [95% CI, 3.84-4.08]; P < .001). Similar patterns were seen for patients whose primary language was not English.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, patients who identified as Black, Hispanic, and Other race and ethnicity were assigned less acute ESI scores than their White peers despite having received more involved physician workups, suggesting some degree of mistriage. Clinical decision support systems might reduce these disparities but would require careful calibration to avoid replicating bias.

Project description:STUDY DESIGN:Secondary analysis of the Back Pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) cohort study. OBJECTIVE:To characterize associations of self-reported race/ethnicity with back pain (BP) patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health care utilization among older adults with a new episode of care for BP. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:No prior longitudinal studies have characterized associations between multiple race/ethnicity groups, and BP-related PROs and health care utilization in the United States. METHODS:This study included 5117 participants ?65 years from three US health care systems. The primary BP-related PROs were BP intensity and back-related functional limitations over 24 months. Health care utilization measures included common diagnostic tests and treatments related to BP (spine imaging, spine-related relative value units [RVUs], and total RVUs) over 24 months. Analyses were adjusted for multiple potential confounders including sociodemographics, clinical characteristics, and study site. RESULTS:Baseline BP ratings were significantly higher for blacks vs. whites (5.8 vs. 5.0; P?<?0.001). Participants in all race/ethnicity groups showed statistically significant, but modest improvements in BP over 24 months. Blacks and Hispanics did not have statistically significant improvement in BP-related functional limitations over time, unlike whites, Asians, and non-Hispanics; however, the magnitude of differences in improvement between groups was small. Blacks had less spine-related health care utilization over 24 months than whites (spine-related RVU ratio of means 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.86). Hispanics had less spine-related health care utilization than non-Hispanics (spine-related RVU ratio of means 0.60; 95% CI 0.40-0.90). CONCLUSION:Blacks and Hispanics had slightly less improvement in BP-related functional limitations over time, and less spine-related health care utilization, as compared to whites and non-Hispanics, respectively. Residual confounding may explain some of the association between race/ethnicity and health outcomes. Further studies are needed to understand the factors underlying these differences and which differences reflect disparities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:3.

Project description:ImportancePrevious research suggests that the prevalence of occupational burnout varies by demographic characteristics, such as sex and age, but the association between physician race/ethnicity and occupational burnout is less well understood.ObjectiveTo investigate possible differences in occupational burnout, depressive symptoms, career satisfaction, and work-life integration by race/ethnicity in a sample of US physicians.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cross-sectional study, data for this secondary analysis of 4424 physicians were originally collected from a cross-sectional survey of US physicians between October 12, 2017, and March 15, 2018. The dates of analysis were March 8, 2019, to May 21, 2020. Multivariable logistic regression, including statistical adjustment for physician demographic and clinical practice characteristics, was performed to examine the association between physician race/ethnicity and occupational burnout, depressive symptoms, career satisfaction, and work-life integration.ExposuresPhysician demographic and clinical practice characteristics included race/ethnicity, sex, age, clinical specialty, hours worked per week, primary practice setting, and relationship status.Main outcomes and measuresPhysicians with a high score on the emotional exhaustion or depersonalization subscale of the Maslach Burnout Inventory were classified as having burnout. Depressive symptoms were measured using the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders instrument. Physicians who marked "strongly agree" or "agree" in response to the survey items "I would choose to become a physician again" and "My work schedule leaves me enough time for my personal/family life" were considered to be satisfied with their career and work-life integration, respectively.ResultsData were available for 4424 physicians (mean [SD] age, 52.46 [12.03] years; 61.5% [2722 of 4424] male). Most physicians (78.7% [3480 of 4424]) were non-Hispanic White. Non-Hispanic Asian, Hispanic/Latinx, and non-Hispanic Black physicians comprised 12.3% (542 of 4424), 6.3% (278 of 4424), and 2.8% (124 of 4424) of the sample, respectively. Burnout was observed in 44.7% (1540 of 3447) of non-Hispanic White physicians, 41.7% (225 of 540) of non-Hispanic Asian physicians, 38.5% (47 of 122) of non-Hispanic Black physicians, and 37.4% (104 of 278) of Hispanic/Latinx physicians. The adjusted odds of burnout were lower in non-Hispanic Asian physicians (odds ratio [OR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.96), Hispanic/Latinx physicians (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.86), and non-Hispanic Black physicians (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.79) compared with non-Hispanic White physicians. Non-Hispanic Black physicians were more likely to report satisfaction with work-life integration compared with non-Hispanic White physicians (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.05-2.73). No differences in depressive symptoms or career satisfaction were observed by race/ethnicity.Conclusions and relevancePhysicians in minority racial/ethnic groups were less likely to report burnout compared with non-Hispanic White physicians. Future research is necessary to confirm these results, investigate factors contributing to increased rates of burnout among non-Hispanic White physicians, and assess factors underlying the observed patterns in measures of physician wellness by race/ethnicity.