Dataset Information

Association of Simulated Patient Race/Ethnicity With Scheduling of Primary Care Appointments.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Racial and ethnic disparities in access to health care may result from discrimination.

Objectives

To 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 participants

This 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.

Exposures

Research 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 measures

Appointment offer rates, days to appointment, and questions asked during the call.

Results

Of 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 relevance

In 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.

SUBMITTER: Wisniewski JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6991290 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association of Simulated Patient Race/Ethnicity With Scheduling of Primary Care Appointments.

Wisniewski Janna M JM Walker Brigham B

JAMA network open 20200103 1

<h4>Importance</h4>Racial and ethnic disparities in access to health care may result from discrimination.<h4>Objectives</h4>To 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.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This cross-sectional study used 7 simulated black, Hispanic, and w ...[more]

PMID: 31995215

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSubstantial patient racial and ethnic differences in opioid prescribing have been documented, but how much of these differences were attributable to physicians prescribing opioids differently to patients of racial and ethnic minority groups is unknown, particularly during the first wave of the opioid epidemic when the dangers of opioid prescribing and use were not as well known.ObjectiveTo examine associations of patient race and ethnicity with differences in opioid prescribing by the same primary care physician (PCP) for new low back pain episodes among older adults from 2007 to 2014.Design setting and participantsThis cross-sectional study used Medicare data of PCP office visits by Medicare beneficiaries who were 66 years or older with new low back pain.Main outcomes and measuresPrescribing of any opioid in the first year of a new low back pain episode (days 1-365) and subsequent long-term use of an opioid (prescribed for ≥180 days in days 366-730).ResultsAmong the study population of 274 771 patients (mean [SD] age, 77.1 [7.2] years; 192 105 [69.9%] women) with new low back pain, 15 285 (6%) were Asian or Pacific Islander, 16 079 (6%) were Black, 21 289 (8%) were Hispanic, and 222 118 (81%) were White, cared for by 63 494 physicians. In adjusted analysis, on average, 11.5% of the White patients (95% CI, 11.4 to 11.6) received an opioid prescription in the first year of new low back pain. The same prescribing physician was 1.5 percentage points (PP; 95% CI, -2.2 PP to -0.8 PP) less likely to prescribe an opioid if the patient was Black, 2.7 PP (95% CI, -3.5 PP to -1.8 PP) less likely if the patient was Asian or Pacific Islander, and 1.0 PP (95% CI, -1.7 PP to -0.3 PP) less likely if the patient was Hispanic. The same physician was more likely to prescribe a prescription nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug to a patient of a racial or ethnic minority group. White patients with new low back pain were more likely to develop subsequent long-term opioid use than patients of racial and ethnic minority groups (eg, 1.8% for White patients vs 0.5% for Hispanic patients).Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found that from 2007 to 2014, primary care physicians prescribed opioids for new low back pain more often to White patients than to patients of racial and ethnic minority groups. These results suggest that there may have been unequal treatment of pain by physicians when less was known about the morbidity associated with opioid use.

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:BackgroundPatient satisfaction is increasingly being used to assess, and financially reward, provider performance. Previous studies suggest that race/ethnicity (R/E) may impact satisfaction, yet few practices adjust for patient R/E. The objective of this study is to examine R/E differences in patient satisfaction ratings and how these differences impact provider rankings.MethodsPatient satisfaction survey data linked to electronic health records from two large outpatient centers in northern California - a non-profit organization of community-based clinics (Site A) and an academic medical center (Site B) - was collected and analyzed. Participants consisted of adult patients who received outpatient care at Site A from December 2010 to November 2014 and Site B from March 2013 to August 2014, and completed Press-Ganey Medical Practice Survey questionnaires (N = 216,392 (Site A) and 30,690 (Site B)). Self-reported non-Hispanic white (NHW), Black, Latino, and Asian patients were studied. For six questions each representing a survey subdomain, favorable ratings were defined as top-box ("very good") compared to all other categories ("very poor," "poor," "fair," and "good"). Using multivariable logistic regression with provider random effects, we assessed whether the likelihood of giving favorable ratings differed by patient R/E, adjusting for patient age and sex.ResultsAsian, younger and female patients provided less favorable ratings than other R/E, older and male patients. After adjustment, Asian patients were less likely than NHW patients to provide top-box ratings to the overall assessment question "likelihood of recommending this practice to others" (Site A: Asian predicted probability (PP) 0.680, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.675-0.685 compared to NHW PP 0.820, 95% CI: 0.818-0.822; Site B: Asian PP 0.734, 95% CI: 0.733-0.736 compared to NHW PP 0.859, 95% CI: 0.859-0.859). The effect sizes for Asian R/E were greater than the effect sizes for older age and female sex. An absolute 3% decrease in mean composite score between providers serving different percentages of Asian patients translated to an absolute 40% drop in national ranking.ConclusionsPatient satisfaction scores may need to be adjusted for patient R/E, particularly for providers caring for high panel percentages of Asian patients.

Project description:ImportanceMedical practices increasingly allow patients to schedule their own visits through online patient portals, yet little is known about who adopts direct scheduling or how this service is used.ObjectiveTo determine patient and visit characteristics associated with direct scheduling, visit patterns, and potential implications for access and continuity in the primary care setting.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used electronic health record (EHR) data from 17 adult primary care practices in a large academic medical center in the Boston, Massachusetts, area. Participants included patients 18 years or older who were attributed in the EHR to an active primary care physician at 1 of the included primary care practices, were enrolled in the patient portal, and had at least 1 visit to 1 of these practices between March 1, 2018, and March 1, 2019, the period of analysis. Data were analyzed from October 25, 2019, to April 14, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresAdoption of direct scheduling, defined as at least 1 use during the study period. Usual scheduling was defined as scheduling with clinic staff by telephone or in person.ResultsWe examined 134 225 completed visits by 62 080 patients (mean [SD] age, 51.1 [16.4] years, 37 793 [60.9%] women) attributed to 140 primary care physicians at 17 primary care practices. A total of 5020 patients (8.1% [95% CI, 7.9%-8.3%]) adopted direct scheduling, with an age range of 18 to 95 years. Compared with nonadopters in the same practices, adopters were younger (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] per additional year, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.98-0.99]) and were more likely to be White (AOR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.01-1.17]) and commercially insured (AOR vs uninsured, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.11-1.76]) and to have more comorbidities (AOR per additional comorbidity, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.04-1.11]). Compared with usually scheduled visits, directly scheduled visits were more likely to be for general medical examinations (1979 visits [36.7%] vs 26 519 visits [21.9%]; P < .001) and with one's own primary care physician (5267 visits [95.2%] vs 94 634 visits [73.5%]; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that direct scheduling was associated with greater primary care continuity. Early adopters were more likely to be young, White, and commercially insured, and to the extent these differences persist as direct scheduling is used more widely, this service may widen socioeconomic disparities in primary care access.

Project description:ImportanceKnowledge gaps persist regarding racial and ethnic variation in late-life depression, including differences in specific depressive symptoms and disparities in care.ObjectiveTo examine racial/ethnic differences in depression severity, symptom burden, and care.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study included 25 503 of 25 871 community-dwelling older adults who participated in the Vitamin D and Omega-3 Trial (VITAL), a randomized trial of cancer and cardiovascular disease prevention conducted from November 2011 to December 2017. Data analysis was conducted from June to September 2018.ExposureRacial/ethnic group (ie, non-Hispanic white; black; Hispanic; Asian; and other, multiple, or unspecified race).Main outcomes and measuresDepressive symptoms, assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8); participant-reported diagnosis, medication, and/or counseling for depression. Differences across racial/ethnic groups were evaluated using multivariable zero-inflated negative binomial regression to compare PHQ-8 scores and multivariable logistic regression to estimate odds of item-level symptom burden and odds of depression treatment among those with diagnosed depression.ResultsThere were 25 503 VITAL participants with adequate depression data (mean [SD] age, 67.1 [7.1] years) including 12 888 [50.5%] women, 17 828 [69.9%] non-Hispanic white participants, 5004 [19.6%] black participants, 1001 [3.9%] Hispanic participants, 377 [1.5%] Asian participants, and 1293 participants [5.1%] who were categorized in the other, multiple, or unspecified race group. After adjustment for sociodemographic, lifestyle, and health confounders, black participants had a 10% higher severity level of PHQ-8 scores compared with non-Hispanic white participants (rate ratio [RR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.17; P < .001); Hispanic participants had a 23% higher severity level of PHQ-8 scores compared with non-Hispanic white participants (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.10-1.38; P < .001); and participants in the other, multiple, or unspecified group had a 14% higher severity level of PHQ-8 scores compared with non-Hispanic white participants (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.25; P = .007). Compared with non-Hispanic white participants, participants belonging to minority groups had 1.5-fold to 2-fold significantly higher fully adjusted odds of anhedonia (among black participants: odds ratio [OR], 1.76; 95% CI, 1.47-2.11; among Hispanic participants: OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.43-2.69), sadness (among black participants: OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.07-1.60; among Hispanic participants: OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.51-2.88), and psychomotor symptoms (among black participants: OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.31-2.39; among Hispanic participants: OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.28-3.50); multivariable-adjusted odds of sleep problems and guilt appeared higher among Hispanic vs non-Hispanic white participants (sleep: OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.01-1.52; guilt: 1.84; 95% CI, 1.31-2.59). Among those with clinically significant depressive symptoms (ie, PHQ-8 score ≥10) and/or those with diagnosed depression, black participants were 61% less likely to report any treatment (ie, medications and/or counseling) than non-Hispanic white participants after adjusting for confounders (adjusted OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.27-0.56).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, significant racial and ethnic differences in late-life depression severity, item-level symptom burden, and depression care were observed after adjustment for numerous confounders. These findings suggest a need for further examination of novel patient-level and clinician-level factors underlying these associations.

Dataset Information

Association of Simulated Patient Race/Ethnicity With Scheduling of Primary Care Appointments.

Importance

Objectives

Design, setting, and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Association of Simulated Patient Race/Ethnicity With Scheduling of Primary Care Appointments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets