Dataset Information

Disparities in Health Insurance Coverage and Access to Care by English Language Proficiency in the USA, 2006-2016.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In the USA, people with limited English proficiency (LEP) disproportionately experience gaps in health insurance coverage and access to care. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010 included reforms that could improve these outcomes.

Objective

To describe changes in insurance coverage and access to health care by English language proficiency over 2006-2016.

Design

We used regression models to estimate changes in coverage and access after 2010 for adults with high vs. limited English proficiency, adjusting for socio-economic status, demographic characteristics, and health care needs. We used difference-in-differences models to assess adjusted changes in disparities by English proficiency after 2010. Supplemental analyses used nearest-neighbor propensity score matching to balance the characteristics of respondents.

Participants

Respondents aged 18-64 in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey over 2006-2016, with high (n = 174,214) or limited (n = 16,484) English language proficiency.

Main measures

Insurance coverage was a binary variable indicating any health insurance coverage during the past 12 months. Access to care was measured using binary variables indicating whether the respondent had a usual source of care and received necessary medical, dental, and preventive care.

Key results

Gains in health insurance coverage after 2010 were significant for adults with high English proficiency (1.7 percentage points, p < 0.001) and adults with limited English proficiency (4.6 percentage points, p = 0.007); gains did not significantly vary by English proficiency. Adults with LEP showed larger improvements than adults with high English proficiency in having a usual source of care (5 percentage points, p = 0.007) and receiving needed medical care and dental care (1.4 percentage points, p = 0.013, and 2.8 percentage points, p = 0.009, respectively). Findings remained similar when matching was used to balance the measured characteristics of respondents with high vs. limited English proficiency.

Conclusions

Disparities in health care access by English proficiency narrowed after 2010, the year of passage of the ACA.

SUBMITTER: Lu T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7210354 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLimited English proficiency (LEP) is associated with poor health status and worse outcomes.ObjectiveTo examine disparities in hypertension between National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) respondents with LEP versus adequate English proficiency.DesignRetrospective analysis of multi-year survey data.ParticipantsAdults 18 years of age and older who participated in the NHANES survey during the period 2003-2012.Main measuresWe defined participants with LEP as anyone who completed the NHANES survey in a language other than English or with the support of an interpreter. Using logistic regression, we estimated the odds ratio for undiagnosed or uncontrolled hypertension (systolic blood pressure (SBP) > 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) > 90 mmHg) among LEP participants relative to those with adequate English proficiency. We adjusted for sociodemographic, acculturation-related, and hypertension-related variables.Key resultsFourteen percent (n = 3,269) of the participants had limited English proficiency: 12.4% (n = 2906) used a Spanish questionnaire and 1.6% (n = 363) used an interpreter to complete the survey in another language. Those with LEP had higher odds of elevated blood pressure on physical examination (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.47 [1.07-2.03]). This finding persisted among participants using an interpreter (AOR = 1.88 [1.15-3.06]) but not among those using the Spanish questionnaire (AOR = 1.32 [0.98-1.80]). In a subgroup analysis, we found that the majority of uncontrolled hypertension was concentrated among individuals with a known diagnosis of hypertension (AOR = 1.80 [1.16-2.81]) rather than those with undiagnosed hypertension (AOR = 1.14 [0.74-1.75]). Interpreter use was associated with increased odds of uncontrolled hypertension, especially among patients who were not being medically managed for hypertension (AOR = 6.56 [1.30-33.12]).ConclusionsIn a nationally representative sample, participants with LEP were more likely to have poorly controlled hypertension than those with adequate English proficiency. LEP is an important driver of disparities in hypertension management and outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundIndividuals with limited English proficiency (LEP) have worse healthcare access and report lower quality of care compared to individuals who are proficient in English. Policy efforts to improve patient-provider communication for LEP individuals have been going on for decades but linguistic disparities persist.ObjectiveTo describe trends in patient-provider communication by limited English proficiency (LEP) from 2006 to 2015.DesignWe estimated interrupted time series models for three measures of patient-provider communication, testing for differences in both means (intercepts) and trends (slopes) before and after 2010 and differences in differences by English proficiency.ParticipantsA nationally representative sample of the US non-institutionalized population with at least one office-based medical visit from the 2006-2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (N = 27,001).Main measuresPatient-provider communication is measured with three variables indicating whether individuals reported that their providers always explained things in a way that was easy to understand, showed respect for what they had to say, and listened carefully.Key resultsAlthough patient-provider communication improved for all groups over the study period, before 2010, it was getting worse among LEP individuals and disparities in patient-provider communication were widening. After 2010, patient-provider communication improved for LEP individuals and language disparities by English proficiency either narrowed or remained the same. For example, between 2006 and 2010, the percent of LEP individuals reporting that their provider explained things clearly declined by, on average, 1.4 percentage points per year (p value = 0.102); after 2010, it increased by 3.0 percentage points per year (p value = 0.003).ConclusionsOur study sheds light on trends in patient-provider communication before and after 2010, a year that marked substantial efforts to reform the US healthcare system. Though patient-provider communication among LEP individuals has improved since 2010, linguistic disparities persist and constitute a formidable challenge to achieving healthcare equity, a long-standing US policy goal.

Project description:BackgroundThere are approximately 25.6 million individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP) in the USA, and this number is increasing.ObjectiveInvestigate associations between LEP and access to care in adults.DesignCross-sectional nationally representative survey.ParticipantsAdults with (n = 18,908) and without (n = 98,060) LEP aged ≥ 18 years identified from the 2014-2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey MAIN MEASURES: Associations between LEP and access to healthcare and preventive services were evaluated with multivariable logistic regression models, stratified by age group (18-64 and ≥ 65 years). The official government definition of LEP (answers "not at all/not well/well" to the question "How well do you speak English?") was used. Access to care included having a usual source of care (and if so, distance from usual source of care, difficulty contacting usual source of care, and provision of extended hours), visiting a medical provider in the past 12 months, having to forego or delay care, and having trouble paying for medical bills. Preventive services included blood pressure and cholesterol check, flu vaccination, and cancer screening.Key resultsAdults aged 18-64 years with LEP were significantly more likely to lack a usual source of care (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 2.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.27-2.70), not have visited a medical provider (aOR = 2.02; CI = 1.89-2.16), and to be overdue for receipt of preventive services, including blood pressure check (aOR = 2.00; CI = 1.79-2.23), cholesterol check (aOR = 1.22; CI = 1.03-1.44), and colorectal cancer screening (aOR = 1.58; CI = 1.37-1.83) than adults without LEP. Results were similar among adults aged ≥ 65 years.ConclusionsAdults with LEP had consistently worse access to care than adults without LEP. System-level interventions, such as expanding access to health insurance coverage, providing language services, improving provider training in cultural competence, and increasing diversity in the medical workforce may minimize barriers and improve equity in access to care.

Project description:BackgroundLanguage concordance can increase access to care for patients with language barriers and improve patient health outcomes. However, systematically assessing and tracking physician non-English language skills remains uncommon in most health systems. This is a missed opportunity for health systems to maximize language-concordant care.ObjectiveTo determine barriers and facilitators to participation in non-English language proficiency assessment among primary care physicians.DesignQualitative, semi-structured interviews.ParticipantsEleven fully and partially bilingual primary care physicians from a large academic health system with a language certification program (using a clinician oral proficiency interview).ApproachInterviews aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to participation in non-English language assessment. Two researchers independently and iteratively coded transcripts using a thematic analysis approach with constant comparison to identify themes.Key resultsMost participants were women (N= 9; 82%). Participants reported proficiency in Cantonese, Mandarin, Russian, and Spanish. All fully bilingual participants (n=5) had passed the language assessment; of the partially bilingual participants (n=6), four did not test, one passed with marginal proficiency, and one did not pass. Three themes emerged as barriers to assessment participation: (1) beliefs about the negative consequences (emotional and material) of not passing the test, (2) time constraints and competing demands, and (3) challenging test format and structure. Four themes emerged as facilitators to increase assessment adoption: (1) messaging consistent with professional ethos, (2) organizational culture that incentivizes certification, (3) personal empowerment about language proficiency, and (4) individuals championing certification.ConclusionsTo increase language assessment participation and thus ensure quality language-concordant care, health systems must address the identified barriers physicians experience and leverage potential facilitators. Findings can inform health system interventions to standardize the requirements and process, increase transparency, provide resources for preparation and remediation, utilize messaging focused on patient care quality and safety, and incentivize participation.