Dataset Information

Perceived discrimination and self-reported quality of care among Latinos in the United States.

ABSTRACT: Given the persistence of health and health-care disparities among Latinos in the United States and evidence that discrimination affects health and health care, an investigation of the relationship between perceived discrimination and quality of health care among Latinos is warranted.To examine the relationship of perceived discrimination (in general and in regard to doctors and medical personnel) with self-reported quality of health care and doctor-patient communication in a nationally representative Latino population sample.Participants were 1,067 Latino adults aged >or=18 years living in the US selected via random-digit dialing. Telephone interviews were conducted in 2008 during Wave 2 of the Pew Hispanic Center/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Hispanic Healthcare Survey.US-born Latinos were twice as likely to report general discrimination as foreign born: 0.32 SD versus -0.23 SD (P < 0.001) on the Detroit Area Survey (DAS) discrimination scale. Higher DAS discrimination was associated with lower self-reported quality of care in US-born Latinos [OR = 0.5; 95% CI (0.3, 0.9); P = 0.009]. For foreign-born Latinos, report of any doctor or medical staff discrimination was associated with lower quality of care [OR = 0.5; 95% CI (0.3, 0.9); P = 0.03], but the DAS was not. For US-born Latinos, doctor discrimination and higher DAS were jointly associated with worse doctor-patient communication. For foreign-born Latinos, the effect of discrimination on doctor-patient communication was significantly smaller than that observed in US-born Latinos.Given the association between perceived discrimination and quality of care, strategies to address discrimination in health-care settings may lead to improved patient satisfaction with care and possibly to improved treatment outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Perez D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2764042 | biostudies-other | 2009 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePerceived everyday discrimination is a psychosocial stressor linked to adverse health outcomes, including mortality.ObjectiveTo assess the association of vision impairment (VI), hearing impairment (HI), and dual sensory impairments (DSI) with everyday discrimination.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional analysis of the Health and Retirement Study 2006 and 2008 surveys, a US population-based survey that included noninstitutionalized adults 51 years and older. Analyses were weighted to account for complex sample design and differential nonresponse. Data were analyzed between October 2019 and November 2019.ExposuresParticipants rated their vision and hearing, using eyeglasses and/or hearing aids if applicable, on a Likert scale (poor, fair, good, very good, and excellent). Sensory impairment was defined as poor or fair ability in the relevant modality, and sensory impairment was categorized as neither sensory impairment (NSI), VI alone, HI alone, and DSI.Main outcomes and measuresPerceived everyday discrimination was measured on the validated 5-question Williams scale (range 0 to 5). Linear regression models estimated differences in discrimination scores by sensory categories, adjusting for age, sex, race, ethnicity, non-US birth, body mass index, relationship status, net household wealth, and number of chronic diseases (among diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, stroke, lung disease, nonskin cancer, and arthritis).ResultsThe sample included 13 092 individuals. After weighting the sample to be representative of the US population, 11.7% had VI alone, 13.1% HI alone, and 7.9% DSI. In the fully adjusted model, participants with VI alone (β [change in discrimination score], 0.07; 95% CI, 0.02-0.13), HI alone (β = 0.07; 95% CI, 0.02-0.11), and DSI (β = 0.23; 95% CI, 0.16-0.29) perceived greater discrimination compared with participants with NSI. The DSI group perceived greater discrimination than VI alone or HI alone.Conclusions and relevanceOlder adults with VI or HI in the United States perceive greater everyday discrimination than older adults with NSI, and those with DSI perceive even more discrimination than those with either VI or HI alone. These results provide insight into the social impact of sensory loss and highlight a need to identify and address reasons for discrimination toward older adults with VI and HI.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Latinos are the largest minority group in the United States and experience persistent disparities in access to and quality of health care. OBJECTIVES: (1) To determine the relationship between nativity/immigration status and self-reported quality of care and preventive care. (2) To assess the impact of a usual source of health care on receipt of preventive care among Latinos. DESIGN: Using cross-sectional data from the 2007 Pew Hispanic Center/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Hispanic Healthcare Survey, a nationally representative telephone survey of 4,013 Latino adults, we compared US-born Latinos with foreign-born Latino citizens, foreign-born Latino permanent residents and undocumented Latinos. We estimated odds ratios using separate multivariate ordered logistic models for five outcomes: blood pressure checked in the past 2 years, cholesterol checked in the past 5 years, perceived quality of medical care in the past year, perceived receipt of no health/health-care information from a doctor in the past year, and language concordance. RESULTS: Undocumented Latinos had the lowest percentages of insurance coverage (37% vs 77% US-born, P < 0.001), usual source of care (58% vs 79% US-born, P < 0.001), blood pressure checked (67% vs 87% US-born, P < 0.001), cholesterol checked (56% vs 83% US-born, P < 0.001), and reported excellent/good care in the past year (76% vs 80% US-born, P < 0.05). Undocumented Latinos also reported the highest percentage receiving no health/health-care information from their doctor (40% vs 20% US-born, P < 0.001) in the past year. Adjusted results showed that undocumented status was associated with lower likelihood of blood pressure checked in the previous 2 years (OR = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.84), cholesterol checked in the past 5 years (OR = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39-0.99), and perceived receipt of excellent/good care in the past year (OR = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.77). Having a usual source of care increased the likelihood of a blood pressure check in the past 2 years and a cholesterol check in the past 5 years. CONCLUSION: In this national sample, undocumented Latinos were less likely to report receiving blood pressure and cholesterol level checks, less likely to report having received excellent/good quality of care, and more likely to receive no health/health-care information from doctors, even after adjusting for potential confounders. Our study shows that differences in nativity/immigration status should be taken into consideration when we discuss perceived quality of care among Latinos.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine perceived inpatient care quality according to regional socioeconomic status (SES), measured by regional household income, across the United States and Taiwan.Data sourcesPatient Experience in Hospital Care (PEHC) survey 2018-2019 data from National Taiwan University; US Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) 2018-2019 data from CMS.gov; and household income and facility data from publicly accessible databases.Study designThis retrospective study used multivariate logistic regression to estimate the effect of household income on the rate of positive inpatient experiences in Taiwan and the United States, adjusting for hospitals' teaching status and ownership, and physician density.Data collectionHospital administrators for HCAHPS and PEHC's research teams invited patients who received inpatient care during the data collection period in the United States and Taiwan, respectively. The analysis included 1024 facilities from nine US states and 350 facilities from twenty major cities/counties in Taiwan.Principal findingsPerceived inpatient care quality was higher in the United States than in Taiwan for the three experience measures. In Taiwan, hospitals with higher regional SES were less likely to receive a highly positive response for perceived respect, accommodation quality, and understanding upon discharge, with odds ratios (ORs) ranging from 0.83 to 0.88. In contrast, in the United States, higher regional SES was associated with a higher likelihood of a positive response for accommodation quality and understanding upon discharge (ORs = 2.51 and 1.48). Regional physician density and individual hospital characteristics show varying effects on perceived quality between Taiwan and the United States.ConclusionsHigher overall experience scores in the United States are consistent with higher spending on health care compared with Taiwan. Varying associations between regional SES and perceived inpatient care quality highlight how systemic and cultural differences between the two countries affect scoring patterns.

Project description:While decreased ocular blood flow is thought to be a possible contributor to glaucoma pathogenesis, it is unclear what role systemic phosphodiesterase inhibitors (PDEi) play. We performed a cross-sectional study of a nationally representative sample of the U.S. population to investigate the relationship between the most commonly used PDEi, sildenafil and theophylline, and self-reported glaucoma.We used the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2008 cycles for this observational study. 7,042 participants, aged 40 years and over, responded to a survey item on glaucoma status and were included in the analysis. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to evaluate the association between at least 1 year of self-reported PDEi use and prevalent glaucoma. Regressions were adjusted for potential confounding variables, including demographics, socioeconomic status, and general health conditions, and accounted for the complex design of the survey. Sample weights were constructed and used to ensure the generalizability of results.482 respondents self-reported a diagnosis of glaucoma, of which 11 used sildenafil and 20 used theophylline for at least 1 year. Covariates significantly associated with higher odds of glaucoma prevalence in univariable analyses included older age, black race, former smoking status, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Conversely, higher education and income were significantly associated with lower odds of glaucoma prevalence. In regression analyses adjusted for demographic and socioeconomic variables, sildenafil (OR = 4.90, CI: 1.24-19.27, p = 0.025) and theophylline (OR = 3.15, CI: 1.46-6.80, p = 0.005) were significantly associated with higher odds of self-reported glaucoma. These associations held after further adjustment with general health behaviors and conditions for both sildenafil and theophylline.Use of sildenafil and theophylline for one or more years was associated with greater prevalence of self-reported glaucoma, a finding which requires further prospective study to assess causality and possible mechanisms of action.

Dataset Information

Perceived discrimination and self-reported quality of care among Latinos in the United States.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets