English Language Proficiency and Geographical Proximity to a Safety Net Clinic as a Predictor of Health Care Access

Studies suggest that proximity to a safety net clinic (SNC) promotes access to care among the uninsured. Distance-based barriers to care may be greater for people with limited English proficiency (LEP), compared to those who are English proficient (EP), but this has not been explored. We assessed the relationship between distance to the nearest SNC and access in non-rural uninsured adults in California, and examined whether this relationship differs by language proficiency. Using the 2005 California Health Interview Survey and a list we compiled of California’s SNCs, we calculated distance between uninsured interviewee residence and the exact address of the nearest SNC. Using multivariate regression to adjust for other relevant characteristics, we examined associations between this distance and interviewee’s probability of having a usual source of health care (USOC) and having visited a physician in the prior 12 months. To examine differences by language proficiency, we included interactions between distance and language proficiency. Uninsured LEP adults living within 2 miles of a SNC were 9.3% less likely than their EP counterparts to have a USOC (P = 0.046). Further, distance to the nearest SNC was inversely associated with the probability of having a USOC among LEP, but not among EP; consequently, the difference between LEP and EP in the probability of having a USOC widened with increasing distance to the nearest SNC. There was no difference between LEP and EP adults living within 2 miles of a SNC in likelihood of having a physician visit; however, as with USOC, distance to the nearest SNC was inversely associated with the probability of having a physician visit among LEP but not EP. The effect sizes diminished, but remained significant, when we included county fixed effects in the models. Having LEP is a barrier to health care access, which compounds when combined with increased distance to the nearest SNC, among uninsured adults. Future studies should explore potential mechanisms so that appropriate interventions can be implemented

Packages of Care for Schizophrenia in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

In the third in a series of six articles on packages of care for mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries, Jair Mari and colleagues discuss the treatment of schizophrenia

A systematic review of the incidence of schizophrenia: the distribution of rates and the influence of sex, urbanicity, migrant status and methodology

BACKGROUND: Understanding variations in the incidence of schizophrenia is a crucial step in unravelling the aetiology of this group of disorders. The aims of this review are to systematically identify studies related to the incidence of schizophrenia, to describe the key features of these studies, and to explore the distribution of rates derived from these studies. METHODS: Studies with original data related to the incidence of schizophrenia (published 1965–2001) were identified via searching electronic databases, reviewing citations and writing to authors. These studies were divided into core studies, migrant studies, cohort studies and studies based on Other Special Groups. Between- and within-study filters were applied in order to identify discrete rates. Cumulative plots of these rates were made and these distributions were compared when the underlying rates were sorted according to sex, urbanicity, migrant status and various methodological features. RESULTS: We identified 100 core studies, 24 migrant studies, 23 cohort studies and 14 studies based on Other Special Groups. These studies, which were drawn from 33 countries, generated a total of 1,458 rates. Based on discrete core data for persons (55 studies and 170 rates), the distribution of rates was asymmetric and had a median value (10%–90% quantile) of 15.2 (7.7–43.0) per 100,000. The distribution of rates was significantly higher in males compared to females; the male/female rate ratio median (10%–90% quantile) was 1.40 (0.9–2.4). Those studies conducted in urban versus mixed urban-rural catchment areas generated significantly higher rate distributions. The distribution of rates in migrants was significantly higher compared to native-born; the migrant/native-born rate ratio median (10%–90% quantile) was 4.6 (1.0–12.8). Apart from the finding that older studies reported higher rates, other study features were not associated with significantly different rate distributions (e.g. overall quality, methods related to case finding, diagnostic confirmation and criteria, the use of age-standardization and age range). CONCLUSIONS: There is a wealth of data available on the incidence of schizophrenia. The width and skew of the rate distribution, and the significant impact of sex, urbanicity and migrant status on these distributions, indicate substantial variations in the incidence of schizophrenia

Incidence of Schizophrenia and Other Psychoses in England, 1950–2009: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

Background We conducted a systematic review of incidence rates in England over a sixty-year period to determine the extent to which rates varied along accepted (age, sex) and less-accepted epidemiological gradients (ethnicity, migration and place of birth and upbringing, time). Objectives To determine variation in incidence of several psychotic disorders as above. Data Sources Published and grey literature searches (MEDLINE, PSycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, ASSIA, HMIC), and identification of unpublished data through bibliographic searches and author communication. Study Eligibility Criteria Published 1950–2009; conducted wholly or partially in England; original data on incidence of non-organic adult-onset psychosis or one or more factor(s) pertaining to incidence. Participants People, 16–64 years, with first -onset psychosis, including non-affective psychoses, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, psychotic depression and substance-induced psychosis. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods Title, abstract and full-text review by two independent raters to identify suitable citations. Data were extracted to a standardized extraction form. Descriptive appraisals of variation in rates, including tables and forest plots, and where suitable, random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions to test specific hypotheses; rate heterogeneity was assessed by the I2-statistic. Results 83 citations met inclusion. Pooled incidence of all psychoses (N = 9) was 31.7 per 100,000 person-years (95%CI: 24.6–40.9), 23.2 (95%CI: 18.3–29.5) for non-affective psychoses (N = 8), 15.2 (95%CI: 11.9–19.5) for schizophrenia (N = 15) and 12.4 (95%CI: 9.0–17.1) for affective psychoses (N = 7). This masked rate heterogeneity (I2: 0.54–0.97), possibly explained by socio-environmental factors; our review confirmed (via meta-regression) the typical age-sex interaction in psychosis risk, including secondary peak onset in women after 45 years. Rates of most disorders were elevated in several ethnic minority groups compared with the white (British) population. For example, for schizophrenia: black Caribbean (pooled RR: 5.6; 95%CI: 3.4–9.2; N = 5), black African (pooled RR: 4.7; 95%CI: 3.3–6.8; N = 5) and South Asian groups in England (pooled RR: 2.4; 95%CI: 1.3–4.5; N = 3). We found no evidence to support an overall change in the incidence of psychotic disorder over time, though diagnostic shifts (away from schizophrenia) were reported. Limitations Incidence studies were predominantly cross-sectional, limiting causal inference. Heterogeneity, while evidencing important variation, suggested pooled estimates require interpretation alongside our descriptive systematic results. Conclusions and Implications of Key Findings Incidence of psychotic disorders varied markedly by age, sex, place and migration status/ethnicity. Stable incidence over time, together with a robust socio-environmental epidemiology, provides a platform for developing prediction models for health service planning

Primary Care Office Policies Regarding Care of Uninsured Adult Patients

OBJECTIVE: To describe primary care office policies regarding care of uninsured patients. DESIGN: Telephone survey of all adult primary care sites advertising in the area telephone directory. Sites were defined by ownership status, number of physicians, use of physician-extenders, and location. Policies assessed were whether the site was accepting new uninsured patients, billing policies, the availability of free or discounted care, and payment plans. SETTING: Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 359 sites identified, 240 (66.9%) responded, representing 794 physicians. Survey respondents included receptionists (40.4%), office managers (36.2%), and physicians (22.9%). RESULTS: While the majority of all sites reported accepting new patients without health insurance (87.5%), policies regarding these patients varied significantly by ownership status and the number of physicians. Sites with 3 or fewer physicians were more likely to accept uninsured patients. Self-owned practices were more likely to require payment at the time of service, and provide discounted care, free care, and payment plans compared with hospital/health system practices or multisite group practices. CONCLUSIONS: Willingness to accept uninsured patients does not always equate to affordable or accessible care. Office policies have the potential to be substantial obstacles to primary care