The hidden inequity in health care

Inequity is the presence of systematic and potentially remediable differences among population groups defined socially, economically, or geographically [1,2]. It is not the same as inequality, which is a much broader term, generally used in the human rights field to describe differences among individuals, some of which are not remediable (at least with current knowledge). Some languages do not make a distinction between the two terms, which may lead to confusion and a need to clarify exact meaning in different contexts. Some people use the term "unfairness" to define inequity, but unfairness is not measurable and therefore not a useful term for policy or evaluation. Inequity can be horizontal or vertical. Horizontal inequity indicates that people with the same needs do not have access to the same resources. Vertical inequity exists when people with greater needs are not provided with greater resources. In population surveys, similar use of services across..

Annotated Bibliography on Equity in Health, 1980-2001

The purposes of this bibliography are to present an overview of the published literature on equity in health and to summarize key articles relevant to the mission of the International Society for Equity in Health (ISEqH). The intent is to show the directions being taken in health equity research including theories, methods, and interventions to understand the genesis of inequities and their remediation. Therefore, the bibliography includes articles from the health equity literature that focus on mechanisms by which inequities in health arise and approaches to reducing them where and when they exist

Policy characteristics facilitating primary health care in Thailand: A pilot study in transitional country

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In contrast to the considerable evidence of inequitable distribution of <it>health</it>, little is known about how health <it>services (particularly primary care services) </it>are distributed in less developed countries. Using a version of primary health care system questionnaire, this pilot study in Thailand assessed policies related to the provision of primary care, particularly with regard to attempts to distribute resources equitably, adequacy of resources, comprehensiveness of services, and co-payment requirement. Information on other main attributes of primary health care policy was also ascertained.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Questionnaire survey of 5 policymakers, 5 academicians, and 77 primary care practitioners who were attending a workshop on primary care. Descriptive statistics with Fischer's exact test were used for data analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>All policymakers and academicians completed the mailed questionnaire; the response rate among the practitioners was 53.25% (41 out of 77). However, the responses from all three groups were consistent in reporting that (1) financial resources were allocated based on different health needs and special efforts were made to assure primary care services to the needy or underserved population, (2) the supply of essential drugs was adequate, (3) clinical services were distributed equitably, (4) out-of-pocket payment was low, and that some primary health care attributes, particularly longitudinality (patients are seen by same doctor or team each time they make a visit), coordination, and family- and community-orientation were satisfactory. Geographical variations were present, suggesting inequitable distribution of primary care across regions. The questionnaire was robust across key stakeholders and feasible for use in a transitional country.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>A primary care systems questionnaire administered to different types of health professionals was able to show that resource distribution was equitable at a national level but some aspects of primary care practice across regions is still of concern, in at least in this transitional country.</p

Routine care provided by specialists to children and adolescents in the United States (2002-2006).

BACKGROUND: Specialist physicians provide a large share of outpatient health care for children and adolescents in the United States, but little is known about the nature and content of these services in the ambulatory setting. Our objective was to quantify and characterize routine and co-managed pediatric healthcare as provided by specialists in community settings. METHODS: Nationally representative data were obtained from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey for the years 2002-2006. We included office based physicians (excluding family physicians, general internists and general pediatricians), and a representative sample of their patients aged 18 or less. Visits were classified into mutually exclusive categories based on the major reason for the visit, previous knowledge of the health problem, and whether the visit was the result of a referral. Primary diagnoses were classified using Expanded Diagnostic Clusters. Physician report of sharing care for the patient with another physician and frequency of reappointments were also collected. RESULTS: Overall, 41.3% out of about 174 million visits were for routine follow up and preventive care of patients already known to the specialist. Psychiatry, immunology and allergy, and dermatology accounted for 54.5% of all routine and preventive care visits. Attention deficit disorder, allergic rhinitis and disorders of the sebaceous glands accounted for about a third of these visits. Overall, 73.2% of all visits resulted in a return appointment with the same physician, in half of all cases as a result of a routine or preventive care visit. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory office-based pediatric care provided by specialists includes a large share of non referred routine and preventive care for common problems for patients already known to the physician. It is likely that many of these services could be managed in primary care settings, lessening demand for specialists and improving coordination of care.RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are

An International Society and Journal for Equity in Health: 10 years on

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Commentary June 2010 marked the 10th Anniversary of the foundation meeting of the International Society for Equity in Health (ISEqH). The formation of the Society was a bold statement, with ambitions to be a global body "to promote equity in health and health services internationally through education, research, publication, communication and charitable support"[1]. The Society particularly aimed to be an organisation that facilitated research on how better to understand and address inequities in health. The main activities of the Society have been a series of biannual conferences as well as the establishment of the International Journal for Equity in Health, the official (but independent) publication of the Society. This paper sets out to record some of the milestones of the Society drawing on the reflections of key researchers who attended the conferences as well as others. The history of the Society will help shape its future and how it responds to important issues facing all interested in global efforts to address continuing and unacceptable inequities in health

Reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the Child Health and Illness Profile (CHIP) Child-Edition, Parent Report Form (CHIP-CE/PRF)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The objectives of the study were to assess the reliability, and the content, construct, and convergent validity of the Spanish version of the CHIP-CE/PRF, to analyze parent-child agreement, and compare the results with those of the original U.S. version.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Parents from a representative sample of children aged 6-12 years were selected from 9 primary schools in Barcelona. Test-retest reliability was assessed in a convenience subsample of parents from 2 schools. Parents completed the Spanish version of the CHIP-CE/PRF. The Achenbach Child Behavioural Checklist (CBCL) was administered to a convenience subsample.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The overall response rate was 67% (n = 871). There was no floor effect. A ceiling effect was found in 4 subdomains. Reliability was acceptable at the domain level (internal consistency = 0.68-0.86; test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.69-0.85). Younger girls had better scores on Satisfaction and Achievement than older girls. Comfort domain score was lower (worse) in children with a probable mental health problem, with high effect size (ES = 1.45). The level of parent-child agreement was low (0.22-0.37).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The results of this study suggest that the parent version of the Spanish CHIP-CE has acceptable psychometric properties although further research is needed to check reliability at sub-domain level. The CHIP-CE parent report form provides a comprehensive, psychometrically sound measure of health for Spanish children 6 to 12 years old. It can be a complementary perspective to the self-reported measure or an alternative when the child is unable to complete the questionnaire. In general, the results are similar to the original U.S. version.</p

Comparison of primary care experiences among adults in general outpatient clinics and private general practice clinics in Hong Kong

Abstract. Background. The main goal of Hong Kong's publicly-funded general outpatient clinics (GOPCs) is to provide primary medical services for the financially vulnerable. The objective of the current study was to compare the primary care experiences of GOPC users and the users of care provided by private general practitioners (GPs) in Hong Kong via a territory-wide telephone survey. Methods. One thousand adults in Hong Kong aged 18 and above were interviewed by a telephone survey. The modified Chinese translated Primary Care Assessment Tool was used to collect data on respondents' primary care experience. Results. Our results indicated that services provided by GOPC were more often used by female, older, poorer, chronically-ill and less educated population. GOPC participants were also more likely to have visited a specialist or used specialist services (69.7% vs. 52.0%; p < 0.001), although this difference in utilization of specialist services disappeared after adjusting for age (55.7% vs. 52.0%, p = 0.198). Analyses were also performed to asses the relationship between healthcare settings (GOPCs versus private GPs) and primary care quality. Private GP patients achieved higher overall PCAT scores largely due to better accessibility (Mean: 6.88 vs. 8.41, p < 0.001) and person-focused care (Mean: 8.37 vs. 11.69, p < 0.001). Conclusions. Our results showed that patients primarily receiving care from private GPs in Hong Kong reported better primary care experiences than those primarily receiving care from GOPCs. This was largely due to the greater accessibility and better interpersonal relationships offered by the private GPs. As most patients use both GOPCs and private GPs, their overall primary care experiences may not be as different as the findings of this study imply. © 2010 Wong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.link_to_subscribed_fulltex

Properties of a short questionnaire for assessing Primary Care experiences for children in a population survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT) is an interesting set of tools for primary care research. A very short version could inform policy makers about consumer experiences with primary care (PC) through health surveys. This work aimed to investigate the validity and reliability of a selection of items from the child short edition (CS) of the PCAT.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A 24 item questionnaire permitted the identification of a regular source of care and the assessment of the key attributes of first contact, ongoing care over time, coordination, services available and services received (comprehensiveness), and cultural competence. Structural validity, reliability, and construct validity were assessed using responses from 2,200 parents of a representative sample of the population aged 0 to 14 years in Catalonia (Spain) who participated in the 2006 Health Survey. Structural validity was analyzed using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was assessed using linear regression analysis between PC experience scores and a measure of overall user satisfaction with healthcare services.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 2,095 (95.2%) parents provided useable responses on PC. After Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), the best fitting model was a 5-factor model in which the original dimensions of first contact and ongoing care were collapsed into one. The CFA also showed a second order factor onto which all domains except services available loaded (root mean square error of approximation = 0.000; comparative fit index = 1.00). Cronbach's alpha values for one of the original scales (first-contact) was poor (alpha < 0.50), but improved using the modified factor structure (alpha > 0.70). Scores on the scales were correlated with satisfaction with healthcare services (p < 0.01), thereby providing some preliminary evidence of construct validity.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This very short questionnaire obtained from the PCAT-CE yields information about five attributes of PC and a summary score. It has shown evidence of validity and reliability for judgments about experiences with primary care overall. If space on surveys is at a premium, the instrument could be useful as a measure of PC experiences.</p

Leaders, leadership and future primary care clinical research

Background: A strong and self confident primary care workforce can deliver the highest quality care and outcomes equitably and cost effectively. To meet the increasing demands being made of it, primary care needs its own thriving research culture and knowledge base. Methods: Review of recent developments supporting primary care clinical research. Results: Primary care research has benefited from a small group of passionate leaders and significant investment in recent decades in some countries. Emerging from this has been innovation in research design and focus, although less is known of the effect on research output. Conclusion: Primary care research is now well placed to lead a broad re-vitalisation of academic medicine, answering questions of relevance to practitioners, patients, communities and Government. Key areas for future primary care research leaders to focus on include exposing undergraduates early to primary care research, integrating this early exposure with doctoral and postdoctoral research career support, further expanding cross disciplinary approaches, and developing useful measures of output for future primary care research investment