24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Race, Medical Mistrust, and Segregation in Primary Care as Usual Source of Care: Findings from the Exploring Health Disparities in Integrated Communities Study

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="d808161e115">Compared to White Americans, African-Americans are less likely to use primary care (PC) as their usual source of care. This is generally attributed to race differences in socioeconomic status and in access to primary care services. Little is known about the relationship between race differences in medical mistrust and the usual source of care disparity. Using data from the Exploring Health Disparities in Integrated Communities (EHDIC) study, we examined the role of medical mistrust in choosing usual source of care in 1408 black and white adults who were exposed to the same healthcare facilities and low-income racially integrated community. Multinomial logistic regression models were estimated to examine the relationship between race, medical mistrust, and usual source of care. After adjusting for demographic and health-related factors, African-Americans were more likely than whites to use the emergency department (ED) (relative risk ratio [RRR] = 1.43 (95 % confidence interval (CI) [1.06–1.94])) and hospital outpatient department (RRR1.50 (95 %CI [1.10–2.05])) versus primary care as a usual source of care. When medical mistrust was added to the model, the gap between African-Americans’ and whites’ risk of using the ED versus primary care as a usual source of care closed (RRR = 1.29; 95 % CI [0.91–1.83]). However, race differences in the use of the hospital outpatient department remained even after accounting for medical mistrust (RRR = 1.67; 95 % CI [1.16–2.40]). Accounting for medical mistrust eliminated the ED-as-usual-source of care disparity. This study highlights the importance of medical mistrust as an intervention point for decreasing ED use as a usual source of care by low-income, urban African-Americans. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Mistrust of health care organizations is associated with underutilization of health services.

          We report the validation of an instrument to measure mistrust of health care organizations and examine the relationship between mistrust and health care service underutilization. We conducted a telephone survey of a random sample of households in Baltimore City, MD. We surveyed 401 persons and followed up with 327 persons (81.5 percent) 3 weeks after the baseline interview. We conducted tests of the validity and reliability of the Medical Mistrust Index (MMI) and then conducted multivariate modeling to examine the relationship between mistrust and five measures of underutilization of health services. Using principle components analysis, we reduced the 17-item MMI to 7 items with a single dimension. Test-retest reliability was moderately strong, ranging from Pearson correlation of 0.346-0.697. In multivariate modeling, the MMI was predictive of four of five measures of underutilization of health services: failure to take medical advice (b=1.56, p<.01), failure to keep a follow-up appointment (b=1.11, p=.01), postponing receiving needed care (b=0.939, p=.01), and failure to fill a prescription (b=1.48, p=.002). MMI was not significantly associated with failure to get needed medical care (b=0.815, p=.06). The MMI is a robust predictor of underutilization of health services. Greater attention should be devoted to building greater trust among patients.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found
            Is Open Access

            Primary care: an increasingly important contributor to effectiveness, equity, and efficiency of health services. SESPAS report 2012.

            As of 2005, the literature on the benefits of primary care oriented health systems was consistent in showing greater effectiveness, greater efficiency, and greater equity. In the ensuing five years, nothing changed that conclusion, but there is now greater understanding of the mechanisms by which the benefits of primary care are achieved. We now know that, within certain bounds, neither the wealth of a country nor the total number of health personnel are related to health levels. What counts is the existence of key features of health policy (Primary Health Care): universal financial coverage under government control or regulation, attempts to distribute resources equitably, comprehensiveness of services, and low or no copayments for primary care services. All of these, in combination, produce better primary care: greater first contact access and use, more person-focused care over time, greater range of services available and provided when needed, and coordination of care. The evidence is no longer confined mainly to industrialized countries, as new studies show it to be the case in middle and lower income countries. The endorsements of the World Health Organization (in the form of the reports of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health and the World Health Report of 2008, as well a number of other international commissions, reflect the widespread acceptance of the importance of primary health care. Primary health care can now be measured and assessed; all innovations and enhancements in it must serve its essential features in order to be useful. Copyright © 2011 SESPAS. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage and access to health care.

              Most research on access to health care focuses on individual-level determinants such as income and insurance coverage. The role of community-level factors in helping or hindering individuals in obtaining needed care, however, has not received much attention. We address this gap in the literature by examining how neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with access to health care. We find that living in disadvantaged neighborhoods reduces the likelihood of having a usual source of care and of obtaining recommended preventive services, while it increases the likelihood of having unmet medical need. These associations are not explained by the supply of health care providers. Furthermore, though controlling for individual-level characteristics reduces the association between neighborhood disadvantage and access to health care, a significant association remains. This suggests that when individuals who are disadvantaged are concentrated into specific areas, disadvantage becomes an "emergent characteristic " of those areas that predicts the ability of residents to obtain health care.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Urban Health
                J Urban Health
                Springer Nature
                1099-3460
                1468-2869
                June 2016
                May 18 2016
                June 2016
                : 93
                : 3
                : 456-467
                Article
                10.1007/s11524-016-0054-9
                4899337
                27193595
                7f85291e-dd5f-4399-8431-6ff5ee1d966a
                © 2016

                http://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log