Abstract
BackgroundOne group often identified as having low socioeconomic status, those living in remote or rural areas, are often recognised as bearing an unequal burden of illness in society. This paper aims to examine equity of utilisation of general practitioner services in Australia.MethodsUsing the 2005 National Health Survey undertaken by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, a microsimulation model was developed to determine the distribution of GP services that would occur if all Australians had equal utilisation of health services relative to need.ResultsIt was estimated that those who are unemployed would experience a 19% increase in GP services. Persons residing in regional areas would receive about 5.7 million additional GP visits per year if they had the same access to care as Australians residing in major cities. This would be a 18% increase. There would be a 20% increase for inner regional residents and a 14% increase for residents of more remote regional areas. Overall there would be a 5% increase in GP visits nationally if those in regional areas had the same access to care as those in major cities.ConclusionParity is an insufficient goal and disadvantaged persons and underserved areas require greater access to health services than the well served metropolitan areas due to their greater poverty and poorer health status. Currently underserved Australians suffer a double disadvantage: poorer health and poorer access to health services.
Highlights
Successive reports conducted by the Australia Institute of Health and Welfare show that people from low socioeconomic backgrounds have more risk factors for chronic disease and greater prevalence of certain
One group often identified as having low socioeconomic status, those living in remote or rural areas, are often recognised as bearing an unequal burden of illness in society
The regression analysis shows that age, sex, employment status, remoteness and self reported health status were associated with the number of times a general practitioner (GP) was visited in the two weeks prior to the survey
Summary
One group often identified as having low socioeconomic status, those living in remote or rural areas, are often recognised as bearing an unequal burden of illness in society. The burden of disease is not distributed amongst Australians Those with low socioeconomic status generally have a lower life expectancy, and are more likely to suffer from chronic disease and have health risk factors [1,2,3]. Those with the lowest socioeconomic status are reported to have around one-third greater burden of disease than those with the highest socioeconomic status [4]. Those living in rural and remote areas experience poorer health status, lower life expectancy and are more susceptible to illness and injury [7]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
