Abstract
BackgroundMore fragmented ambulatory care (i.e., care spread across many providers without a dominant provider) has been associated with more subsequent healthcare utilization (such as more tests, procedures, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations) than less fragmented ambulatory care. It is not known if race and socioeconomic status are associated with fragmented ambulatory care.MethodsWe conducted a longitudinal analysis of data from the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study, using the REGARDS baseline visit plus the first year of follow-up. We included participants ≥65 years old, who had linked fee-for-service Medicare claims, and ≥ 4 ambulatory visits in the first year of follow-up. We used Tobit regression to determine the associations between race, annual household income, and educational attainment at baseline and fragmentation score in the subsequent year (as measured with the reversed Bice-Boxerman Index). Covariates included other demographic characteristics, medical conditions, medication use, health behaviors, and psychosocial variables. Additional analyses categorized visits by the type of provider (primary care vs. specialist).ResultsThe study participants (N = 6799) had an average age of 73.0 years, 53% were female, and 30% were black. Nearly half had low annual household income (<$35,000) and 41% had a high school education or less. Overall, participants had a median of 10 ambulatory visits to 4 providers in the 12 months following their baseline study visit. Participants in the highest quintile of fragmentation scores had a median of 11 visits to 7 providers. Black race was associated with an absolute adjusted 3% lower fragmentation score compared to white race (95% confidence interval (2% lower to 4% lower; p < 0.001). This difference was explained by blacks seeing fewer specialists than whites. Income and education were not independent predictors of fragmentation scores.ConclusionsAmong Medicare beneficiaries, blacks had less fragmented ambulatory care than whites, due to lower utilization of specialty care. Future research is needed to determine the effect of fragmented care on health outcomes for blacks and whites.
Highlights
MethodsWe conducted a longitudinal analysis of data from the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study, using the REGARDS baseline visit plus the first year of follow-up
More fragmented ambulatory care has been associated with more subsequent healthcare utilization than less fragmented ambulatory care
Exclusion criteria included race other than black or white, Hispanic ethnicity, active treatment for cancer, medical conditions that would preclude longterm participation, cognitive impairment judged by the trained telephone interviewer, residence in or inclusion on a waiting list for a nursing home, and inability to communicate in English [17]
Summary
We conducted a longitudinal analysis of data from the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study, using the REGARDS baseline visit plus the first year of follow-up. Overview We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the nationwide REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study [17]. Population, and data sources Between 2003 and 2007, 30,239 community-dwelling black and white adults ≥45 years old were enrolled in the REGARDS study [17]. Exclusion criteria included race other than black or white, Hispanic ethnicity, active treatment for cancer, medical conditions that would preclude longterm participation, cognitive impairment judged by the trained telephone interviewer, residence in or inclusion on a waiting list for a nursing home, and inability to communicate in English [17]
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.