Differences In Receipt Of Care Research Articles

Exploring socioeconomic inequities in access to palliative and end-of-life care in the UK: a narrative synthesis

BackgroundEfforts to tackle socioeconomic inequities in access to palliative and end-of-life care require comprehensive understanding about the extent of and reasons for inequities. Most research on this topic examines differences in receipt of care. There is a need, particularly in the UK, for theoretically driven research that considers both receipt of care and the wider factors influencing the relationship between socioeconomic position and access to palliative and end-of-life care.MethodsThis is a mixed studies narrative synthesis on socioeconomic position and access to palliative and end-of-life care in the UK. Study searches were conducted in databases AMED, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, SocIndex, and Academic Literature Search, as well as grey literature sources, in July 2020. The candidacy model of access, which describes access as a seven-stage negotiation between patients and providers, guided study searches and provided a theoretical lens through which data were synthesised.ResultsSearches retrieved 5303 studies (after de-duplication), 29 of which were included. The synthesis generated four overarching themes, within which concepts of candidacy were evident: identifying needs; taking action; local conditions; and receiving care.ConclusionThere is not a consistent or clear narrative regarding the relationship between socioeconomic position and receipt of palliative and end-of-life care in the UK. Attempts to address any inequities in access will require knowledge and action across many different areas. Key evidence gaps in the UK literature concern the relationship between socioeconomic position, organisational context, and assessing need for care.

(539) - Racial Differences in Receipt of Care by a Cardiologist During a Critical Heart Failure Admission

(539) - Racial Differences in Receipt of Care by a Cardiologist During a Critical Heart Failure Admission

Can patient navigation improve receipt of recommended breast cancer care? Evidence from the National Patient Navigation Research Program.

Poor and underserved women face barriers in receiving timely and appropriate breast cancer care. Patient navigators help individuals overcome these barriers, but little is known about whether patient navigation improves quality of care. The purpose of this study is to examine whether navigated women with breast cancer are more likely to receive recommended standard breast cancer care. Women with breast cancer who participated in the national Patient Navigation Research Program were examined to determine whether the care they received included the following: initiation of antiestrogen therapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer; initiation of postlumpectomy radiation therapy; and initiation of chemotherapy in women younger than age 70 years with triple-negative tumors more than 1 cm. This is a secondary analysis of a multicenter quasi-experimental study funded by the National Cancer Institute to evaluate patient navigation. Multiple logistic regression was performed to compare differences in receipt of care between navigated and non-navigated participants. Among participants eligible for antiestrogen therapy, navigated participants (n = 380) had a statistically significant higher likelihood of receiving antiestrogen therapy compared with non-navigated controls (n = 381; odds ratio [OR], 1.73; P = .004) in a multivariable analysis. Among the participants eligible for radiation therapy after lumpectomy, navigated participants (n = 255) were no more likely to receive radiation (OR, 1.42; P = .22) than control participants (n = 297). We demonstrate that navigated participants were more likely than non-navigated participants to receive antiestrogen therapy. Future studies are required to determine the full impact patient navigation may have on ensuring that vulnerable populations receive quality care.

Inpatient care of the elderly in Brazil and India: Assessing social inequalities

The rapidly growing older adult populations in Brazil and India present major challenges for health systems in these countries, especially with regard to the equitable provision of inpatient care. The objective of this study was to contrast inequalities in both the receipt of inpatient care and the length of time that care was received among adults aged over 60 in two large countries with different modes of health service delivery. Using the Brazilian National Household Survey from 2003 and the Indian National Sample Survey Organisation survey from 2004 inequalities by wealth (measured by income in Brazil and consumption in India) were assessed using concentration curves and indices. Inequalities were also examined through the use of zero-truncated negative binomial models, studying differences in receipt of care and length of stay by region, health insurance, education and reported health status. Results indicated that there was no evidence of inequality in Brazil for both receipt and length of stay by income per capita. However, in India there was a pro-rich bias in the receipt of care, although once care was received there was no difference by consumption per capita for the length of stay. In both countries the higher educated and those with health insurance were more likely to receive care, while the higher educated had longer stays in hospital in Brazil. The health system reforms that have been undertaken in Brazil could be credited as a driver for reducing healthcare inequalities amongst the elderly, while the significant differences by wealth in India shows that reform is still needed to ensure the poor have access to inpatient care. Health reforms that move towards a more public funding model of service delivery in India may reduce inequality in elderly inpatient care in the country.

Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Health from Population‐Based Research to Practice‐Based Research: The Example of Oral Health

Oral health serves as an excellent model for understanding social disparities in health. Associations among race, socioeconomic status, oral health, and dental care are strong. Multiple points along the dental care process allow investigation of disparities and mechanisms; and there are multiple types of treatment services (ranging from those that all patients and clinicians would likely agree on, to multiple treatment options, to discretionary treatments). Florida Dental Care Study (FDCS) data are used to provide examples of these concepts. Without regard to whether the dental care system was ultimately entered, the FDCS found substantive social differences in 1) incidence of need; 2) responsiveness to this need; and 3) propensity to seek preventive services. Once the dental care system had been accessed, substantive social differences were still evident with regard to 1) clinical condition; 2) awareness of treatment options; and 3) treatment discussions and recommendations. Once differences in clinical condition were taken into account, and once analysis was limited to persons who had entered the dental care system, social differences in receipt of care were still evident. Findings suggested that although dental care was effective at treating and preventing certain oral conditions, social differences in treatment effectiveness were evident.