Does use of GP and specialist services vary across areas and according to individual socioeconomic position? A multilevel analysis using linked data in Australia

Author:

Butler Danielle CORCID,Larkins SarahORCID,Jorm Louisa,Korda Rosemary J

Abstract

ObjectiveTimely access to primary care and supporting specialist care relative to need is essential for health equity. However, use of services can vary according to an individual’s socioeconomic circumstances or where they live. This study aimed to quantify individual socioeconomic variation in general practitioner (GP) and specialist use in New South Wales (NSW), accounting for area-level variation in use.DesignOutcomes were GP use and quality-of-care and specialist use. Multilevel logistic regression was used to estimate: (1) median ORs (MORs) to quantify small area variation in outcomes, which gives the median increased risk of moving to an area of higher risk of an outcome, and (2) ORs to quantify associations between outcomes and individual education level, our main exposure variable. Analyses were adjusted for individual sociodemographic and health characteristics and performed separately by remoteness categories.SettingBaseline data (2006–2009) from the 45 and Up Study, NSW, Australia, linked to Medicare Benefits Schedule and death data (to December 2012).Participants267 153 adults aged 45 years and older.ResultsGP (MOR=1.32–1.35) and specialist use (1.16–1.18) varied between areas, accounting for individual characteristics. For a given level of need and accounting for area variation, low education-level individuals were more likely to be frequent users of GP services (no school certificate vs university, OR=1.63–1.91, depending on remoteness category) and have continuity of care (OR=1.14–1.24), but were less likely to see a specialist (OR=0.85–0.95).ConclusionGP and specialist use varied across small areas in NSW, independent of individual characteristics. Use of GP care was equitable, but specialist care was not. Failure to address inequitable specialist use may undermine equity gains within the primary care system. Policies should also focus on local variation.

Funder

National Health and Medical Research Council

Publisher

BMJ

Reference44 articles.

1. Developing measures to capture the true value of primary care;olde Hartman;BJGP Open,2021

2. Better Measurement for Performance Improvement in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: The Primary Health Care Performance Initiative (PHCPI) Experience of Conceptual Framework Development and Indicator Selection

3. The European primary care monitor: structure, process and outcome indicators;Kringos;BMC Fam Pract,2010

4. Solar O , Irwin A . A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants of health. Social Determinants of Health discussion paper 2 (policy and practice). Geneva: World Health Organisation, 2010.

5. What explains the regional variation in the use of general practitioners in Australia;Mu;BMC Health Serv Res,2020

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3