Socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparities in health care quality have been extensively documented. Recently, the elimination of disparities in health care has become the focus of a national initiative. Yet, there is little effort to monitor and address disparities in health care through organizational quality improvement. After reviewing literature on disparities in health care, we discuss the limitations in existing quality assessment for identifying and addressing these disparities. We propose 5 principles to address these disparities through modifications in quality performance measures: disparities represent a significant quality problem; current data collection efforts are inadequate to identify and address disparities; clinical performance measures should be stratified by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position for public reporting; population-wide monitoring should incorporate adjustment for race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position; and strategies to adjust payment for race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position should be considered to reflect the known effects of both on morbidity.

Racial and ethnic disparities in health care have been well documented, but poorly explained. To examine the effect of access barriers, including English fluency, on racial and ethnic disparities in health care. Cross-sectional analysis of the Community Tracking Survey (1996–1997). Adults 18 to 64 years with private or Medicaid health insurance. Independent variables included race, ethnicity, and English fluency. Dependent variables included having had a physician or mental health visit, influenza vaccination, or mammogram during the past year. The health care use pattern for English-speaking Hispanic patients was not significantly different than for non-Hispanic white patients in the crude or multivariate models. In contrast, Spanish-speaking Hispanic patients were significantly less likely than non-Hispanic white patients to have had a physician visit (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.72–0.83), mental health visit (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32–0.76), or influenza vaccination (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.15–0.52). After adjustment for predisposing, need, and enabling factors, Spanish-speaking Hispanic patients showed significantly lower use than non-Hispanic white patients across all four measures. Black patients had a significantly lower crude relative risk of having received an influenza vaccination (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58–0.87). Adjustment for additional factors had little impact on this effect, but resulted in black patients being significantly less likely than non-Hispanic white patients to have had a visit with a mental health professional (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37–0.55). Among insured nonelderly adults, there are appreciable disparities in health-care use by race and Hispanic ethnicity. Ethnic disparities in care are largely explained by differences in English fluency, but racial disparities in care are not explained by commonly used access factors.

Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

The annual National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Reports document widespread and persistent racial and ethnic disparities. These disparities result from complex interactions between patient factors related to social disadvantage, clinicians, and organizational and health care system factors. Separate and unequal systems of health care between states, between health care systems, and between clinicians constrain the resources that are available to meet the needs of disadvantaged groups, contribute to unequal outcomes, and reinforce implicit bias. Recent data suggest slow progress in many areas but have documented a few notable successes in eliminating these disparities. To eliminate these disparities, continued progress will require a collective national will to ensure health care equity through expanded health insurance coverage, support for primary care, and public accountability based on progress toward defined, time-limited objectives using evidence-based, sufficiently resourced, multilevel quality improvement strategies that engage patients, clinicians, health care organizations, and communities.

Patients' trust in their health care providers may affect their satisfaction and health outcomes. Despite the potential importance of trust, there are few studies of its correlates using objective measures of physician behavior during encounters with patients. We assessed physician behavior and length of visit using audio tapes of encounters of 2 unannounced standardized patients (SPs) with 100 community-based primary care physicians participating in a large managed care organization. Physician behavior was assessed via 3 components of the Measure of Patient-Centered Communication (MPCC) scale. The Primary Care Assessment Survey (PCAS) trust subscale was administered to 50 patients from each physician's practice and to SPs. We used multilevel modeling to examine the associations between physicians' Patient-Centered Communication during the SP visits and ratings of trust by both patients and SPs. Component 1 of the MPCC, which explored the patient's experience of the disease and illness, was independently associated with patient's rating of trust in their physician. A I SD increase in this score was associated with 0.08 SD increase in trust (95% confidence interval 0.02-0.14). Each additional minute spent in SP visits was also independently associated with 0.01 SD increase in patient trust. (95% confidence interval 0.0001-0.02). Component 1 and visit length were also positively associated with SP trust ratings. Physician verbal behavior during an SP encounter is associated with trust reported by SPs and patients. Research is needed to determine whether interventions designed to enhance physicians' exploration patients' experiences of disease and illness improves trust. Key Words: physician-patient relationship, patient-centered care, trust, physician behavior

Health is unevenly distributed across socioeconomic status. Persons of lower income, education, or occupational status experience worse health and die earlier than do their better-off counterparts. This article discusses these disparities in the context of urban medical practice. The article begins with a discussion of the complex relationship among socioeconomic status, race, and health in the United States. It highlights the effects of institutional, individual, and internalized racism on the health of African Americans, including the insidious consequences of residential segregation and concentrated poverty. Next, the article reviews health disparities based on socioeconomic status across the life cycle, beginning in fetal health and ending with disparities among the elderly. Potential explanations for these socioeconomic-based disparities are addressed, including reverse causality (e.g., being poor causes lower socioeconomic status) and confounding by genetic factors. The article underscores social causation as the primary explanation for health disparities and highlights the cumulative effects of social disadvantage across stages of the life cycle and across environments (e.g., fetal, family, educational, occupational, and neighborhood). The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of health disparities for the practice of urban medicine, including the role that concentration of disadvantage plays among patients and practice sites and the need for quality improvement to mitigate these disparities.