Inequity in healthcare use among the indigenous population living in non-remote areas of Australia.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Australia
/ epidemiology
Cross-Sectional Studies
Female
Health Surveys
Healthcare Disparities
/ statistics & numerical data
Humans
Income
Insurance, Health
Male
Middle Aged
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
/ statistics & numerical data
Patient Acceptance of Health Care
/ statistics & numerical data
Poverty
Socioeconomic Factors
Young Adult
Concentration index
Decomposition
Indigenous people
Inequity
Specialist visit
Journal
Public health
ISSN: 1476-5616
Titre abrégé: Public Health
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 0376507
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2020
Sep 2020
Historique:
received:
28
02
2020
revised:
10
06
2020
accepted:
24
06
2020
pubmed:
10
8
2020
medline:
31
10
2020
entrez:
10
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Although several studies have examined the gap in healthcare use between indigenous and non-indigenous people, empirical evidence on inequity in healthcare use within indigenous populations is limited. This study aims to fill this gap in the literature by investigating income-related inequity (unequal use for equal need) in healthcare use among indigenous Australians living in non-remote areas. This is a cross-sectional study. This study used data from the Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey, 2012-13. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association of income with the probability of a general practitioner (GP) visit, a specialist visit and inpatient admission. The horizontal inequity (HI) index and decomposition analysis were also used to quantify and explain inequity in healthcare use. No consistent association was found between income and the probability of GP visit or inpatient admission after controlling for health need. However, the likelihood of visiting a specialist was about three times (odds ratio = 2.96, P = 0.028) higher for the richest compared with the poorest population subgroups. The inequity index was 0.016 (P < 0.001), indicating a pro-rich inequity for the probability of visiting a specialist. Income inequality, unequal distribution of private health insurance and inequality in education were the main factors explaining the pro-rich inequity in specialist utilisation. Although there was no income-related inequity in GP visits or inpatient admissions, wealthier indigenous Australians had a higher probability of visiting a specialist than their poorer counterparts, after adjusting for need. Specific policies and initiatives are required to address the inequity faced by low-income indigenous people in Australia.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32768622
pii: S0033-3506(20)30289-4
doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.06.051
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
35-43Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.