Does socio-economic status influence the effect of multimorbidity on the frequent use of ambulatory care services in a universal healthcare system? A population-based cohort study.
Ambulatory care utilization
Effect modification
Frequent healthcare users
Multimorbidity
Socioeconomic status
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Mar 2021
06 Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
18
05
2020
accepted:
18
02
2021
entrez:
7
3
2021
pubmed:
8
3
2021
medline:
15
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Frequent healthcare users place a significant burden on health systems. Factors such as multimorbidity and low socioeconomic status have been associated with high use of ambulatory care services (emergency rooms, general practitioners and specialist physicians). However, the combined effect of these two factors remains poorly understood. Our goal was to determine whether the risk of being a frequent user of ambulatory care is influenced by an interaction between multimorbidity and socioeconomic status, in an entire population covered by a universal health system. Using a linkage of administrative databases, we conducted a population-based cohort study of all adults in Quebec, Canada. Multimorbidity (defined as the number of different diseases) was assessed over a two-year period from April 1st 2012 to March 31st 2014 and socioeconomic status was estimated using a validated material deprivation index. Frequents users for a particular category of ambulatory services had a number of visits among the highest 5% in the total population during the 2014-15 fiscal year. We used ajusted logistic regressions to model the association between frequent use of health services and multimorbidity, depending on socioeconomic status. Frequent users (5.1% of the population) were responsible for 25.2% of all ambulatory care visits. The lower the socioeconomic status, the higher the burden of chronic diseases, and the more frequent the visits to emergency departments and general practitioners. Socioeconomic status modified the association between multimorbidity and frequent visits to specialist physicians: those with low socioeconomic status visited specialist physicians less often. The difference in adjusted proportions of frequent use between the most deprived and the least deprived individuals varied from 0.1% for those without any chronic disease to 5.1% for those with four or more chronic diseases. No such differences in proportions were observed for frequent visits to an emergency room or frequent visits to a general practitioner. Even in a universal healthcare system, the gap between socioeconomic groups widens as a function of multimorbidity with regard to visits to the specialist physicians. Further studies are needed to better understand the differential use of specialized care by the most deprived individuals.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Frequent healthcare users place a significant burden on health systems. Factors such as multimorbidity and low socioeconomic status have been associated with high use of ambulatory care services (emergency rooms, general practitioners and specialist physicians). However, the combined effect of these two factors remains poorly understood. Our goal was to determine whether the risk of being a frequent user of ambulatory care is influenced by an interaction between multimorbidity and socioeconomic status, in an entire population covered by a universal health system.
METHODS
METHODS
Using a linkage of administrative databases, we conducted a population-based cohort study of all adults in Quebec, Canada. Multimorbidity (defined as the number of different diseases) was assessed over a two-year period from April 1st 2012 to March 31st 2014 and socioeconomic status was estimated using a validated material deprivation index. Frequents users for a particular category of ambulatory services had a number of visits among the highest 5% in the total population during the 2014-15 fiscal year. We used ajusted logistic regressions to model the association between frequent use of health services and multimorbidity, depending on socioeconomic status.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Frequent users (5.1% of the population) were responsible for 25.2% of all ambulatory care visits. The lower the socioeconomic status, the higher the burden of chronic diseases, and the more frequent the visits to emergency departments and general practitioners. Socioeconomic status modified the association between multimorbidity and frequent visits to specialist physicians: those with low socioeconomic status visited specialist physicians less often. The difference in adjusted proportions of frequent use between the most deprived and the least deprived individuals varied from 0.1% for those without any chronic disease to 5.1% for those with four or more chronic diseases. No such differences in proportions were observed for frequent visits to an emergency room or frequent visits to a general practitioner.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Even in a universal healthcare system, the gap between socioeconomic groups widens as a function of multimorbidity with regard to visits to the specialist physicians. Further studies are needed to better understand the differential use of specialized care by the most deprived individuals.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33676497
doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06194-w
pii: 10.1186/s12913-021-06194-w
pmc: PMC7937264
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
202Références
Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2016 Jul 05;9:143-56
pubmed: 27462182
Can J Public Health. 2009 May-Jun;100(3):180-3
pubmed: 19507718
Am J Epidemiol. 2012 Apr 1;175(7):602-5
pubmed: 22306562
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2003 Oct;8(4):215-24
pubmed: 14596756
J Clin Epidemiol. 2000 Dec;53(12):1258-67
pubmed: 11146273
Ann Emerg Med. 2010 Jul;56(1):42-8
pubmed: 20346540
Lancet. 2017 Jul 8;390(10090):156-168
pubmed: 28077234
BMJ. 2007 May 19;334(7602):1016-7
pubmed: 17510108
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Dec 10;12:452
pubmed: 23217125
Health Promot Int. 2019 Oct 1;34(5):e1-e17
pubmed: 30107564
Ann Fam Med. 2005 May-Jun;3(3):215-22
pubmed: 15928224
J Eval Clin Pract. 2010 Aug;16(4):825-31
pubmed: 20557407
Can Fam Physician. 2014 Sep;60(9):781-3, 790-2
pubmed: 25217666
Lancet. 2012 Jul 7;380(9836):37-43
pubmed: 22579043
CMAJ. 2007 Nov 20;177(11):1362-8
pubmed: 18025427
J Comorb. 2018 Dec 14;8(1):2235042X18814939
pubmed: 30574456
JAMA. 2012 Jun 20;307(23):2493-4
pubmed: 22797447
Br J Gen Pract. 2011 Jan;61(582):e12-21
pubmed: 21401985
Acad Emerg Med. 2011 Aug;18(8):836-43
pubmed: 21843219
BMC Public Health. 2012 Mar 19;12:201
pubmed: 22429338
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Jan 22;15:23
pubmed: 25609174
Palliat Med. 2014 Dec;28(10):1167-96
pubmed: 24866758
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003 Jun;57(6):424-8
pubmed: 12775787
BMJ Open. 2016 Sep 29;6(9):e012353
pubmed: 27687900
Int J Epidemiol. 2014 Jun;43(3):962-70
pubmed: 24603316
Soc Sci Med. 2000 Jul;51(1):123-33
pubmed: 10817475
Ann Fam Med. 2018 Mar;16(2):127-131
pubmed: 29531103
J Prim Care Community Health. 2017 Jul;8(3):169-175
pubmed: 28606031
Lancet. 2012 Sep 15;380(9846):1011-29
pubmed: 22964159
Ann Fam Med. 2005 May-Jun;3(3):223-8
pubmed: 15928225
Health Serv Res. 2005 Aug;40(4):1167-85
pubmed: 16033498
PLoS One. 2016 May 27;11(5):e0155982
pubmed: 27232878
Qual Life Res. 2013 May;22(4):791-9
pubmed: 22684529
CMAJ. 2012 Apr 3;184(6):E307-16
pubmed: 22353588
BMC Public Health. 2017 May 10;17(1):422
pubmed: 28486983
BMC Public Health. 2014 May 29;14:530
pubmed: 24885174
Br J Gen Pract. 2014 Jul;64(624):e440-7
pubmed: 24982497
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013 Oct;18(4):215-23
pubmed: 23945679
BMJ Open. 2017 Sep 3;7(9):e017701
pubmed: 28871027
Int J Equity Health. 2013 Aug 20;12:67
pubmed: 23962150
Med Care. 2018 May;56(5):441-447
pubmed: 29578951
BMJ Open. 2015 Apr 16;5(4):e007771
pubmed: 25882486
Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Dec;32(12):2099-108
pubmed: 24301392
CMAJ. 2013 Apr 2;185(6):E263-9
pubmed: 23439620