Patient gender does not influence referral to an orthopaedic surgeon by advanced practice orthopaedic providers: a prospective observational study in Canada.
Access to care
Advanced practice physiotherapist
Arthroplasty
Extended scope
Gender bias
Gender disparity
Health equity
Occupational therapist, orthopaedics
Physiotherapist
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:
11 Sep 2021
11 Sep 2021
Historique:
received:
12
05
2021
accepted:
26
08
2021
entrez:
13
9
2021
pubmed:
14
9
2021
medline:
15
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The role of an advanced practice physiotherapist has been introduced in many countries to improve access to care for patients with hip and knee arthritis. Traditional models of care have shown a gender bias, with women less often referred and recommended for surgery than men. This study sought to understand if patient gender affects access to care in the clinical encounter with the advanced practice provider. Our objectives were: (1) To determine if a gender difference exists in the clinical decision to offer a consultation with a surgeon; (2) To determine if a gender difference exists in patients' decisions to accept a consultation with a surgeon among those patients to whom it is offered; and, (3) To describe patients' reasons for not accepting a consultation with a surgeon. This was a prospective study of 815 patients presenting to a tertiary care centre for assessment of hip and knee arthritis, with referral onward to an orthopaedic surgeon when indicated. We performed a multiple logistic regression analysis adjusting for severity to address the first objective and a simple logistic regression analysis to answer the second objective. Reasons for not accepting a surgical consultation were obtained by questionnaire. Eight hundred and fifteen patients (511 women, 304 men) fulfilled study eligibility criteria. There was no difference in the probability of being referred to a surgeon for men and women (difference adjusted for severity = - 0.02, 95% CI: - 0.07, 0.02). Neither was there a difference in the acceptance of a referral for men and women (difference = - 0.05, 95% CI: - 0.09, 0.00). Of the 14 reasons for declining a surgical consultation, 5 showed a difference with more women than men indicating a preference for non-surgical treatment along with fears/concerns about surgery. There is no strong evidence to suggest there is a difference in proportion of males and females proceeding to surgical consultation in the model of care that utilizes advanced practice orthopaedic providers in triage. This study adds to the evidence that supports the use of suitably trained alternate providers in roles that reduce wait times to care and add value in contexts where health human resources are limited. The care model is a viable strategy to assist in managing the growing backlog in orthopaedic care, recently exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The role of an advanced practice physiotherapist has been introduced in many countries to improve access to care for patients with hip and knee arthritis. Traditional models of care have shown a gender bias, with women less often referred and recommended for surgery than men. This study sought to understand if patient gender affects access to care in the clinical encounter with the advanced practice provider. Our objectives were: (1) To determine if a gender difference exists in the clinical decision to offer a consultation with a surgeon; (2) To determine if a gender difference exists in patients' decisions to accept a consultation with a surgeon among those patients to whom it is offered; and, (3) To describe patients' reasons for not accepting a consultation with a surgeon.
METHODS
METHODS
This was a prospective study of 815 patients presenting to a tertiary care centre for assessment of hip and knee arthritis, with referral onward to an orthopaedic surgeon when indicated. We performed a multiple logistic regression analysis adjusting for severity to address the first objective and a simple logistic regression analysis to answer the second objective. Reasons for not accepting a surgical consultation were obtained by questionnaire.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Eight hundred and fifteen patients (511 women, 304 men) fulfilled study eligibility criteria. There was no difference in the probability of being referred to a surgeon for men and women (difference adjusted for severity = - 0.02, 95% CI: - 0.07, 0.02). Neither was there a difference in the acceptance of a referral for men and women (difference = - 0.05, 95% CI: - 0.09, 0.00). Of the 14 reasons for declining a surgical consultation, 5 showed a difference with more women than men indicating a preference for non-surgical treatment along with fears/concerns about surgery.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
There is no strong evidence to suggest there is a difference in proportion of males and females proceeding to surgical consultation in the model of care that utilizes advanced practice orthopaedic providers in triage. This study adds to the evidence that supports the use of suitably trained alternate providers in roles that reduce wait times to care and add value in contexts where health human resources are limited. The care model is a viable strategy to assist in managing the growing backlog in orthopaedic care, recently exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34511124
doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06965-5
pii: 10.1186/s12913-021-06965-5
pmc: PMC8435171
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
952Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
J Eval Clin Pract. 2009 Feb;15(1):178-83
pubmed: 19239599
Clin Geriatr Med. 2010 Aug;26(3):387-99
pubmed: 20699161
J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999 Oct;53(10):643-50
pubmed: 10616677
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020 Jun;28(6):1712-1719
pubmed: 32361927
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004 Apr;34(4):187-93
pubmed: 15128188
Physiother Can. 2014 Summer;66(3):264-71
pubmed: 25125779
N Engl J Med. 2000 Apr 6;342(14):1016-22
pubmed: 10749964
Arthritis Rheum. 1994 May;37(5):687-94
pubmed: 8185695
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020 Oct 10;21(1):673
pubmed: 33038935
Healthc Q. 2008;11(2):67-75
pubmed: 18362523
J Clin Epidemiol. 1996 Dec;49(12):1373-9
pubmed: 8970487
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018 Jun 1;19(1):181
pubmed: 29859072
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013 Aug;21(8):1042-52
pubmed: 23680877
Pain Rep. 2020 Oct 12;5(6):e855
pubmed: 33134751
Arthritis Rheum. 2004 Aug 15;51(4):635-41
pubmed: 15334438
Physiother Can. 2015 Fall;67(4):369-77
pubmed: 27504037
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2012 Sep;20(9):967-73
pubmed: 22659599
BMJ. 2021 Feb 9;372:n339
pubmed: 33563590
Ann Rheum Dis. 1957 Dec;16(4):494-502
pubmed: 13498604
J Arthroplasty. 2020 Jul;35(7S):S45-S48
pubmed: 32381441
JAMA. 1999 Dec 22-29;282(24):2313-20
pubmed: 10612318
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Jul 30;12:225
pubmed: 22846144
Can J Surg. 2017 Aug;60(4):266-272
pubmed: 28730987
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Jul;469(7):1829-37
pubmed: 21448775
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020 Aug;29(8):1564-1572
pubmed: 32199757
Healthc Q. 2008;11(2):62-6
pubmed: 18362522
Musculoskeletal Care. 2018 Dec;16(4):425-432
pubmed: 29927063
CMAJ. 2008 Mar 11;178(6):681-7
pubmed: 18332383
Aust Health Rev. 2015 Jun;39(3):271-82
pubmed: 26629584
CMAJ. 2020 Nov 2;192(44):E1347-E1356
pubmed: 32873541
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013 Aug;65(8):1281-90
pubmed: 23401380
Med Decis Making. 2002 May-Jun;22(3):272-8
pubmed: 12058784
Physiother Can. 2013 Winter;65(1):46-55
pubmed: 24381382
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 07;9(3):e91286
pubmed: 24608134
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012 Jun 21;13:107
pubmed: 22716771
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1997 Mar;5(2):87-97
pubmed: 9135820
Am J Med. 1997 Jun;102(6):524-30
pubmed: 9217666
Physiother Can. 2010 Fall;62(4):298-305
pubmed: 21886368
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Jan 4;22(1):4
pubmed: 33397350