Literature DB >> 16275968

Socioeconomic status and the utilization of diagnostic imaging in an urban setting.

Sandor Demeter1, Martin Reed, Lisa Lix, Leonard MacWilliam, William D Leslie.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In publicly funded health care systems, the utilization of health care services should be equitable, irrespective of socioeconomic status (SES). Although the association between SES and health care utilization has been examined in Canada relative to surgical, cardiac and preventive health care services, no published studies have specifically explored the association between SES and diagnostic imaging.
METHODS: We examined over 300,000 diagnostic imaging claims made in the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority between Apr. 1, 2001, and Mar. 31, 2002. Using patient postal codes, we assigned SES on the basis of average household incomes in Canada's 1996 census. Using multiple regression, we examined the association between income quintile, patient age group (< or =16, 17-64, > or = 65 years), patient morbidity level according to the Johns Hopkins University Adjusted Clinical Group method (high, moderate, low), and imaging modality (general radiology, vascular, computed tomography, magnetic resonance, and general and obstetric ultrasound).
RESULTS: Relative rates (RR) of diagnostic imaging utilization (highest v. lowest income quintile) were significantly increased in pediatric and adult patient groups at all morbidity levels receiving general radiology (highest RR 2.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.07-2.93); pediatric and adult patient groups at high and low morbidity levels and elderly patient groups at low morbidity levels receiving general ultrasound (highest RR 2.26, 95% CI 1.20-4.26); pediatric and adult patient groups at all morbidity levels and elderly patients at high and moderate morbidity levels receiving magnetic resonance imaging (highest RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.78- 3.52); and adult patient groups at all morbidity levels receiving computed tomography (highest RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.35- 1.59). A lower RR of diagnostic imaging utilization in the highest income quintile was found only among patients receiving obstetric ultrasound (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.87). No significant associations were found among elderly patients receiving general radiology or computed tomography or adult patients receiving vascular imaging.
INTERPRETATION: We found a pattern of increased diagnostic imaging utilization in patient groups with a higher SES. Further research is needed to better understand the nature of this finding and how it contributes to health outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16275968      PMCID: PMC1277044          DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.050609

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  11 in total

1.  Effect of distance and social disadvantage on the response to invitations to attend mammography screening.

Authors:  J C Hyndman; C D Holman; V P Dawes
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.136

2.  Diffusion, utilisation and regional variations in the use of CT and MRI in Sweden.

Authors:  S Olsson
Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 5.428

3.  Assessing population health care need using a claims-based ACG morbidity measure: a validation analysis in the Province of Manitoba.

Authors:  Robert J Reid; Noralou P Roos; Leonard MacWilliam; Norman Frohlich; Charlyn Black
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Health service use in the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority: variations across areas in relation to health and socioeconomic status.

Authors:  Norman Frohlich; Randy Fransoo; Noralou Roos
Journal:  Healthc Manage Forum       Date:  2002

5.  Utilization of radiology services in the United States: levels and trends in modalities, regions, and populations.

Authors:  Mythreyi Bhargavan; Jonathan H Sunshine
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-01-28       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Equity in Canadian health care: does socioeconomic status affect waiting times for elective surgery?

Authors:  Samuel E D Shortt; Ralph A Shaw
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-02-18       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Customer fee and participation in breast-cancer screening.

Authors:  P Immonen-Räihä; L Kauhava; I Parvinen; H Helenius; P Klemi
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-10-27       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Optimal indicators of socioeconomic status for health research.

Authors:  Mary C Daly; Greg J Duncan; Peggy McDonough; David R Williams
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  The influence of ethnicity and socioeconomic status on the use of mammography by Asian and Pacific island women on Guam.

Authors:  T K Pinhey; T J Iverson; R L Workman
Journal:  Women Health       Date:  1994

10.  Demographic, clinical, and financial factors relating to the completion rate of screening mammography.

Authors:  R A Johnson; P J Murata
Journal:  Cancer Detect Prev       Date:  1988
View more
  21 in total

1.  Comment on Reyes et al.: Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy in Europe 2007: a survey of the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology.

Authors:  Ali Gholamrezanezhad
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-02-04       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  The effect of socioeconomic status on bone density testing in a public health-care system.

Authors:  S Demeter; W D Leslie; L Lix; L MacWilliam; G S Finlayson; M Reed
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2006-09-20       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Does Equity in Healthcare Use Vary across Canadian Provinces?

Authors:  Sara Allin
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2008-05

4.  Is lower income associated with an increased likelihood of qualification for treatment for osteoporosis in Canadian women?

Authors:  S L Brennan; W D Leslie; L M Lix
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Feasibility of studying brain morphology in major depressive disorder with structural magnetic resonance imaging and clinical data from the electronic medical record: a pilot study.

Authors:  Wouter S Hoogenboom; Roy H Perlis; Jordan W Smoller; Qing Zeng-Treitler; Vivian S Gainer; Shawn N Murphy; Susanne E Churchill; Isaac S Kohane; Martha E Shenton; Dan V Iosifescu
Journal:  Psychiatry Res       Date:  2012-11-11       Impact factor: 3.222

6.  Mortality rates after incident non-traumatic fractures in older men and women.

Authors:  S Morin; L M Lix; M Azimaee; C Metge; P Caetano; W D Leslie
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-12-16       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Patterns of medical pluralism among adults: results from the 2001 National Health Interview Survey in Taiwan.

Authors:  Chun-Chuan Shih; Yi-Chang Su; Chien-Chang Liao; Jaung-Geng Lin
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-07-06       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  FRAX provides robust fracture prediction regardless of socioeconomic status.

Authors:  S L Brennan; W D Leslie; L M Lix; H Johansson; A Oden; E McCloskey; J A Kanis
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-11-05       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  Impact of socioeconomic status on ionizing radiation exposure from medical imaging in children.

Authors:  Katherine Freeman; Daniel Strauchler; Todd S Miller
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 5.532

10.  Better access to outpatient magnetic resonance imaging in Ontario - But for whom?

Authors:  John J You; Vikram Venkatesh; Andreas Laupacis
Journal:  Open Med       Date:  2009-03-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.