Simone Dahrouge1, Emily Seale, William Hogg, Grant Russell, Jaime Younger, Elizabeth Muggah, David Ponka, Jay Mercer. 1. *Department of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa †C.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyère Research Institute ‡Institute of Population Health §Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa ∥Institute of Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Ottawa ¶Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada #Southern Academic Primary Care Research Unit. School of Primary Health Care, Monash University, Clayton, Vic, Australia **Ottawa Hospital Research Institute ††Bruyère Family Medicine Centre, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating primary care quality across physician gender are limited to primary and secondary prevention. OBJECTIVES: Investigate the relationship between family physician gender and quality of primary care using indicators that cover 5 key dimensions of primary care. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis using linked health administrative datasets (April 1, 2008 to March 31, 2010). SUBJECTS: All family physicians working in the 3 main primary care models in the province of Ontario (Canada), providing general care and having a panel size >1200. MEASURES: Indicators of cancer screening (3), chronic disease management (9), continuity (2), comprehensiveness (2), and access (5). RESULTS: A total of 4195 physicians (31% female) were eligible. Adjusting for provider and patient factors, patients of female physicians were more likely to have received recommended cancer screening (odds ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] (OR) range: 1.24 [1.18-1.30], 1.85 [1.78-1.92]) and diabetes management (OR: 1.04 [1.01-1.08], 1.28 [1.05-1.57]). They had fewer emergency room visits (rate ratio [95% CI] (RR) range: 0.83 [0.79-0.87]) and hospitalizations (RR: 0.89 [0.86-0.93]), and higher referrals (RR: 1.12 [1.09-1.14]). There was evidence of effect modification by patient gender (female vs. male) for hospitalization (RR: 0.74 [0.70-0.79] vs. 0.96 [0.90-1.02]) and emergency room visits (RR: 0.84 [0.81-0.88] vs. 0.98 [0.94-1.01]). Lower emergency room visits were also more evident in more complex patients of female physicians. There were no significant differences in the continuity or comprehensiveness measures. CONCLUSIONS: The indicators assessed in this study point to a benefit for patients under the care of female physicians. Potential explanations are discussed.
BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating primary care quality across physician gender are limited to primary and secondary prevention. OBJECTIVES: Investigate the relationship between family physician gender and quality of primary care using indicators that cover 5 key dimensions of primary care. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis using linked health administrative datasets (April 1, 2008 to March 31, 2010). SUBJECTS: All family physicians working in the 3 main primary care models in the province of Ontario (Canada), providing general care and having a panel size >1200. MEASURES: Indicators of cancer screening (3), chronic disease management (9), continuity (2), comprehensiveness (2), and access (5). RESULTS: A total of 4195 physicians (31% female) were eligible. Adjusting for provider and patient factors, patients of female physicians were more likely to have received recommended cancer screening (odds ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] (OR) range: 1.24 [1.18-1.30], 1.85 [1.78-1.92]) and diabetes management (OR: 1.04 [1.01-1.08], 1.28 [1.05-1.57]). They had fewer emergency room visits (rate ratio [95% CI] (RR) range: 0.83 [0.79-0.87]) and hospitalizations (RR: 0.89 [0.86-0.93]), and higher referrals (RR: 1.12 [1.09-1.14]). There was evidence of effect modification by patient gender (female vs. male) for hospitalization (RR: 0.74 [0.70-0.79] vs. 0.96 [0.90-1.02]) and emergency room visits (RR: 0.84 [0.81-0.88] vs. 0.98 [0.94-1.01]). Lower emergency room visits were also more evident in more complex patients of female physicians. There were no significant differences in the continuity or comprehensiveness measures. CONCLUSIONS: The indicators assessed in this study point to a benefit for patients under the care of female physicians. Potential explanations are discussed.
Authors: Yusuke Tsugawa; Anupam B Jena; Jose F Figueroa; E John Orav; Daniel M Blumenthal; Ashish K Jha Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Angela Meier; Jenny Yang; Jinyuan Liu; Jeremy R Beitler; Xin M Tu; Robert L Owens; Radhika L Sundararajan; Atul Malhotra; Rebecca E Sell Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 7.598