Mary A Khetani1, Zachary Richardson, Beth M McManus. 1. *Department of Occupational Therapy, College of Applied Health Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), Chicago, IL; †Department of Health Systems, Management and Policy, Colorado School of Public Health, Aurora, CO.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe social disparities in early intervention (EI) service use and provider-reported outcomes. METHODS: Secondary data analysis of administrative data to ascertain EI service use of all EI and discipline-specific services and child and family characteristics. Adjusted logistic regression models estimated the odds of receiving each type of core EI service. Adjusted median regression models estimated differences in EI intensity for each type of core EI service. Adjusted ordinal regression models estimated the association between each type of EI therapy service and provider estimates of children's global functional improvement. RESULTS: Children with a diagnosis (b = 0.8, SE = 0.2) and those whose caregiver had 12 years of education or less (b = 0.6, SE = 0.3) had higher EI intensity. Black, non-Hispanic (BNH) children had nearly 75% lower odds of receiving physical therapy (PT) (odds ratio [OR] = 0.3, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-0.7) and greater odds of receiving speech therapy (ST) (OR = 3.4, 95% CI, 1.3-9.3) than their white, non-Hispanic (WNH) peers. BNH children who received PT received about an hour less per month (b = -0.7, SE = 0.4) than their WNH peers. Hispanic children (b = 1.0, SE = 0.3) and those with higher family income (b = 0.7, SE = 0.3) received greater intensity of PT compared with their peers who are WNH and from low-income families. Publically insured children had lower intensity of occupational therapy (b = -0.5, SE = 0.3) and ST (b = -0.6, SE = 0.3). Greater intensity of EI services was not associated with greater provider-perceived improvement. CONCLUSION: Results suggest disparities, by race and family income, in receipt of EI therapy services. These findings highlight opportunities to customize and coordinate care for improved EI access and care quality.
OBJECTIVE: To describe social disparities in early intervention (EI) service use and provider-reported outcomes. METHODS: Secondary data analysis of administrative data to ascertain EI service use of all EI and discipline-specific services and child and family characteristics. Adjusted logistic regression models estimated the odds of receiving each type of core EI service. Adjusted median regression models estimated differences in EI intensity for each type of core EI service. Adjusted ordinal regression models estimated the association between each type of EI therapy service and provider estimates of children's global functional improvement. RESULTS:Children with a diagnosis (b = 0.8, SE = 0.2) and those whose caregiver had 12 years of education or less (b = 0.6, SE = 0.3) had higher EI intensity. Black, non-Hispanic (BNH) children had nearly 75% lower odds of receiving physical therapy (PT) (odds ratio [OR] = 0.3, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-0.7) and greater odds of receiving speech therapy (ST) (OR = 3.4, 95% CI, 1.3-9.3) than their white, non-Hispanic (WNH) peers. BNHchildren who received PT received about an hour less per month (b = -0.7, SE = 0.4) than their WNH peers. Hispanic children (b = 1.0, SE = 0.3) and those with higher family income (b = 0.7, SE = 0.3) received greater intensity of PT compared with their peers who are WNH and from low-income families. Publically insured children had lower intensity of occupational therapy (b = -0.5, SE = 0.3) and ST (b = -0.6, SE = 0.3). Greater intensity of EI services was not associated with greater provider-perceived improvement. CONCLUSION: Results suggest disparities, by race and family income, in receipt of EI therapy services. These findings highlight opportunities to customize and coordinate care for improved EI access and care quality.
Authors: Katharine E Zuckerman; Kimber M Mattox; Brianna K Sinche; Gregory S Blaschke; Christina Bethell Journal: Clin Pediatr (Phila) Date: 2013-09-10 Impact factor: 1.168
Authors: Wanda D Barfield; Karen M Clements; Kimberly G Lee; Milton Kotelchuck; Nancy Wilber; Paul H Wise Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2007-06-12
Authors: Stacey C Dusing; Jennifer C Burnsed; Shaaron E Brown; Amy D Harper; Karen D Hendricks-Munoz; Richard D Stevenson; Leroy R Thacker; Rebecca M Molinini Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2020-08-12
Authors: Zachary S Richardson; Elizabeth A Scully; Jodi K Dooling-Litfin; Natalie J Murphy; Briana Rigau; Mary A Khetani; Beth M McManus Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2019-11-26 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Elizabeth Peacock-Chambers; JoAnna K Leyenaar; Sheila Foss; Emily Feinberg; Donna Wilson; Peter D Friedmann; Paul Visintainer; Rachana Singh Journal: J Dev Behav Pediatr Date: 2019 Jul/Aug Impact factor: 2.225
Authors: Zachary S Richardson; Mary A Khetani; Elizabeth Scully; Jodi Dooling-Litfin; Natalie J Murphy; Beth M McManus Journal: Acad Pediatr Date: 2019-02-21 Impact factor: 3.107
Authors: Alicia G Kachmar; R Scott Watson; David Wypij; Mallory A Perry; Martha A Q Curley Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 9.296
Authors: Beth M McManus; Natalie J Murphy; Zachary Richardson; Mary A Khetani; Margaret Schenkman; Elaine H Morrato Journal: Child Care Health Dev Date: 2019-12-18 Impact factor: 2.508
Authors: Matthew L Romo; Katharine H McVeigh; Phoebe Jordan; Jeanette A Stingone; Pui Ying Chan; George L Askew Journal: J Public Health (Oxf) Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 2.341