This study examined whether health confidence is associated with consumers' ratings and reports of care and whether adjusting for health confidence and other factors attenuates ethnic or racial disparities. Data are from the 2005 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Persons with greater health confidence had lower adjusted odds of high overall care ratings (OCRs) and high reports of getting needed care and provider communication. Adjusting for health confidence and other factors, there were no Hispanic/non-Hispanic differences. Compared with whites, African Americans had lower OCRs and reports of getting needed care; Asians had lower OCRs and reports of getting needed care, getting care quickly, and provider communication. Health care organizations and providers should consider targeting improvement efforts toward health-confident persons and adjusting for health confidence when comparing consumer assessments across groups. Although health confidence is associated with consumer assessments, other factors explain racial and ethnic differences.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Confidence in healthcare may influence the patients' utilisation of healthcare resources and perceptions of healthcare quality. We sought to determine whether self-reported confidence in healthcare differed between the UK and the USA, as well as by rurality or urbanicity.
A secondary analysis of a subset of survey questions regarding self-reported confidence in healthcare from the 2010 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey.
Telephone survey of participants from the UK and the USA.
Our final analysis included 1511 UK residents (688 rural, 446 suburban, 372 urban, 5 uncategorised) and 2501 US residents (536 rural, 1294 suburban, 671 urban).
Questions assessed respondents' confidence in the effectiveness and affordability of the treatment. We compared survey outcomes from these questions between, and within, the two regions and among, and within, residence types (rural, suburban and urban).
Significant differences were found in self-reported confidence in healthcare between the UK and US, among residence types, and between the two regions within residence types. Reported levels were higher in the UK. Within regions, significant differences by residence type were found for the US, but not the UK. Within the US, suburban respondents had the highest self-reported confidence in healthcare.
Significant differences exist between the UK and US in confidence in healthcare. In the US, but not in the UK, self-reported confidence is related to residence type. Within countries, significant differences by residence type were found for the US, but not the UK. Our findings warrant the examination of causes for relative confidence levels in healthcare between regions and among US residence types.
BMJ Open 05/2013; 3(5). DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002640 · 2.27 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background:
There is evidence that Black patients may experience stereotype threat--apprehension about being negatively stereotyped--in healthcare settings, which might adversely affect their behavior in clinical encounters. Recent studies conducted outside of healthcare have shown that a brief self-affirmation intervention, in which individuals are asked to focus on and affirm their valued characteristics and sources of personal pride, can reduce the negative effects of stereotype threat on academic performance and on interpersonal communication.
This randomised controlled trial examined whether a self-affirmation (SA) intervention would decrease the negative effects of stereotype threat (negative mood, lower state self-esteem, greater perceptions of racial discrimination) and increase communication self-efficacy among Black primary care patients. Self-affirmation was induced by having patients complete a 32-item values affirmation questionnaire.
Patients in the SA condition had lower levels of performance self-esteem and social self-esteem than patients in the control. There were no differences between the SA and the control groups on negative mood, communication self-efficacy, and perceptions of discrimination.
Our SA intervention lowered state self-esteem among Black patients. Future research is needed to determine the type of SA task that is most effective for this population.
Applied Psychology Health and Well-Being 10/2013; 6(2). DOI:10.1111/aphw.12015 · 1.75 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background: Patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical care can be a strong predictor of medication and other health-related outcomes. Less understood is the role that location of pharmacies in urban or suburban environments plays in patient satisfaction with pharmacy and pharmacist services. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to serve as a pilot examining urban and suburban community pharmacy populations for similarities and differences in patient satisfaction. Methods: Community pharmacy patients were asked to self-administer a 30-question patient satisfaction survey. Fifteen questions addressed their relationship with the pharmacist, 10 questions addressed satisfaction and accessibility of the pharmacy, and five questions addressed financial concerns. Five urban and five suburban pharmacies agreed to participate. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and chisquare analysis. Results: Most patients reported high levels of satisfaction. Satisfaction with pharmacist relationship and service was 70% or higher with no significant differences between locations. There were significant differences between the urban and suburban patients regarding accessibility of pharmacy services, customer service and some patient/pharmacist trust issues. Conclusions: The significant differences between patient satisfaction in the suburban and urban populations warrant a larger study with more community pharmacies in other urban, suburban and rural locations to better understand and validate study findings.
Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy 05/2014; 11(1). DOI:10.1016/j.sapharm.2014.05.001 · 2.35 Impact Factor
Note: This list is based on the publications in our database and might not be exhaustive.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.