Center for Health Policy Research, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Department of Health Policy and Management, Fielding School of Public Health, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 8;15(12):e0242844. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242844. eCollection 2020.
In the United States, there are nearly 1,400 Health Resources and Services Administration-funded health centers (HCs) serving low-income and underserved populations and more than 600 of these HCs are located in rural areas. Disparities in quality of medical care in urban vs. rural areas exist but data on such differences between urban and rural HCs is limited in the literature. We examined whether urban and rural HCs differed in their performance on clinical quality measures before and after controlling for patient, organizational, and contextual characteristics.
We used the 2017 Uniform Data System to examine performance on clinical quality measures between urban and rural HCs (n = 1,373). We used generalized linear regression models with the logit link function and binomial distribution, controlling for confounding factors. After adjusting for potential confounders, we found on par performance between urban and rural HCs in all but one clinical quality measure. Rural HCs had lower rates of linking patients newly diagnosed with HIV to care (74% [95% CI: 69%, 80%] vs. 83% [95% CI: 80%, 86%]). We identified control variables that systematically accounted for eliminating urban vs. rural differences in performance on clinical quality measures. We also found that both urban and rural HCs had some clinical quality performance measures that were lower than available national benchmarks. Main limitations included potential discrepancy of urban or rural designation across all HC sites within a HC organization.
Findings highlight HCs' contributions in addressing rural disparities in quality of care and identify opportunities for improvement. Performance in both rural and urban HCs may be improved by supporting programs that increase the availability of providers, training, and provision of technical resources.
在美国,有近 1400 家由卫生资源和服务管理局资助的健康中心(HC)为低收入和服务不足的人群提供服务,其中 600 多家位于农村地区。城市和农村地区的医疗保健质量存在差异,但文献中关于城市和农村 HC 之间差异的数据有限。我们研究了在控制患者、组织和环境特征后,城市和农村 HC 在临床质量措施上的表现是否存在差异。
我们使用 2017 年统一数据系统,检查了城市和农村 HC 之间临床质量措施的表现(n=1373)。我们使用具有对数链接函数和二项式分布的广义线性回归模型,控制混杂因素。在调整潜在混杂因素后,我们发现除了一项临床质量指标外,城市和农村 HC 的表现相当。农村 HC 将新诊断为 HIV 的患者与护理机构联系的比例较低(74%[95%置信区间:69%,80%]与 83%[95%置信区间:80%,86%])。我们确定了控制变量,可以系统地消除临床质量措施表现上的城乡差异。我们还发现,城市和农村 HC 都有一些临床质量绩效指标低于可用的国家基准。主要限制因素包括在 HC 组织内的所有 HC 站点中,城市或农村的指定可能存在差异。
研究结果突出了 HC 在解决农村地区医疗保健质量差距方面的贡献,并确定了改进的机会。通过支持增加提供者、培训和提供技术资源的项目,农村和城市 HC 的绩效都可以得到提高。