TY - JOUR
T1 - Patient and provider assessments of adherence and the sources of disparities
T2 - Evidence from diabetes care
AU - Lutfey, Karen E.
AU - Ketcham, Jonathan
PY - 2005/12
Y1 - 2005/12
N2 - Objective. To (1) compare diabetes patients' self-assessments of adherence with their providers' assessments; (2) determine whether there are systematic differences between the two for certain types of patients; and (3) consider how the cognitive processing that providers use to assess adherence might explain these differences. Data Sources/Study Setting. Primary survey data were collected in 1998 from 156 patient provider pairs in two subspecialty endocrinology clinics in a large Midwestern city. Study Design. Data were collected in a cross-sectional survey study design. Providers were surveyed immediately after seeing each diabetes patient, and patients were surveyed via telephone within 1 week of clinic visits. Data Collection/Extraction Methods. Bivariate descriptive results and multivariate regression analyses are used to examine how patient characteristics relate to four measures of overall adherence assessments: (1) patients' self-assessments; (2) providers' assessments of patient adherence; (3) differences between those assessments; and (4) absolute values of those differences. Principal Findings. Patient self-assessments are almost entirely independent of observable characteristics such as sex, race, and age. Provider assessments vary with observable characteristics such as patient race and age but not with less readily observable factors such as education and income. For black patients, we observe that relative to white patients, providers' assessments are significantly farther away from-although not systematically farther above or below-patients' self-assessments. Conclusions. Providers appear to rely on observable cues, particularly age and race, to make inferences about an individual patient's adherence. These findings point to a need for further research of various types of provider cognitive processing, particularly in terms of distinguishing between prejudice and uncertainty. If disparities in assessment stem more from information and communication problems than from provider prejudice, policy interventions should facilitate providers' systematic acquisition and processing of information, particularly for some types of patients.
AB - Objective. To (1) compare diabetes patients' self-assessments of adherence with their providers' assessments; (2) determine whether there are systematic differences between the two for certain types of patients; and (3) consider how the cognitive processing that providers use to assess adherence might explain these differences. Data Sources/Study Setting. Primary survey data were collected in 1998 from 156 patient provider pairs in two subspecialty endocrinology clinics in a large Midwestern city. Study Design. Data were collected in a cross-sectional survey study design. Providers were surveyed immediately after seeing each diabetes patient, and patients were surveyed via telephone within 1 week of clinic visits. Data Collection/Extraction Methods. Bivariate descriptive results and multivariate regression analyses are used to examine how patient characteristics relate to four measures of overall adherence assessments: (1) patients' self-assessments; (2) providers' assessments of patient adherence; (3) differences between those assessments; and (4) absolute values of those differences. Principal Findings. Patient self-assessments are almost entirely independent of observable characteristics such as sex, race, and age. Provider assessments vary with observable characteristics such as patient race and age but not with less readily observable factors such as education and income. For black patients, we observe that relative to white patients, providers' assessments are significantly farther away from-although not systematically farther above or below-patients' self-assessments. Conclusions. Providers appear to rely on observable cues, particularly age and race, to make inferences about an individual patient's adherence. These findings point to a need for further research of various types of provider cognitive processing, particularly in terms of distinguishing between prejudice and uncertainty. If disparities in assessment stem more from information and communication problems than from provider prejudice, policy interventions should facilitate providers' systematic acquisition and processing of information, particularly for some types of patients.
KW - Adherence
KW - Chronic disease
KW - Clinical encounter
KW - Racial/ethnic differences in health and health care
KW - Statistical discrimination
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=29144517465&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=29144517465&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00433.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00433.x
M3 - Article
C2 - 16336549
AN - SCOPUS:29144517465
SN - 0017-9124
VL - 40
SP - 1803
EP - 1817
JO - Health Services Research
JF - Health Services Research
IS - 6 I
ER -