Robert M. Politzer

Inequality in America: The Contribution of Health Centers in Reducing and Eliminating Disparities in Access to Care

Reducing and eliminating health status disparities by providing access to appropriate health care is a goal of the nation’s health care delivery system. This article reviews the literature that demonstrates a relationship between access to appropriate health care and reductions in health status disparities. Using comprehensive site-level data, patient surveys, and medical record reviews, the authors present an evaluation of the ability of health centers to provide such access. Access to a regular and usual source of care alone can mitigate health status disparities. The safety net health center network has reduced racial/ethnic, income, and insurance status disparities in access to primary care and important preventive screening procedures. In addition, the network has reduced low birth weight disparities for African American infants. Evidence suggests that health centers are successful in reducing and eliminating health access disparities by establishing themselves as their patients’ usual and regular source of care. This relationship portends well for reducing and eliminating health status disparities.

Primary care, infant mortality, and low birth weight in the states of the USA

Study objective: The study tests the extent to which primary care physician supply (office based primary care physicians per 10 000 population) moderates the association between social inequalities and infant mortality and low birth weight throughout the 50 states of the USA. Design: Pooled cross sectional, time series analysis of secondary data. Analyses controlled for state level education, unemployment, racial/ethnic composition, income inequality, and urban/rural differences. Contemporaneous and time lagged covariates were modelled. Setting: Eleven years (1985–95) of data from 50 US states (final n = 549 because of one missing data point). Main results: Primary care was negatively associated with infant mortality and low birth weight in all multivariate models (p<0.0001). The association was consistent in contemporaneous and time lagged models. Although income inequality was positively associated with low birth weight and infant mortality (p<0.0001), the association with infant mortality disappeared with the addition of sociodemographic covariates. Conclusions: In US states, an increased supply of primary care practitioners—especially in areas with high levels of social disparities—is negatively associated with infant mortality and low birth weight.

Availability of Primary Care Providers and Pharmacists in the United States

OBJECTIVE To determine the rural distribution of primary care providers (primary care physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurse midwives) and pharmacists. DESIGN Five-digit ZIP code mapping to study the availability of primary care providers and pharmacists, alone and in combinations, in rural areas and ZIP code-based health professional shortage areas (HPSAs). National averages for annual physician visits for hypertension, asthma, and diabetes were used to estimate the sufficiency of the rural physician supply. SETTING Rural areas of the United States. RESULTS In rural areas, all providers were present in lower densities than national averages, particularly in HPSAs. The primary care physician supply was insufficient to meet national averages for office visits for hypertension, asthma, and diabetes. Among available providers, the most prevalent co-presence was primary care physician with pharmacist. HPSAs showed very low physician density (1 per 22,122), and the most prevalent providers were pharmacists. States varied widely in provider density. CONCLUSION Despite longstanding efforts and the expansion of managed care, primary care providers remain in short supply in rural areas, especially ZIP code-based HPSAs. Making the best use of available providers should be encouraged. The continued shortfall of primary care providers in rural areas, particularly HPSAs, makes it logical to use other available providers and combinations to increase health care access. Pharmacists could increase care for patients with conditions treated with medications. Other available providers, based on skills and work site, could also offset shortages.

Primary Care, Income Inequality, and Stroke Mortality in the United States A Longitudinal Analysis, 1985–1995

Background and Purpose— The goal of this study was to test whether primary care reduces the impact of income inequality on stroke mortality. Methods— This study used pooled time-series cross-sectional analysis of 11 years of state-level data (n=549). Analyses controlled for education levels, unemployment, racial/ethnic composition, and percent urban. Contemporaneous and time-lagged covariates were modeled. Results— Primary care was negatively associated with stroke mortality in models including all covariates (P <0.0001). The impact of income inequality on stroke mortality was reduced in the presence of primary care (P <0.0001) but disappeared with the addition of covariates (P >0.05). Conclusions— In the absence of social policy that addresses sociodemographic determinants of health, primary care promotion may serve as a palliative strategy for combating stroke mortality and reducing the adverse impact of income inequality on health.

Primary care, social inequalities, and all-cause, heart disease, and cancer mortality in US counties, 1990

OBJECTIVES We tested the association between the availability of primary care and income inequality on several categories of mortality in US counties. METHODS We used cross-sectional analysis of data from counties (n=3081) in 1990, including analysis of variance and multivariate ordinary least squares regression. Independent variables included primary care resources, income inequality, and sociodemographics. RESULTS Counties with higher availability of primary care resources experienced between 2% and 3% lower mortality than counties with less primary care. Counties with high income inequality experienced between 11% and 13% higher mortality than counties with less inequality. CONCLUSIONS Primary care resources may partially moderate the effects of income inequality on health outcomes at the county level.

Primary Care Quality: Community Health Center and Health Maintenance Organization

Objective This study compares the primary health care quality of community health centers (CHCs) and health maintenance organizations (HMOs) in South Carolina to elucidate the quality of CHC performance relative to mainstream settings such as the HMO. Methods Mail surveys were used to obtain data from 350 randomly selected HMO users. Surveys with follow-up interviews were conducted to obtain data from 540 randomly selected CHC users. A validated adult primary care assessment tool was used in both surveys. Multivariate analyses were performed to assess the association of health care setting (HMO versus CHC) with primary care quality while controlling for sociodemographic and health care characteristics. Results After controlling for sociodemographic and health care use measures, CHC patients demonstrated higher scores in several primary care domains (ongoing care, coordination of service, comprehensiveness, and community orientation) as well as total primary care performance. Conclusion Users of CHC are more likely than HMO users to rate their primary health care provider as good, except in the area of ease of first contact. The positive rating of the CHC is particularly impressive after taking into account that many CHC users have characteristics associated with poorer ratings of care.

Comparative effectiveness of health centers as regular source of care: application of sentinel ACSC events as performance measures.

A 4-state (Alabama, California, Georgia, Pennsylvania) retrospective analysis of claims data from 1.6 million Medicaid beneficiaries to assess the performance of community health centers compared with other Medicaid providers (office-based and hospital-based practices) served as a regular source of care to Medicaid beneficiaries, each with at least one diagnosed ambulatory care–sensitive condition (ACSC). The health centers compared with the other Medicaid providers experienced one third fewer sentinel ACS events: 5.7 and 8.2 ACS admissions and 26.1 and 37.7 ACS emergency visits, respectively, per 100 persons. Controlling for case mix and other factors, the logistic regression results for sentinel events indicated that Medicaid beneficiaries who relied on health centers for primary care were significantly less likely to experience an ACS admission (OR = 0.89, P < .0001) or an ACS emergency visit (OR = 0.81, P < .0001) than the Medicaid beneficiaries who relied on other Medicaid providers. Sentinel ACS events can serve as efficient measures for assessing provider performance and comparing effectiveness of regular sources for primary care.

Trends in mental health and substance abuse services at the nation's community health centers: 1998-2003

OBJECTIVE We examined trends in delivery of mental health and substance abuse services at the nations community health centers. METHODS Analyses used data from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Bureau of Primary Cares (BPHC) 1998 and 2003 Uniform Data System, merged with county-level data. RESULTS Between 1998 and 2003, the number of patients diagnosed with a mental health/substance abuse disorder in community health centers increased from 210,000 to 800,000. There was an increase in the number of patients per specialty mental health/substance abuse treatment provider and a decline in the mean number of patient visits, from 7.3 visits per patient to 3.5 by 2003. Although most community health centers had some on-site mental health/substance abuse services, centers without on-site services were more likely to be located in counties with fewer mental health/substance abuse clinicians, psychiatric emergency rooms, and inpatient hospitals. CONCLUSIONS Community health centers are playing an increasingly central role in providing mental health/substance abuse treatment services in the United States. It is critical both to ensure that these centers have adequate resources for providing mental health/substance abuse care and that they develop effective linkages with mental health/substance abuse clinicians in the communities they serve.

Access to Care for U.S. Health Center Patients and Patients Nationally How Do the Most Vulnerable Populations Fare

This study examined access to care for uninsured and Medicaid-insured community health center patients in comparison to nonhealth center patients nationally. Using nationally representative data from 2 major surveys in 2002, there was a positive association between seeking care in community health centers and self-reported access to care for both uninsured and Medicaid patients. This suggests that health centers may fill a critical gap in access to care for patients who use their services. Given recent budget cuts to the Medicaid program, health centers remain an important policy option to assure access to care for vulnerable populations.

The Future Role of Health Centers in Improving National Health

International health rankings for the US are heavily influenced by striking racial and socioeconomic health status disparities. Current discussions of health determinants frequently relegate or entirely dismiss health care contributions despite increasing evidence of the importance of access to primary care. Health centers deliver community-based primary care to a considerable and growing proportion of the nations most vulnerable and have produced significant health improvements, especially for women and children. Policies that disproportionately benefit those in greatest need are likely to produce the largest gains in national health. Continued expansion of the health center network to ensure primary care for those who remain underserved is both an effective and politically acceptable strategy to improve national health.