Disparate Use of Diagnostic Modalities for Patients With Limited English Proficiency and Neurologic Disorders.

IF 2.3 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurology. Clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-09 DOI:10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200417
Altaf Saadi, Redwan Bin Abdul Baten, Margarita Alegría, David Himmelstein, Steffie Woolhandler
{"title":"Disparate Use of Diagnostic Modalities for Patients With Limited English Proficiency and Neurologic Disorders.","authors":"Altaf Saadi, Redwan Bin Abdul Baten, Margarita Alegría, David Himmelstein, Steffie Woolhandler","doi":"10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Limited English proficiency (LEP) impairs health access-including outpatient specialty care-and quality care, i.e., inappropriate use of diagnostic tests. At least in some cases, studies have suggested that clinicians may substitute testing for time-consuming clinical evaluation involving medical interpreters. This study (1) examines disparities in receipt of diagnostic testing among patients with LEP and neurologic illness, in both the ambulatory and emergency department (ED) settings, including (2) whether better patient-provider communication is associated with reduced testing disparities and (3) how testing disparities vary according to insurance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed nationally representative data from the 2003-2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and identified adults with neurologic illness using diagnostic codes. To assess the association between LEP status and diagnostic testing (CT/MRI, laboratory tests, and any diagnostic tests), we estimated logistic regression models that included year-fixed effects. We constructed separate models for ambulatory and ED settings, including models with a patient-provider communication measure to see how that influenced the LEP-diagnostic testing association. Finally, we conducted stratified analyses by sources of health insurance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>LEP status was associated with greater receipt of laboratory tests (OR = 1.46, <i>p</i> < 0.05) but less CT/MRI in the ambulatory setting (0.86, <i>p</i> < 0.05), patterns that persisted in analyses stratified by insurance status. Factoring in patient-provider communication attenuated but did not eliminate these disparities, with attenuation most notable in rates of CT/MRI. We found fewer testing disparities for patients with LEP in the ED than in ambulatory settings.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>In this nationwide study of patients with neurologic illness, we observed both greater and less use of diagnostic tests for patients with LEP and neurologic illness. The greater use of laboratory tests may reflect the overuse of easily obtainable tests for patients with LEP. Conversely, the less use of CT/MRI may be due to time and transportation challenges in scheduling follow-up visits, alongside other barriers to patient follow-up. The population of patients with LEP is growing, making it critical to study not only disparities in their care but also nuances and determinants of these disparities beyond patient-provider communication and across clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":19136,"journal":{"name":"Neurology. Clinical practice","volume":"15 2","pages":"e200417"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11727602/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology. Clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200417","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Limited English proficiency (LEP) impairs health access-including outpatient specialty care-and quality care, i.e., inappropriate use of diagnostic tests. At least in some cases, studies have suggested that clinicians may substitute testing for time-consuming clinical evaluation involving medical interpreters. This study (1) examines disparities in receipt of diagnostic testing among patients with LEP and neurologic illness, in both the ambulatory and emergency department (ED) settings, including (2) whether better patient-provider communication is associated with reduced testing disparities and (3) how testing disparities vary according to insurance.

Methods: We analyzed nationally representative data from the 2003-2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and identified adults with neurologic illness using diagnostic codes. To assess the association between LEP status and diagnostic testing (CT/MRI, laboratory tests, and any diagnostic tests), we estimated logistic regression models that included year-fixed effects. We constructed separate models for ambulatory and ED settings, including models with a patient-provider communication measure to see how that influenced the LEP-diagnostic testing association. Finally, we conducted stratified analyses by sources of health insurance.

Results: LEP status was associated with greater receipt of laboratory tests (OR = 1.46, p < 0.05) but less CT/MRI in the ambulatory setting (0.86, p < 0.05), patterns that persisted in analyses stratified by insurance status. Factoring in patient-provider communication attenuated but did not eliminate these disparities, with attenuation most notable in rates of CT/MRI. We found fewer testing disparities for patients with LEP in the ED than in ambulatory settings.

Discussion: In this nationwide study of patients with neurologic illness, we observed both greater and less use of diagnostic tests for patients with LEP and neurologic illness. The greater use of laboratory tests may reflect the overuse of easily obtainable tests for patients with LEP. Conversely, the less use of CT/MRI may be due to time and transportation challenges in scheduling follow-up visits, alongside other barriers to patient follow-up. The population of patients with LEP is growing, making it critical to study not only disparities in their care but also nuances and determinants of these disparities beyond patient-provider communication and across clinical settings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对英语水平有限和神经系统疾病患者使用诊断模式的差异。
背景和目的:有限的英语熟练程度(LEP)损害了医疗服务的可及性,包括门诊专科护理和高质量的护理,即不恰当地使用诊断测试。至少在某些情况下,研究表明,临床医生可以用测试代替耗时的临床评估,包括医疗口译员。本研究(1)检查LEP和神经系统疾病患者接受诊断测试的差异,包括门诊和急诊科(ED)设置,包括(2)更好的患者与提供者沟通是否与减少测试差异相关,以及(3)测试差异如何根据保险而变化。方法:我们分析了2003-2018年医疗支出小组调查的全国代表性数据,并使用诊断代码识别患有神经系统疾病的成年人。为了评估LEP状态与诊断测试(CT/MRI、实验室测试和任何诊断测试)之间的关系,我们估计了包括年固定效应的逻辑回归模型。我们分别构建了门诊和急诊科设置的模型,包括具有患者-提供者沟通措施的模型,以了解其如何影响lep诊断测试关联。最后,我们根据健康保险的来源进行了分层分析。结果:LEP状态与更多的实验室检查相关(OR = 1.46, p < 0.05),但在门诊环境中较少的CT/MRI检查相关(OR = 0.86, p < 0.05),这种模式在按保险状态分层的分析中持续存在。考虑到病人与医生之间的沟通,这些差异减弱了,但并没有消除,在CT/MRI的比率中衰减最为显著。我们发现LEP患者在急诊科的检测差异小于门诊。讨论:在这项全国范围的神经系统疾病患者研究中,我们观察到LEP和神经系统疾病患者诊断测试的使用既有增加的,也有减少的。实验室检查的大量使用可能反映了LEP患者过度使用易于获得的检查。相反,CT/MRI的较少使用可能是由于安排随访的时间和交通方面的挑战,以及患者随访的其他障碍。LEP患者的数量正在增长,因此不仅要研究他们的护理差异,还要研究这些差异的细微差别和决定因素,这些差异超出了患者与提供者的沟通和跨临床环境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neurology. Clinical practice
Neurology. Clinical practice CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Neurology® Genetics is an online open access journal publishing peer-reviewed reports in the field of neurogenetics. The journal publishes original articles in all areas of neurogenetics including rare and common genetic variations, genotype-phenotype correlations, outlier phenotypes as a result of mutations in known disease genes, and genetic variations with a putative link to diseases. Articles include studies reporting on genetic disease risk, pharmacogenomics, and results of gene-based clinical trials (viral, ASO, etc.). Genetically engineered model systems are not a primary focus of Neurology® Genetics, but studies using model systems for treatment trials, including well-powered studies reporting negative results, are welcome.
期刊最新文献
A Real-World Prospective Multiple Sclerosis Pregnancy Registry in the United States: PREG-MS. Disparate Use of Diagnostic Modalities for Patients With Limited English Proficiency and Neurologic Disorders. Consensus Recommendations for the Management of Neurosarcoidosis: A Delphi Survey of Experts Across the United States. Improving the Clinical Diagnostic Criteria for Genetically Confirmed Adult-Onset Huntington Disease: Considering Nonmotor Presentations. National Trends in Stroke Presentation, Treatments, and Outcomes During the First 2 Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1