Association between perceived discrimination and healthcare-seeking behavior in people with a disability.

BACKGROUND: Experiences of discrimination lead people from vulnerable groups to avoid medical healthcare. It is yet to be known if such experiences affect people with disabilities (PWD) in the same manner. OBJECTIVES: To determine the association between perceived discrimination and healthcare-seeking behavior in people with disabilities and to explore differences of this association across disability types. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study with data from a national survey of people with disabilities. Perceived discrimination and care-seeking behavior were measured as self-reports from the survey. Dependence for daily life activities, possession of health insurance, and other disability-related variables were included and considered as confounders. We used Poisson regression models and techniques for multistage sampling in the analyses. A stratified analysis was used to explore effects of discrimination across types of disability. RESULTS: Most of PWD were 65 years or older (67.1%). Prevalence of healthcare seeking was 78.8% in those who perceived discrimination, and 86.1% in those who did not. After adjusting for potential confounders, the probability of not seeking care was higher in people who reported perceived discrimination (adjusted PR = 1.15; 95%CI: 1.04-1.28). In a stratified analysis, significant effects of discrimination were found in people with communication disability (adjusted PR = 1.34, 95%CI: 1.07-1.67) and with physical disability (adjusted PR = 1.17, 95%CI: 1.03-1.34). CONCLUSIONS: People with disabilities who perceive discrimination are less likely to seek healthcare. This association was higher for people with communication and physical disabilities. These results provide evidence to institutions who attempt to tackle discrimination.

Assessment of Rehabilitation Infrastructure in Peru.

OBJECTIVE: To assess rehabilitation infrastructure in Peru in terms of the World Health Organization (WHO) health systems building blocks. DESIGN: Anonymous quantitative survey; questions were based on the WHO's Guidelines for Essential Trauma Care and rehabilitation professionals' input. SETTING: Large public hospitals and referral centers and an online survey platform. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of hospital personnel working in rehabilitation and neurology (N=239), recruited through existing contacts and professional societies. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures were for 4 WHO domains: health workforce, health service delivery, essential medical products and technologies, and health information systems. RESULTS: Regarding the domain of health workforce, 47% of physical therapists, 50% of occupational therapists, and 22% of physiatrists never see inpatients. Few reported rehabilitative nurses (15%) or prosthetist/orthotists (14%) at their hospitals. Even at the largest hospitals, most reported ≤3 occupational therapists (54%) and speech-language pathologists (70%). At hospitals without speech-language pathologists, physical therapists (49%) or nobody (34%) perform speech-language pathology roles. At hospitals without occupational therapists, physical therapists most commonly (59%) perform occupational therapy tasks. Alternate prosthetist/orthotist task performers are occupational therapists (26%), physical therapists (19%), and physicians (16%). Forty-four percent reported interdisciplinary collaboration. Regarding the domain of health services, the most frequent inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation barriers were referral delays (50%) and distance/transportation (39%), respectively. Regarding the domain of health information systems, 28% reported rehabilitation service data collection. Regarding the domain of essential medical products and technologies, electrophysical agents (88%), gyms (81%), and electromyography (76%) were most common; thickened liquids (19%), swallow studies (24%), and cognitive training tools (28%) were least frequent. CONCLUSIONS: Rehabilitation emphasis is on outpatient services, and there are comparatively adequate numbers of physical therapists and physiatrists relative to rehabilitation personnel. Financial barriers seem low for accessing existing services. There appear to be shortages of inpatient rehabilitation, specialized services, and interdisciplinary collaboration. These may be addressed by redistributing personnel and investing in education and equipment for specialized services. Further examination of task sharing's role in Peru's rehabilitation services is necessary to evaluate its potential to address deficiencies.

[Economic income in peruvian physicians according to the specialty: A cross-sectional analysis of the ENSUSALUD 2015]. / Ingresos económicos en médicos peruanos según especialidad: Un análisis transversal de la ENSUSALUD 2015.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relationship between having a medical specialty and the monthly income of Peruvian doctors, and to compare the economic incomes among areas with higher and lower density of medical doctors in Peru. MATERIALS AND METHODS: : We analyzed data of the National Satisfaction Survey of Health Users (in Spanish: ENSUSALUD) carried out in Peru in the year 2015. This survey, with a national level of inference, was performed on physicians working at health facilities in Peru. Monthly income was measured considering all paid activities of the physician. Crude and adjusted prevalence ratios (PR and aPR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated through Poisson regression models with robust variance, taking into account the complex sampling of the survey. RESULTS: Out of 2 219 Physicians surveyed, 2 154 (97.0%) observations were analyzed. The probability of earning > S/5 000 (1 572.3 USD) per month was 29.1% for general practitioners; 65.6% for specialists; 63.0% for clinical specialists; 70.5% for surgeons, and 55.7% for other specialties. Compared to general practitioners, physicians with clinical, surgical, and other specialties were more likely to earn > S/5 000 per month (aPR = 1.44, 1.49, and 1.26, respectively). The probability of earning > S/5 000 was higher in those working in departments with low medical density. CONCLUSIONS: Monthly incomes were higher for specialist physicians than for non-specialists. Economic incomes were higher in departments with lower density of physicians, which may encourage physicians to work in these departments.

OBJETIVOS: Evaluar la asociación entre tener una especialidad médica y el ingreso económico mensual en médicos peruanos, y comparar los ingresos económicos entre áreas con mayor y menor densidad de médicos en Perú. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: Se analizaron los datos de la Encuesta Nacional de Satisfacción de Usuarios de Salud realizada en Perú el año 2015. Esta encuesta con nivel de inferencia nacional fue realizada a médicos que laboran en establecimientos de salud de Perú. Se evaluó el ingreso económico considerando todas las actividades remuneradas del médico. Se calcularon las razones de prevalencia crudas y ajustadas (RP y RPa) y sus intervalos de confianza al 95% (IC95%) mediante regresiones de Poisson con varianza robusta, tomando en cuenta el muestreo complejo de la encuesta. RESULTADOS: De 2219 médicos encuestados, se analizaron 2154 (97,0%) observaciones. La frecuencia de ganar >S/ 5000 (1572,3 USD) mensuales fue de 29,1% en médicos generales; 65,6% en especialistas; 63,0% en especialidades clínicas; 70,5% en especialidades quirúrgicas, y 55,7% en otras especialidades. En comparación a los médicos generales, los médicos con especialidades clínicas, quirúrgicas, y otras especialidades, tuvieron más probabilidades de ganar >S/ 5000 mensuales (RPa = 1,44, 1,49, y 1,26, respectivamente). La probabilidad de ganar >S/ 5000 fue mayor en quienes laboraban en departamentos con baja densidad de médicos. CONCLUSIONES: Los ingresos económicos fueron mayores en médicos especialistas que en no especialistas. Los ingresos económicos fueron mayores en departamentos con menor densidad de médicos, lo cual puede animar a que los médicos laboren en dichos departamentos.

Ingresos económicos en médicos peruanos según especialidad: Un análisis transversal de la ENSUSALUD 2015 / Economic income in peruvian physicians according to the specialty: A cross-sectional analysis of the ENSUSALUD 2015

RESUMEN Objetivos Evaluar la asociación entre tener una especialidad médica y el ingreso económico mensual en médicos peruanos, y comparar los ingresos económicos entre áreas con mayor y menor densidad de médicos en Perú. Materiales y métodos Se analizaron los datos de la Encuesta Nacional de Satisfacción de Usuarios de Salud realizada en Perú el año 2015. Esta encuesta con nivel de inferencia nacional fue realizada a médicos que laboran en establecimientos de salud de Perú. Se evaluó el ingreso económico considerando todas las actividades remuneradas del médico. Se calcularon las razones de prevalencia crudas y ajustadas (RP y RPa) y sus intervalos de confianza al 95% (IC95%) mediante regresiones de Poisson con varianza robusta, tomando en cuenta el muestreo complejo de la encuesta. Resultados De 2219 médicos encuestados, se analizaron 2154 (97,0%) observaciones. La frecuencia de ganar >S/ 5000 (1572,3 USD) mensuales fue de 29,1% en médicos generales; 65,6% en especialistas; 63,0% en especialidades clínicas; 70,5% en especialidades quirúrgicas, y 55,7% en otras especialidades. En comparación a los médicos generales, los médicos con especialidades clínicas, quirúrgicas, y otras especialidades, tuvieron más probabilidades de ganar >S/ 5000 mensuales (RPa = 1,44, 1,49, y 1,26, respectivamente). La probabilidad de ganar >S/ 5000 fue mayor en quienes laboraban en departamentos con baja densidad de médicos. Conclusiones Los ingresos económicos fueron mayores en médicos especialistas que en no especialistas. Los ingresos económicos fueron mayores en departamentos con menor densidad de médicos, lo cual puede animar a que los médicos laboren en dichos departamentos.

ABSTRACT Objectives To evaluate the relationship between having a medical specialty and the monthly income of Peruvian doctors, and to compare the economic incomes among areas with higher and lower density of medical doctors in Peru. Materials and methods : We analyzed data of the National Satisfaction Survey of Health Users (in Spanish: ENSUSALUD) carried out in Peru in the year 2015. This survey, with a national level of inference, was performed on physicians working at health facilities in Peru. Monthly income was measured considering all paid activities of the physician. Crude and adjusted prevalence ratios (PR and aPR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated through Poisson regression models with robust variance, taking into account the complex sampling of the survey. Results Out of 2 219 Physicians surveyed, 2 154 (97.0%) observations were analyzed. The probability of earning > S/5 000 (1 572.3 USD) per month was 29.1% for general practitioners; 65.6% for specialists; 63.0% for clinical specialists; 70.5% for surgeons, and 55.7% for other specialties. Compared to general practitioners, physicians with clinical, surgical, and other specialties were more likely to earn > S/5 000 per month (aPR = 1.44, 1.49, and 1.26, respectively). The probability of earning > S/5 000 was higher in those working in departments with low medical density. Conclusions Monthly incomes were higher for specialist physicians than for non-specialists. Economic incomes were higher in departments with lower density of physicians, which may encourage physicians to work in these departments.