Understanding intersectional inequality in access to primary care providers using multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Despite the Canadian healthcare system's commitment to equity, evidence for disparate access to primary care (PC) providers exists across individual social identities/positions. Intersectionality allows us to reflect the realities of how social power shapes healthcare experiences at an individual's interdependent and intersecting social identities/positions. The objectives of this study were to determine: (1) the extent to which intersections can be used classify those who had/did not have a PC provider; (2) the degree to which each social identity/position contributes to the ability to classify individuals as having a PC provider; and (3) predicted probabilities of having a PC provider for each intersection. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using national cross-sectional data from 241,445 individuals in Canada aged ≥18, we constructed 320 intersections along the dimensions of gender, age, immigration status, race, and income to examine the outcome of whether one had a PC provider. Multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy, a multi-level model using individual-level data, was employed to address intersectional objectives. An intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) of 23% (95%CI: 21-26%) suggests that these intersections could, to a very good extent, explain individual variation in the outcome, with age playing the largest role. Not all between-intersection variance in this outcome could be explained by additive effects of dimensions (remaining ICC: 6%; 95%CI: 2-16%). The highest intersectional predicted probability existed for established immigrant, older South Asian women with high income. The lowest intersectional predicted probability existed for recently immigrated, young, Black men with low income. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a "universal" healthcare system, our analysis demonstrated a substantial amount of inequity in primary care across intersections of gender, age, immigration status, race, and income.

Patient Sex and Postoperative Outcomes after Inpatient Intraabdominal Surgery: A Population-based Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Intraabdominal surgeries are frequently performed procedures that lead to a high volume of unplanned readmissions and postoperative complications. Patient sex may be a determinant of adverse outcomes in this population, possibly due to differences in biology or care delivery, but it is understudied. The authors hypothesized that there would be no association between patient sex and the risk of postoperative adverse outcomes in intraabdominal surgery. METHODS: This retrospective, population-based cohort study involved adult inpatients aged 18 yr or older who underwent intraabdominal surgeries in Ontario, Canada, between April 2009 and March 2016. The authors studied the association of patient sex on the primary composite outcome of all-cause death, hospital readmission, or major postoperative complications, all within 30 postoperative days. Inverse probability of exposure weighting based on propensity scores (computed using demographic characteristics such as rural residence status and median neighborhood income quintile, common comorbidities, and surgery- and hospital-specific characteristics) was used to estimate the adjusted association of sex on outcomes. RESULTS: The cohort included 215,846 patients (52.3% female). The primary outcome was observed in 24,712 (21.9%) females and 25,486 (24.7%) males (unadjusted risk difference, 2.8% [95% CI, 2.5 to 3.2%]; P < 0.001). After adjustment, the association between the male sex and the primary outcome was not statistically significant (adjusted risk difference, -0.2% [95% CI, -0.5 to 0.2%]; P = 0.378). CONCLUSIONS: In a large population of intraabdominal surgical patients, there was no differential risk between sexes in the composite outcome of all-cause death, hospital readmission, or major postoperative complications, all within 30 postoperative days.

Primary Care Informatics Response to Covid-19 Pandemic: Adaptation, Progress, and Lessons from Four Countries with High ICT Development.

OBJECTIVE: Internationally, primary care practice had to transform in response to the COVID pandemic. Informatics issues included access, privacy, and security, as well as patient concerns of equity, safety, quality, and trust. This paper describes progress and lessons learned. METHODS: IMIA Primary Care Informatics Working Group members from Australia, Canada, United Kingdom and United States developed a standardised template for collection of information. The template guided a rapid literature review. We also included experiential learning from primary care and public health perspectives. RESULTS: All countries responded rapidly. Common themes included rapid reductions then transformation to virtual visits, pausing of non-COVID related informatics projects, all against a background of non-standardized digital development and disparate territory or state regulations and guidance. Common barriers in these four and in less-resourced countries included disparities in internet access and availability including bandwidth limitations when internet access was available, initial lack of coding standards, and fears of primary care clinicians that patients were delaying care despite the availability of televisits. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care clinicians were able to respond to the COVID crisis through telehealth and electronic record enabled change. However, the lack of coordinated national strategies and regulation, assurance of financial viability, and working in silos remained limitations. The potential for primary care informatics to transform current practice was highlighted. More research is needed to confirm preliminary observations and trends noted.