Gender and socioeconomic status as determinants of waiting time for inpatient surgery in a system with implicit queue management

Private health insurance in the United States and Sweden: A comparative review

Background and Aims

The United States of America and Sweden both contain a public and private component to their healthcare systems. While both countries spend a similar amount per capita on public healthcare expenditures, the United States spends significantly more in the private healthcare sector. Sweden has a social democratic model of health care, and given its identity as a welfare state, private health insurance providers have a small and nuanced role.

Methods

This paper was completed after searches were queried for "Sweden," "United States," and variants of the words "insurance," "public," "private," "Medicare," "Medicaid," "public," and "costs." A preliminary search in May 2022, yielded 78 articles, of which 45 were ultimately considered relevant for this review. Inclusion criteria consisted of English language articles, topic relevance, and verification of MEDLINE-indexed journals. These searches were performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and Cochrane. Summary findings of these searches are compiled in this review.

Results

Sweden guarantees low-cost appropriate care to all citizens with equitable access; however, drawbacks of its system include high financial burden, lack of primary care infrastructure, as well as geographical and socioeconomic inequities. On the other hand, the United States' healthcare system is built around the private sector with public health insurance reserved only for the most vulnerable patient populations.

Conclusion

Our goal is to provide an overview, compare the role of private health insurance in both countries, and highlight policies that have had beneficial effects in each nation. Possible solutions to the drawbacks of each nation's health insurance policies could be addressed by additional support to Sweden's vulnerable population by developing a program similar to the US' Medicare Advantage program. Conversely, the United States may benefit from increasing access to public health insurance, especially in instances where families face unemployment.

Factors influencing a long-term relationship between healthcare providers and patients – perspectives of patients at a public regional hospital, Ghana

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to determine the factors that influence patients’ long-term relationship with healthcare providers in healthcare delivery at hospitals.

Design/methodology/approach

Data were gathered using 170 patients in a cross-sectional survey with quantitative research methods at a public regional hospital. Results were obtained using descriptive analysis and regression analysis.

Findings

Generally, the study found that the health-related factors (the reception of staff, providers’ attitude, waiting time, competence and expertise and the hospital environment) that influence patients’ long-term relationship with the healthcare providers/hospital were statistically significant (p < 0.001). The findings showed that overall 90.0 per cent of the patients were very satisfied with the overall healthcare services at the hospital.

Research limitations/implications

Limited sample size, lack of examination of healthcare providers’ perspectives and non-application of qualitative methods make it difficult to give a true picture of how these can enhance patients’ intent to keep a long-term relationship with the healthcare providers/hospital.

Practical implications

The paper suggests that health policymakers and practitioners need to enhance measures that will make patients satisfied leading to their long-term commitment and cordial relationship with the healthcare providers/hospital.

Social implications

The study demonstrated how health-related factors will be associated with the patients’ agreement/intent to keep a long-term relationship with their service providers at hospitals. Thus, the overall hypothesis was true that there is a relationship between patients’ satisfaction with the healthcare experienced and their long-term relationship with healthcare providers/hospital.

Originality/value

This is one of the few studies conducted on the topic in the context of Ghana’s health sector. It recommends that there should be a good interpersonal relationship between healthcare providers and patients, as patients’ satisfaction is not based on only receiving treatment at the health facility.

Wait lists and adult general surgery: is there a socioeconomic dimension in Canada?

BACKGROUND

Little is known about whether patients' socioeconomic status influences their access to elective general surgery in Canada. The purpose of this study was to assess the association between socioeconomic status and wait times for elective general surgery.

METHODS

Analysis of prospectively recruited participants' data. The setting was six hospitals in the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority, a geographically defined region that includes Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Participants had elective general surgery between October 2013 and April 2017, community dwelling, aged 19 years or older and could complete survey forms. The outcome measure was wait time, defined as the number of weeks between being registered for elective general surgery and surgery date.

RESULTS

One thousand three hundred twenty elective general surgery participants were included in the study. The response rate among eligible patients was 53%. Regression analyses found no statistically significant association between patients' wait time with SES, adjusting for health status, cancer status, surgical priority level, comorbidity burden and demographic characteristics. Participants with proven or suspected cancer status had shorter waits relative to participants waiting for surgery for benign conditions. Participants with at least one comorbidity tended to experience shorter waits of approximately 5 weeks (p < 0.01). Pre-operative pain or depression/anxiety were not associated with shorter wait times.

CONCLUSIONS

Although this study found no relationship between SES and surgical wait time for elective general surgeries in the study hospitals, patients in lower SES categories reported worse health when assigned to the surgical queue.

Priority and prejudice: does low socioeconomic status bias waiting time for endoscopy? A blinded, randomized survey

INTRODUCTION

An unwanted socioeconomic health gap is observed in Western countries with easily accessible, government-financed health care systems. Survival rates from several malignancies differ between socioeconomic clusters and the disparities remain after adjusting for major co-morbidities and health related behavior. The possibility of biased conduct among health care workers has been proposed as a contributing factor, but evidence is sparse.

METHODS

A blinded, randomized online questionnaire survey was conducted among specialists in gastroenterology in Norway. Each respondent was asked to give priority for colonoscopy to three different referrals. By randomized sequence, half the referrals contained a discreet piece of information indicating low socioeconomic status (SES). The SES information given was focused on known low-status clusters in Norway, namely the morbidly obese and receivers of disability pensions.

RESULTS

There were 107 respondents giving a response rate of 67%. A lower priority was consistently given to the referrals containing information on low SES, but the difference only reached statistical significance (p = .018) for one of the referrals.

CONCLUSION

Information on low SES may influence how referrals for endoscopy are prioritized.

Socioeconomic status and waiting times for health services: An international literature review and evidence from the Italian National Health System

In the absence of priority criteria, waiting times are an implicit rationing instrument where the absence or limited use of prices creates an excess of demand. Even in the presence of priority criteria, waiting times may be unfair because they reduce health care demand of patients in lower socio-economic conditions due to high opportunity costs of time or a decay in their health level. Significant evidence has shown a relationship between socioeconomic status and the length of waiting time. The first phase of the study involved an extensive review of the existent literature for the period of 2002-2016 in the main databases (Scopus, PubMed and Science Direct). Twenty-eight met the eligibility criteria. The 27 papers were described and classified. The e mpirical objective of this study was to determine whether socioeconomic characteristics affect waiting time for different health services in the Italian national health system. The services studied were specialist visits, diagnostics tests and elective surgeries. A classification tree and logistic regression models were implemented. Data from the 2013 Italian Health National Survey were used. The analysis found heterogeneous results for different types of service. Individuals with lower education and economic resources have a higher risk of experiencing excessive waiting times for diagnostic and specialist visits. For elective surgery, socioeconomic inequalities are present but appear to be lower.

Rationing in health systems: A critical review

Background: It is difficult to provide health care services to all those in need of such services due to limited resources and unlimited demands. Thus, priority setting and rationing have to be applied. This study aimed at critically examining the concept of rationing in health sector and identifying its purposes, influencing factors, mechanisms, and outcomes. Methods: The critical interpretive synthesis methodology was used in this study. PubMed, Cochrane, and Proquest databases were searched using the related key words to find related documents published between 1970 and 2015. In total, 161 published reports were reviewed and included in the study. Thematic content analysis was applied for data analysis. Results: Health services rationing means restricting the access of some people to useful or potentially useful health services due to budgetary limitation. The inherent features of the health market and health services, limited resources, and unlimited needs necessitate health services rationing. Rationing can be applied in 4 levels: health care policy- makers, health care managers, health care providers, and patients. Health care rationing can be accomplished through fixed budget, benefit package, payment mechanisms, queuing, copayments, and deductibles. Conclusion: This paper enriched our understanding of health services rationing and its mechanisms at various levels and contributed to the literature by broadly conceptualizing health services rationing.

Bedside Rationing by Health Practitioners: A Case Study in a Ugandan Hospital

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to describe bedside rationing by health practitioners in a teaching hospital in Uganda.

Methods. This was a case study involving in-depth interviews. A modified thematic approach was used in data analysis. Types of decisions, the decision-making process, key players, and hospital-, medical-, and patient-related considerations in the process were identified. Klein’s 6 forms of rationing were used to identify the forms of rationing used. The setting was a tertiary hospital in Uganda. Theoretical sampling was used to identify 40 doctors and 16 nurses from the Departments of Medicine, Surgery, Paediatrics, and Obstetric and Gynaecology.

Results. Four types of bedside rationing decisions were identified: 1) which patients are seen first, 2) which treatment the patients receive, 3) which patients are admitted, and 4) which patients are taken to the operating theatre first. Hospital-related considerations regarding bedside rationing included the hospital budget and number of beds; medical-related considerations included the patient’s diagnosis and effectiveness of treatment; and patient-related considerations included poverty, social status, and age. All forms of rationing (denial, dilution, deflection, deterrence, delay, and termination) were practiced.

Conclusion. Although bedside rationing decisions in the study hospital seem somewhat similar to that in developed countries, the rationing of 1st-line drugs by health practitioners in Uganda is complex, difficult, and different from what has been described in industrialized countries. The complexity and severity of the consequences of the bedside decisions necessitate the development of resource-sensitive clinical guidelines and transparent decision-making processes to foster patients’ understanding of the reasons and the procedures and to ensure fair decision-making processes.

Heart Surgery Waiting Time: Assessing the Effectiveness of an Action

BACKGROUND

Waiting time is an index assessing patient satisfaction, managerial effectiveness and horizontal equity in providing health care. Although heart surgery centers establishment is attractive for politicians. They are always faced with the question of to what extent they solve patient's problems.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate factors influencing waiting time in patients of heart surgery centers, and to make recommendations for health-care policy-makers for reducing waiting time and increasing the quality of services from this perspective.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study was performed in 2013. After searching articles on PubMed, Elsevier, Google Scholar, Ovid, Magiran, IranMedex, and SID, a list of several criteria, which relate to waiting time, was provided. Afterwards, the data on waiting time were collected by a researcher-structured checklist from 156 hospitalized patients. The data were analyzed by SPSS 16. The Kolmogorov Smirnov and Shapiro tests were used for determination of normality. Due to the non-normal distribution, non-parametric tests, such as Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney were chosen for reporting significance. Parametric tests also used reporting medians.

RESULTS

Among the studied variables, just economic status had a significant relation with waiting time (P = 0.37). Fifty percent of participants had diabetes, whereas this estimate was 43.58% for high blood pressure. As the cause of delay, 28.2% of patients reported financial problems, 18.6% personal problem and 13.5% a delay in providing equipment by the hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

It seems the studied hospital should review its waiting time arrangements and detach them, as far as possible, from subjective and personal (specialists) decisions. On the other hand, ministries of health and insurance companies should consider more financial support. It is also recommend that hospitals should arrange preoperational psychiatric consultation for increasing patients' emotionally readiness.

Horizontal inequality in rationing by waiting lists

The objective of this article was to investigate the existence of horizontal inequality in access to care for six categories of elective surgery in a publicly funded system, when care is rationed through waiting lists. Administrative waiting time data on all elective surgeries (n = 4,634) performed in Ostergötland, Sweden, in 2007 were linked to national registers containing variables on socioeconomic indicators. Using multiple regression, we tested five hypotheses reflecting that more resourceful groups receive priority when rationing by waiting lists. Low disposable household income predicted longer waiting times for orthopedic surgery (27%, p < 0.01) and general surgery (34%, p < 0.05). However, no significant differences on the basis of ethnicity and gender were detected. A particularly noteworthy finding was that disposable household income appeared to be an increasingly influential factor when the waiting times were longer. Our findings reveal horizontal inequalities in access to elective surgeries, but only to a limited extent. Whether this is good or bad depends on one's moral inclination. From a policymaker's perspective, it is nevertheless important to recognize that horizontal inequalities arise even though care is not rationed through ability to pay.

Equity in specialist waiting times by socioeconomic groups: evidence from Spain

In countries with publicly financed health care systems, waiting time--rather than price--is the rationing mechanism for access to health care services. The normative statement underlying such a rationing device is that patients should wait according to need and irrespective of socioeconomic status or other non-need characteristics. The aim of this paper is to test empirically that waiting times for publicly funded specialist care do not depend on patients' socioeconomic status. Waiting times for specialist care can vary according to the type of medical specialty, type of consultation (review or diagnosis) and the region where patients' reside. In order to take into account such variability, we use Bayesian random parameter models to explain waiting times for specialist care in terms of need and non-need variables. We find that individuals with lower education and income levels wait significantly more time than their counterparts.

Determinants of patient waiting time in the general outpatient department of a tertiary health institution in north Western Nigeria

BACKGROUND

The amount of time a patient waits to be seen is one factor which affects utilization of healthcare services. Patients perceive long waiting times as barrier to actually obtaining services and keeping patients waiting unnecessarily can be a cause of stress for both patient and doctor.

AIM

This study was aimed at assessing the determinants of patients' waiting time in the general outpatient department (GOPD) of a tertiary health institution in northern Nigeria.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This descriptive cross-sectional study was carried out among new patients attending the GOPD of the Usmanu Danfodiyo University Teaching Hospital, Sokoto, North Western Nigeria. A structured questionnaire was used to elicit information from 100 patients who were recruited into the study using a convenience sampling method. Data collected were entered and analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 17; Chi-square test was used to compare differences between proportions with the level of statistical significance set at 5% (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

Sixty-one percent (59/96) of the respondents waited for 90-180 min in the clinic, whereas 36.1% (35/96) of the patients spent less than 5 min with the doctor in the consulting room. The commonest reason for the long waiting time in the GOPD was the large number of patients with few healthcare workers.

CONCLUSION

There is an urgent need to increase the number of health workers in the GOPDs which serves as the gate way to the hospital if the aims of the Millennium Development Goals are to be realized.

Socioeconomic differences in waiting times for elective surgery: a population-based retrospective study

Background

Widespread literature on inequity in healthcare access and utilization has been published, but research on socioeconomic differences in waiting times is sparse and the evidence is fragmentary and controversial. The objective of the present study is the analysis of the relationship between individual socioeconomic level and waiting times for in-hospital elective surgery.

Methods

We retrospectively studied the waiting times experienced by patients registered on hospital waiting lists for 6 important surgical procedures by using the Hospital Discharge Database (HDD) of the Piedmont Region (4,000,000 inhabitants in the North West of Italy) from 2006 to 2008. The surgical procedures analyzed were: coronary artery by-pass (CABG), angioplasty, coronarography, endarterectomy, hip replacement and cholecystectomy. Cox regression models were estimated to study the relationship between waiting times and educational level taking into account the confounding effect of the following factors: sex, age, comorbidity, registration period, and Local Health Authorities (LHA) as a proxy of supply.

Results

Median waiting times for low educational level were higher than for high educational level for all the selected procedures. Differences were particularly high for endarterectomy and hip replacement. For all considered procedures, except CABG, an inverse gradient between waiting times and educational level was observed: the conditional probabilities of undergoing surgery were lower among individuals with a low to middle level education than for individuals with a higher level of education after adjustment for sex, age, comorbidities, registration period, and LHAs. For most procedures the effect decreases over the follow up period.

Conclusions

The results of the study show evidence of inequalities in access to elective surgery in Italy. Implementation of policies aimed to promote national information initiatives that guarantee wider access to those with low socio-economic status is strongly recommended.

Monitoring prioritisation in the public health-care sector by use of medical guidelines. The case of Norway

This paper presents a new way to monitor priority settings in public health-care systems. We take departure in medical guidelines prescribing acceptable waiting times for different medical descriptions. Allocating ICD10 codes to the medical descriptions, we are able to compare actual waiting times to the recommended maximum waiting times. This way we use the medical guidelines as a tool for monitoring prioritisation in the health sector. In an application, using data from the Norwegian Patient Register, we test statistically for compliance with the guidelines. The results indicate that patients suffering from the most severe conditions are receiving too low priority in the Norwegian health-care sector relative to patients of lower priority.

Relationship between total hip replacement appropriateness and surgical priority instruments

RATIONALE

Variability in indications for total hip replacement (THR) and unequal waiting times may limit health care access.

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the relationship between appropriateness and previously developed surgical priority instruments.

METHOD

Multicentre cross-validation study of patients placed on the waiting list for THR. Information on surgical priority, surgeons' evaluation of priority through a visual analogue scale (VAS) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (Health Utilities Index mark 3, EQ-5D, Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritic Index) was collected. THR indications were considered appropriate, uncertain or inappropriate according to appropriateness criteria. Statistical differences and clinically important differences in surgical priority, VAS and HRQOL between appropriateness categories were analysed with the Mann-Whitney U-test and effect size (ES), respectively. Surgical priority score's ability to discriminate appropriate and inappropriate indications was evaluated through the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

RESULTS

49.4% (87) of the THR indications were deemed appropriate, 39.8% (70) uncertain and 10.8% (19) inappropriate. Differences in surgical priority score, VAS and HRQOL between appropriateness categories were statistically significant. Clinically important differences were generally small (ES, 0.2-0.5) between inappropriate and uncertain, moderate (ES, 0.5-0.8) between uncertain and appropriate, and large (ES > 0.8) between inappropriate and appropriate categories. The AUC to discriminate appropriate and inappropriate indications was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.96-0.99) and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.83-0.97), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between the surgical priority and appropriateness instruments reinforces their validity and could improve waiting list management by establishing maximum waiting periods based on patients' characteristics.

Educational inequalities in mortality over four decades in Norway: prospective study of middle aged men and women followed for cause specific mortality, 1960-2000

OBJECTIVES

To determine the extent to which educational inequalities in relation to mortality widened in Norway during 1960-2000 and which causes of death were the main drivers of this disparity.

DESIGN

Nationally representative prospective study.

SETTING

Four cohorts of the Norwegian population aged 45-64 years in 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990 and followed up for mortality over 10 years.

PARTICIPANTS

359 547 deaths and 32 904 589 person years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All cause mortality and deaths due to cancer of lung, trachea, or bronchus; other cancer; cardiovascular diseases; suicide; external causes; chronic lower respiratory tract diseases; or other causes. Absolute and relative indices of inequality were used to present differences in mortality by educational level (basic, secondary, and tertiary).

RESULTS

Mortality fell from the 1960s to the 1990s in all educational groups. At the same time the proportion of adults in the basic education group, with the highest mortality, decreased substantially. As mortality dropped more among those with the highest level of education, inequalities widened. Absolute inequalities in mortality denoting deaths among the basic education groups minus deaths among the high education groups doubled in men and increased by a third in women. This is equivalent to an increase in the slope index of inequality of 105% in men and 32% in women. Inequalities on a relative scale widened more, from 1.33 to 2.24 among men (P=0.01) and from 1.52 to 2.19 among women (P=0.05). Among men, absolute inequalities mainly increased as a result of cardiovascular diseases, lung cancer, and chronic lower respiratory tract diseases. Among women this was mainly due to lung cancer and chronic lower respiratory tract diseases. Unlike the situation in men, absolute inequalities in deaths due to cardiovascular causes narrowed among women. Chronic lower respiratory tract diseases contributed more to the disparities in inequalities among women than among men.

CONCLUSION

All educational groups showed a decline in mortality. Nevertheless, and despite the fact that the Norwegian welfare model is based on an egalitarian ideology, educational inequalities in mortality among middle aged people in Norway are substantial and increased during 1960-2000.

Prioritization and patients' rights: analysing the effect of a reform in the Norwegian hospital sector

The right to equal treatment, irrespective of age, gender, ethnicity, socio-economic status and place of residence, is an important principle for several health care systems. A reform of the Norwegian hospital sector of 2002 may be used as a relevant experiment for investigating whether centralization of ownership and management structures will lead to more equal prioritization practices over geographical regions. One concern was variation in waiting times across the country. The reform was followed up in subsequent years by some other policy initiatives that also aimed at reducing waiting lists. We measure prioritization practice by a method that takes departure in recommended maximum waiting times from medical guidelines. We merge the information from the guidelines with individual patient data on actual waiting times for the period 1999-2005. This way we can monitor whether each patient in the available register of actual hospital visits has waited shorter or longer than what is considered medically acceptable by the guideline. The results indicate no equalization between the five new health regions, but we find evidence of more equal prioritization within four of the health regions. Our method of measuring prioritizations allows us to analyse how prioritization practice evolved over time after the reform, thus covering some further initiatives with the same objective. The results indicate that an observed reduction in waiting times after the reform have favoured patients of lower prioritization status, something we interpret as a general worsening of prioritization practices over time.

Prioritisation of patients on waiting lists for hip and knee arthroplasties and cataract surgery: Instruments validation

Background

Prioritisation instruments were developed for patients on waiting list for hip and knee arthroplasties (AI) and cataract surgery (CI). The aim of the study was to assess their convergent and discriminant validity and inter-observer reliability.

Methods

Multicentre validation study which included orthopaedic surgeons and ophthalmologists from 10 hospitals. Participating doctors were asked to include all eligible patients placed in the waiting list for the procedures under study during the medical visit. Doctors assessed patients' priority through a visual analogue scale (VAS) and administered the prioritisation instrument. Information on socio-demographic data and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (HUI3, EQ-5D, WOMAC and VF-14) was obtained through a telephone interview with patients. The correlation coefficients between the prioritisation instrument score and VAS and HRQOL were calculated. For the reliability study a self-administered questionnaire, which included hypothetic patients' scenarios, was sent via postal mail to the doctors. The priority of these scenarios was assessed through the prioritisation instrument. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between doctors was calculated.

Results

Correlations with VAS were strong for the AI (0.64, CI95%: 0.59–0.68) and for the CI (0.65, CI95%: 0.62–0.69), and moderate between the WOMAC and the AI (0.39, CI95%: 0.33–0.45) and the VF-14 and the CI (0.38, IC95%: 0.33–0.43). The results of the discriminant analysis were in general as expected. Inter-observer reliability was 0.79 (CI95%: 0.64–0.94) for the AI, and 0.79 (CI95%: 0.63–0.95) for the CI.

Conclusion

The results show acceptable validity and reliability of the prioritisation instruments in establishing priority for surgery.

The acceptability of waiting times for elective general surgery and the appropriateness of prioritising patients

Background

Problematic waiting lists in public health care threaten the equity and timeliness of care provision in several countries. This study assesses different stakeholders' views on the acceptability of waiting lists in health care, their preferences for priority care of patients, and their judgements on acceptable waiting times for surgical patients.

Methods

A questionnaire survey was conducted among 257 former patients (82 with varicose veins, 86 with inguinal hernia, and 89 with gallstones), 101 surgeons, 95 occupational physicians, and 65 GPs. Judgements on acceptable waiting times were assessed using vignettes of patients with varicose veins, inguinal hernia, and gallstones.

Results

Participants endorsed the prioritisation of patients based on clinical need, but not on ability to benefit. The groups had significantly different opinions (p < 0.05) on the use of non-clinical priority criteria and on the need for uniformity in the prioritisation process.

Acceptable waiting times ranged between 2 and 25 weeks depending on the type of disorder (p < 0.001) and the severity of physical and psychosocial problems of patients (p < 0.001). Judgements were similar between the survey groups (p = 0.3) but responses varied considerably within each group depending on the individual's attitude towards waiting lists in health care (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The explicit prioritisation of patients seems an accepted means for reducing the overall burden from waiting lists. The disagreement about appropriate prioritisation criteria and the need for uniformity, however, raises concern about equity when implementing prioritisation in daily practice.

Single factor waiting time thresholds seem insufficient for securing timely care provision in the presence of long waiting lists as they do not account for the different consequences of waiting between patients.

Non-attendance and effective equity of access at four public specialist outpatient centers in Hong Kong

This study tests whether socio-economic status (SES), at either the individual or ecologic levels, exerts a direct impact on non-attendance or an indirect impact on attendance through longer waiting time for appointments and/or doctor-shopping behavior at four public specialist outpatient centers in Hong Kong. We collected information through three main sources, namely patients' referral letters, telephone interviews with both open- and closed-ended questions (e.g. doctor-shopping data) and hospital administrative databases from a total of 6495 attenders and non-attenders enrolled from July 2000 through October 2001. Individual-level SES was measured by education, occupation and monthly household income. Tertiary planning unit (TPU)-level SES data consisted of proportion unemployed, proportion with tertiary education, median income and Gini coefficient. Direct effects of SES on non-attendance were examined by logistic regression. Indirect contributions mediated through waiting time and doctor-shopping were analyzed by structural equation modeling. We found that SES, at the individual or ecologic level, did not exert a direct effect on non-attendance. Instead, TPU-level SES contributed positively to waiting time (beta=0.06+/-0.03, p=0.048), i.e. worse-off neighborhoods (and those with greater income inequality) had a shorter waiting time. Individual-level SES was also directly associated with the likelihood of doctor-shopping (beta=0.16+/-0.02, p<0.001), i.e. the poor were less likely to doctor-shop. Both waiting time (beta=0.12+/-0.02, p<0.001) and doctor-shopping (beta=0.37+/-0.02, p<0.001) were significantly related to non-attendance. Our findings suggest a highly equitable specialist ambulatory care public system in Hong Kong. Health care resources are appropriately targeted at the socially indigent, and the poor are not discriminated against and pushed to seek alternative sources of care by the system. These results should be confirmed using a prospective design.

Do case-generic measures of queue performance for bypass surgery accurately reflect the waiting-list experiences of those most urgent?

BACKGROUND

Queue performance is typically assessed using generic measures, which capture the queue in aggregate. The objective of this study was to examine whether case-generic measures of queue performance appropriately reflected the waiting-list experiences of those patients with greatest disease severity.

METHODS

We examined the queue for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in Ontario between April 1993 and March 2000 using data obtained from the Cardiac Care Network. Our primary measure of queue performance was the proportion of patients who received their bypass surgery within their recommended maximum waiting times (%RMWTs) in any given month. We compared case-generic measures of queue performance to case-specific measures of queue performance stratified by urgency level.

RESULTS

The queue was largely comprised of elective cases ranging from 73% (1993) to 57%(1999). Urgent patients comprised the minority of the queue ranging from 14% (1993) to 20% (1999). Case-generic month-to-month variations in the percentage of cases completed within RMWTs (an aggregated waiting list measure encompassing the characteristics of all patients in the queue) closely resembled the experiences of elective patients (R2 = 0.81), but conversely, bore little relationship to the waiting-list experiences of those most urgent (R2 = 0.15).

INTERPRETATION

Case-generic measures of queue performance for bypass surgery in Ontario were not reflective of the waiting-list experiences of those most urgent. Our results reinforce the concept that urgency-specific waiting list monitoring systems are required to best evaluate and appropriately respond to fluctuations in queue performance.