Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Ethnic inequities in the patterns of Personalised Care Adjustments for ‘Informed Dissent’ and ‘Patient Unsuitable’: A retrospective study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink

View ORCID ProfileB. Hayanga, View ORCID ProfileM. Stafford, View ORCID ProfileM. Ashworth, J. Hughes, View ORCID ProfileL. Bécares
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.09.30.22280554
B. Hayanga
1King’s College London, London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for B. Hayanga
  • For correspondence: brenda.hayanga{at}kcl.ac.uk
M. Stafford
2The Health Foundation
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for M. Stafford
M. Ashworth
1King’s College London, London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for M. Ashworth
J. Hughes
2The Health Foundation
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
L. Bécares
1King’s College London, London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for L. Bécares
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Objectives To examine patterns of PCA reporting for ‘informed dissent’ and ‘patient unsuitable’, how they vary by ethnic group, and whether ethnic inequities can be explained by socio-demographic factors or comorbidities.

Design A retrospective study using routinely collected electronic health records.

Setting Individual patient data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink collected from UK general practice.

Participants Patients with at least one of the 12 Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) conditions which had PCA coding options from a random sample of 690,00 patients aged 18+ years on the 1st of Jan 2016.

Main outcomes measures The associations between ethnicity and two PCA reasons (‘Informed Dissent’ and ‘Patient Unsuitable’) were examined using logistic regressions after adjustment for age, sex, multiple QOF conditions and area-level deprivation.

Results The association between ethnicity and the two PCA reasons were in opposite directions. After accounting for age, gender, multiple QOF conditions and area-level deprivation, people of Bangladeshi [OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.87], Black African [OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.81], Black Caribbean, OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.76], Indian [OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.83], mixed [OR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.99], other Asian [OR: 0.74 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.86] and other ethnicity [OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.80] were less likely to have a PCA record for ‘informed dissent’ than people of white ethnicity. Only people of Indian ethnicity were significantly less likely than people of white ethnicity to have a PCA record for ‘patient unsuitable’ in fully adjusted models [OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.94]. We found ethnic inequities in PCA reporting for ‘patient unsuitable’ among people of Black Caribbean, Black other, Pakistani, and other ethnicity, but these attenuated after adjusting for multiple QOF conditions and/or area level deprivation.

Conclusion Study findings counter the narratives that suggest that people from minoritised ethnic groups often refuse medical intervention. They illuminate the complex relationship between ‘informed dissent’ and (dis)empowerment which requires further scrutiny. They also show ethnic inequalities in PCA reporting for ‘patient unsuitable’ that are linked to clinical and social complexity and should be tackled to improve health outcomes for all.

Competing Interest Statement

MS and JH are employed by The Health Foundation. The authors have no competing interest to declare.

Funding Statement

This work is funded by The Health Foundation (AIMS 1874695).

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

This study is part of a wider project investigating ethnic inequities in health care use and care quality among people with multiple conditions. Ethics committee/IRB of University of Sussex gave ethical approval for this project. The study was reviewed for ethical and methods content and approved by the CPRD team (eRAP protocol number 21_000333).

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

This study uses routinely collected individual patient data which can be obtained from Clinical Research Practice Datalink subject to protocol approval via the CPRD Research Data Governance Process. Although these data are anonymised, they are considered sensitive data in the UK by the Data Protection Act and, therefore, cannot be shared publicly. Information about applying to use CPRD data can be found at https://www.cprd.com/data-access.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted September 30, 2022.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Ethnic inequities in the patterns of Personalised Care Adjustments for ‘Informed Dissent’ and ‘Patient Unsuitable’: A retrospective study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Ethnic inequities in the patterns of Personalised Care Adjustments for ‘Informed Dissent’ and ‘Patient Unsuitable’: A retrospective study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink
B. Hayanga, M. Stafford, M. Ashworth, J. Hughes, L. Bécares
medRxiv 2022.09.30.22280554; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.09.30.22280554
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Ethnic inequities in the patterns of Personalised Care Adjustments for ‘Informed Dissent’ and ‘Patient Unsuitable’: A retrospective study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink
B. Hayanga, M. Stafford, M. Ashworth, J. Hughes, L. Bécares
medRxiv 2022.09.30.22280554; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.09.30.22280554

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Primary Care Research
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (349)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Anesthesia (181)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (2648)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (316)
  • Dermatology (223)
  • Emergency Medicine (399)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (942)
  • Epidemiology (12228)
  • Forensic Medicine (10)
  • Gastroenterology (759)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (4103)
  • Geriatric Medicine (387)
  • Health Economics (680)
  • Health Informatics (2657)
  • Health Policy (1005)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (985)
  • Hematology (363)
  • HIV/AIDS (851)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13695)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (797)
  • Medical Education (399)
  • Medical Ethics (109)
  • Nephrology (436)
  • Neurology (3882)
  • Nursing (209)
  • Nutrition (577)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (739)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (695)
  • Oncology (2030)
  • Ophthalmology (585)
  • Orthopedics (240)
  • Otolaryngology (306)
  • Pain Medicine (250)
  • Palliative Medicine (75)
  • Pathology (473)
  • Pediatrics (1115)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (466)
  • Primary Care Research (452)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3432)
  • Public and Global Health (6527)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1403)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (814)
  • Respiratory Medicine (871)
  • Rheumatology (409)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (410)
  • Sports Medicine (342)
  • Surgery (448)
  • Toxicology (53)
  • Transplantation (185)
  • Urology (165)