Level of agreement between physician and patient assessment of non-medical health factors. (29th January 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Casanova, Ludovic; Ringa, Virginie; Chatelard, Sophia; Paquet, Sylvain; Pendola-Luchel, Isabelle; Panjo, Henri; Bideau, Camille; Deflesselle, Eric; Delpech, Raphaëlle; Bloy, Géraldine; Rigal, Laurent
• Is Part Of: Family practice. Volume 35:Number 4(2018)
• Page Start: 488
• Page End: 494
• Publication Date: 2018-01-29
• Subjects: Biopsychosocial model -- knowledge -- general practice -- practitioners -- multilevel analysis -- social inequalities in health -- socio-economic class -- socio-economic factors; Primary care (Medicine) -- Periodicals; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; 616.005
• DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmx141
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0263-2136

Abstract

Abstract: Background: GPs need to consider assorted relevant non-medical factors, such as family or work situations or health insurance coverage, to determine appropriate patient care. If GPs' knowledge of these factors varies according to patients' social position, less advantaged patients might receive poorer care, resulting in the perpetuation of social inequalities in health. Objective: To assess social disparities in GPs' knowledge of non-medical factors relevant to patient care. Methods: Observational survey of GPs who supervise internships in the Paris metropolitan area. Each of the 52 enrolled GPs randomly selected 70 patients from their patient list. Their knowledge of five relevant factors (coverage by publicly funded free health insurance, or by supplementary health insurance, living with a partner, social support and employment status) was analysed as the agreement between the patients' and GPs' answers to matching questions. Occupational, educational and financial disparities were estimated with multilevel models adjusted for age, sex, chronic disease and GP-patient relationship. Results: Agreement varied according to the factor considered from 66% to 91%. The global agreement score (percentage of agreement for all five factors) was 72%. Social disparities and often gradients, disfavouring the less well-off patients, were observed for each factor considered. Social gradients were most marked according to perceived financial situation and for health insurance coverage. Conclusion: GPs must be particularly attentive toward their least advantaged patients, to be aware of the relevant non-medical factors that affect these patients' health and care, and thus provide management adapted to each individual's personal situation.