Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION

Tougher for poor to find physician

Study links socio-economic well-being to ability to get appointment with new doctor

  • Print

TORONTO -- Financially better-off individuals seeking a family doctor appear more likely to get an appointment than those who are poor, even though our universal health-care system offers no monetary incentive for cherry-picking patients, a study suggests.

Individuals who called a physician's office asking to be seen as a new patient were more than 50 per cent more likely to get an appointment if they presented themselves as having a well-paying job. the study found.

"Our study provides very strong evidence of discrimination, but it does not identify specific offices that are discriminating," said principal researcher Dr. Stephen Hwang, a specialist in inner-city health at St. Michael's Hospital in Toronto.

"It simply shows you are more likely to get an appointment if you are of high socio-economic status," he said. "We think this indicates pretty clearly there is preferential access to primary care."

To conduct the study, published Monday in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, researchers phoned 375 family physician and general practitioner offices in Toronto, posing as a bank employee or a welfare recipient, either with chronic health conditions or needing only routine care.

"So every physician's office got a call from one person and there were four possible scenarios that they could be randomly assigned to," said Hwang, noting the doctors' offices were chosen at random and most responses were from receptionists or other administrative staff.

The proportion of calls resulting in an appointment offer was greater for those posing as bank employees -- 23 per cent -- than for those presenting themselves as welfare recipients -- 14 per cent. When including those who were offered a screening visit or a spot on a waiting list, 37 per cent of so-called better-off callers got a positive response compared to 24 per cent for those of more limited income.

"Typically, the caller who was turned down would be told: 'I'm sorry, but Dr. X is not accepting patients currently' or 'The practice is not open to new patients,' " Hwang said.

"That's what they would be told, but what we observed is that you're more likely to be told that if you're of low socio-economic status than if you're of high socio-economic status."

Hwang stressed he's not singling out family physicians or suggest they discriminate more than other physicians.

"We don't know if this is a subconscious bias on the part of the receptionist or if they're carrying out instructions that are given to them or if it's conscious bias. We don't know."

Dr. Marie-Dominique Beaulieu, president of the College of Family Physicians of Canada, said her organization promotes patient equality and would frown on any of its 28,000 members across the country choosing a patient based on social or financial profile.

"Socio-economic status or any other (patient) characteristic shouldn't be considered" when a physician is in a position to accept new patients, Beaulieu said from Montreal, where she practises family medicine.

The study has some limitations, including the fact doctors' offices were called only once with a single scenario, not twice by two different researchers posing as patients on relatively opposite sides of the socio-economic coin.

Hwang conceded two calls would have been ideal -- providing a "smoking gun" if each caller got a different response -- but there were logistical pitfalls, including time constraints and concern about detection if the calls were made too close together.

"I think we have to take this study for what it is," said Beaulieu, "which is a small study that maybe adds to a body of knowledge, but certainly cannot be considered as conclusive at demonstrating bias."

Unexpectedly, researchers who said they had chronic health conditions -- in this case, diabetes and low back pain -- were more likely to receive appointment offers than those seeking routine care, such as a checkup (24 per cent versus 13 per cent).

"We were very surprised by that," said Hwang, who had hypothesized patients without complex health problems would be more likely to be accepted.

"We thought because patients with chronic health conditions take more time and more effort that physicians might be preferentially seeking to enrol healthy patients in their practices.

"But we were pleased to see the opposite, that physician offices were appropriately giving priority to people with health problems over those who did not have immediate health problems."

Beaulieu said the fact patients with complex health-care needs were more likely to be offered an appointment is reassuring.

"So this would not support the idea of cherry-picking," she said.

The study found no evidence the length of time a doctor had been practising nor the socio-economic status of the neighbourhood where offices were located had any bearing on whether a patient was accepted.

Hwang said the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario recommends against doctors cherry-picking patients based on their health status, socio-economic profile or other factors. "They say 'it is not appropriate for physicians to screen potential patients because it can compromise public trust in the profession, especially at a time when access to care is a concern.' "

-- The Canadian Press

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition February 26, 2013 C11

Fact Check

Fact Check

Have you found an error, or know of something we’ve missed in one of our stories?
Please use the form below and let us know.

* Required
  • Please post the headline of the story or the title of the video with the error.

  • Please post exactly what was wrong with the story.

  • Please indicate your source for the correct information.

  • Yes

    No

  • This will only be used to contact you if we have a question about your submission, it will not be used to identify you or be published.

  • Cancel

Having problems with the form?

Contact Us Directly
  • Print

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

Have Your Say

New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscribers only. why?

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press Subscribers only. why?

The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.

letters

Make text: Larger | Smaller

LATEST VIDEO

The Whiteboard - Jets' 5-on-3 penalty kill

View more like this

Photo Store Gallery

  • A goose flys defensively to protect their young Wednesday near Kenaston Blvd and Waverley -See Bryksa 30 Day goose challenge- Day 16 - May 23, 2012   (JOE BRYKSA / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)
  • PHIL.HOSSACK@FREEPRESS.MB.CA Winnipeg Free Press 090528 STAND UP...(Weather) One to oversee the pecking order, a pack of pelican's fishes the eddies under the Red River control structure at Lockport Thursday morning......

View More Gallery Photos

Poll

Will you watch The Interview?

View Results

View Related Story

Ads by Google