Evaluation of regional variation in racial and ethnic differences in patient experience among Veterans Health Administration primary care users
研究了退伍军人健康管理局初级保健用户中，少数种族和民族群体与白人退伍军人在患者体验上的差异，发现不同区域（VISN）存在显著差异，尤其对人口代表性较低的群体。
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate racial and ethnic differences in patient experience among VA primary care users at the Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) level. DATA SOURCE AND STUDY SETTING: We performed a secondary analysis of the VA Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients-Patient Centered Medical Home for fiscal years 2016-2019. STUDY DESIGN: We compared 28 patient experience measures (six each in the domains of access and care coordination, 16 in the domain of person-centered care) between minoritized racial and ethnic groups (American Indian or Alaska Native [AIAN], Asian, Black, Hispanic, Multi-Race, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander [NHOPI]) and White Veterans. We used weighted logistic regression to test differences between minoritized and White Veterans, controlling for age and gender. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We defined meaningful difference as both statistically significant at two-tailed p < 0.05 with a relative difference ≥10% or ≤-10%. Within VISNs, we included tests of group differences with adequate power to detect meaningful relative differences from a minimum of five comparisons (domain agnostic) per VISN, and separately for a minimum of two for access and care coordination and four for person-centered care domains. We report differences as disparities/large disparities (relative difference ≥10%/≥ 25%), advantages (experience worse or better, respectively, than White patients), or equivalence. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Our analytic sample included 1,038,212 Veterans (0.6% AIAN, 1.4% Asian, 16.9% Black, 7.4% Hispanic, 0.8% Multi-Race, 0.8% NHOPI, 67.7% White). Across VISNs, the greatest proportion of comparisons indicated disparities for three of seven eligible VISNs for AIAN, 6/10 for Asian, 3/4 for Multi-Race, and 2/6 for NHOPI Veterans. The plurality of comparisons indicated advantages or equivalence for 17/18 eligible VISNs for Black and 12/14 for Hispanic Veterans. AIAN, Asian, Multi-Race, and NHOPI groups had more comparisons indicating disparities by VISN in the access domain than person-centered care and care coordination. CONCLUSIONS: We found meaningful differences in patient experience measures across VISNs for minoritized compared to White groups, especially for groups with lower population representation.