Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28924919›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2017

Use of Accessible Examination Tables in the Primary Care Setting: A Survey of Physical Evaluations and Patient Attitudes.

Megan A Morris, Allysha C Maragh-Bass, Joan M Griffin, Lila J Finney Rutten, Tara Lagu, Sean Phelan

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Megan A MorrisMayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Rochester, MN, USA. Megan.a.morris@ucdenver.edu.
Allysha C Maragh-BassCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Joan M GriffinMayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Rochester, MN, USA.
Lila J Finney RuttenMayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Rochester, MN, USA.
Tara LaguCenter for Quality of Care Research, Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, MA, USA.
Sean PhelanDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccessible diagnostic equipment, including height-adjustable examination tables, is necessary to accommodate patients with disabilities. Studies demonstrate that only a minority of clinics provide accessible equipment. For clinics with this equipment, no studies have examined the use of such equipment in routine clinical care.

objectiveIn primary care clinics with and without height-adjustable examination tables, we compared the frequency and variation in physical evaluations on examination tables and patients' perceptions of quality care.

designSurvey administered to patients at two primary care clinics in Rochester, MN, in 2015. One clinic had height-adjustable examination tables in every exam room; the other clinic had none. PATIENTS: A total of 399 English-speaking adult primary care patients (61% participation). MAIN MEASURES: Participants were asked whether they were physically evaluated on a table during their clinical encounter. In addition, they completed two subscales of the Patient Perception of Quality of Care survey: Perceptions of Provider's Bedside Manner and Perceptions of Provider's Work. KEY

resultsOverall, there were no differences between clinics in the likelihood of patients being examined on an exam table or in their perceptions of quality of care. Across both clinics, patients who reported a disability were 27% less likely to be examined on a table, were less likely to rate their provider's bedside manner favorably (74% vs. 59%) and to have positive perceptions of their provider's work (46% vs. 32%) than patients without disabilities.

conclusionsThe presence of accessible medical equipment was not associated with care delivered to patients. While this might not be meaningful for most patients, it could be problematic for patients with disabilities, who are less likely to be examined. Therefore, accessible equipment alone may not be sufficient to reduce disparities in the care experience. Provider- and organization-level factors must thus be considered in efforts to provide equitable care to patients with disabilities.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overEquipment DesignExamination TablesHealth Care SurveysHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMiddle AgedMinnesotaPersons with DisabilitiesPhysical ExaminationPhysician-Patient RelationsPrimary Health Careaccess to caredisabilitydisparityprimary care

Identifiers

PMID28924919
PMCPMC5698222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.