ArticleInquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
Cross-Sectional Analysis of Difficulties Using Usual Source of Care for People with Disability.
Article in Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years in Korea, healthcare utilization has been increasing due to aging of people with disability. However, accessibility to usual source of care (USCs) for people with disabilities remains unimproved. This study aimed to analyze current usage of USCs by people with disabilities in Korea in comparison with people without disabilities. This study utilized data of the 2018 Korean Health Panel Survey, a representative longitudinal survey of the entire nation that included 12 880 participants with or without disabilities in South Korea. People with disabilities were classified into Mobility Disorder, Communication Disorder, Mental Disorder, and Others. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess satisfaction with the utilization of USCs among people with or without disabilities. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was employed to examine difference in satisfaction between people with disabilities and those without. The proportion of people with disabilities utilizing USCs as their primary healthcare facility was only one-third of that of people without disabilities. In terms of overall satisfaction with USCs, respondents indicated insufficient consultation time and difficulty comprehending medical information during appointments. However, people with disabilities utilizing USCs as tertiary healthcare facilities reported higher satisfaction levels than people without disabilities, stating ease of understanding medical information, opportunities for asking questions, and ability to provide feedback. To enhance accessibility for people with disabilities to utilize USCs as their primary healthcare facility, it is necessary to strengthen accessibility through institutional mechanisms by providing disability-friendly physical facilities and auxiliary aids to facilitate communication with healthcare providers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.