Jessica Brinson, Priyanka Kumar, Jiangxia Wang, Varshini Varadaraj, Bonnielin K Swenor, Adrienne W Scott
{"title":"Disparities in Eye Care Utilization by Self-Reported Vision Difficulty and Diabetes Status in the United States.","authors":"Jessica Brinson, Priyanka Kumar, Jiangxia Wang, Varshini Varadaraj, Bonnielin K Swenor, Adrienne W Scott","doi":"10.1080/09286586.2023.2249540","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess differences in eye care utilization by vision difficulty (VD), diabetes status, and sociodemographic characteristics for American adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The analysis pooled cross-sectional data from the National Health Interview Survey (2010-2018) from US adults ≥ 18 years. The outcome measure was eye care utilization in the past year. The primary independent variable included four groups: no VD or diabetes, only diabetes, only VD, and diabetes and VD. VD was defined as self-reported difficulty seeing even with glasses or contacts. Diabetic status was defined as ever receiving this diagnosis by a health professional. Multivariable logistic regression analyses examined associations between eye care utilization, VD, diabetic status, and sociodemographic characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 284,599 adults included in this study, the majority were female (55%), White (73%), and non-Hispanic (84%). In regression analysis, as compared to adults without diabetes or VD, adults with both diabetes and VD had the greatest utilization (OR = 2.49, 99% CI = 2.18-2.85). Females had higher utilization than men (OR = 1.45, 99% CI = 1.41-1.50). Higher levels of education was associated with greater utilization (OR = 1.82, 99% CI = 1.72-1.92). White and American Indian adults without diabetes had higher utilization compared to other races (OR = 1.17, 99% CI = 1.12-1.24, 0.98-1.39).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While adults with VD and diabetes are better connected to eye care, significant eye care disparities persist for marginalized groups in the U.S. Identifying and understanding these disparities and eliminating barriers to care is critical to better support all patient populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":19607,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"283-290"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09286586.2023.2249540","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To assess differences in eye care utilization by vision difficulty (VD), diabetes status, and sociodemographic characteristics for American adults.
Methods: The analysis pooled cross-sectional data from the National Health Interview Survey (2010-2018) from US adults ≥ 18 years. The outcome measure was eye care utilization in the past year. The primary independent variable included four groups: no VD or diabetes, only diabetes, only VD, and diabetes and VD. VD was defined as self-reported difficulty seeing even with glasses or contacts. Diabetic status was defined as ever receiving this diagnosis by a health professional. Multivariable logistic regression analyses examined associations between eye care utilization, VD, diabetic status, and sociodemographic characteristics.
Results: Of the 284,599 adults included in this study, the majority were female (55%), White (73%), and non-Hispanic (84%). In regression analysis, as compared to adults without diabetes or VD, adults with both diabetes and VD had the greatest utilization (OR = 2.49, 99% CI = 2.18-2.85). Females had higher utilization than men (OR = 1.45, 99% CI = 1.41-1.50). Higher levels of education was associated with greater utilization (OR = 1.82, 99% CI = 1.72-1.92). White and American Indian adults without diabetes had higher utilization compared to other races (OR = 1.17, 99% CI = 1.12-1.24, 0.98-1.39).
Conclusion: While adults with VD and diabetes are better connected to eye care, significant eye care disparities persist for marginalized groups in the U.S. Identifying and understanding these disparities and eliminating barriers to care is critical to better support all patient populations.
期刊介绍:
Ophthalmic Epidemiology is dedicated to the publication of original research into eye and vision health in the fields of epidemiology, public health and the prevention of blindness. Ophthalmic Epidemiology publishes editorials, original research reports, systematic reviews and meta-analysis articles, brief communications and letters to the editor on all subjects related to ophthalmic epidemiology. A broad range of topics is suitable, such as: evaluating the risk of ocular diseases, general and specific study designs, screening program implementation and evaluation, eye health care access, delivery and outcomes, therapeutic efficacy or effectiveness, disease prognosis and quality of life, cost-benefit analysis, biostatistical theory and risk factor analysis. We are looking to expand our engagement with reports of international interest, including those regarding problems affecting developing countries, although reports from all over the world potentially are suitable. Clinical case reports, small case series (not enough for a cohort analysis) articles and animal research reports are not appropriate for this journal.