附庸与非附庸农村居民预防保健接受的差异。

IF 1.2 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Lindsay Burton, Kathy L Rush, Cherisse L Seaton, Mindy A Smith, Kendra Corman, Eric P H Li
{"title":"附庸与非附庸农村居民预防保健接受的差异。","authors":"Lindsay Burton, Kathy L Rush, Cherisse L Seaton, Mindy A Smith, Kendra Corman, Eric P H Li","doi":"10.1177/15248399251350623","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Preventive care services are crucial for overall health, yet, rural communities experience low rates of preventive service use. Primary care providers are pivotal in facilitating preventive service uptake (e.g., vaccinations, screenings) but shortages have left 1 in 5 Canadians without a primary care provider. The aim of this study was to compare preventive care uptake between BC rural residents attached and unattached to a primary care clinician. A quantitative cross-sectional survey of rural patients, both with (attached) and without (unattached) a primary care provider, was conducted from July to Sept 2022. Participants completed measures assessing prevention activity completion, priorities, and prevention activity self-efficacy. Descriptive statistics were used to compare preventive care completion and attachment status. A total of 516 rural residents (301 attached; 215 unattached) completed the survey (M age = 50.63 years; 74.4% female). Unattached patients reported lower prevention service completion rates (M = 51%) compared with attached patients (M = 63%; p < .001), although there was no significant difference in the number of prevention priorities. Self-efficacy for provider communication (p < .001), managing chronic illness (p = .002), getting vaccines (p < .001), and completing preventive screening (p < .001) was lower among unattached compared with attached participants. The results indicate a suboptimal uptake of preventive care in rural communities. Furthermore, they highlight a concerning gap in uptake between attached and unattached patients and provide strategic information for developing and implementing preventive care policy and programs, a pressing need given the persistent provider shortage.</p>","PeriodicalId":47956,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion Practice","volume":" ","pages":"15248399251350623"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in Preventive Care Uptake in Attached and Unattached Rural-Living Residents.\",\"authors\":\"Lindsay Burton, Kathy L Rush, Cherisse L Seaton, Mindy A Smith, Kendra Corman, Eric P H Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15248399251350623\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Preventive care services are crucial for overall health, yet, rural communities experience low rates of preventive service use. Primary care providers are pivotal in facilitating preventive service uptake (e.g., vaccinations, screenings) but shortages have left 1 in 5 Canadians without a primary care provider. The aim of this study was to compare preventive care uptake between BC rural residents attached and unattached to a primary care clinician. A quantitative cross-sectional survey of rural patients, both with (attached) and without (unattached) a primary care provider, was conducted from July to Sept 2022. Participants completed measures assessing prevention activity completion, priorities, and prevention activity self-efficacy. Descriptive statistics were used to compare preventive care completion and attachment status. A total of 516 rural residents (301 attached; 215 unattached) completed the survey (M age = 50.63 years; 74.4% female). Unattached patients reported lower prevention service completion rates (M = 51%) compared with attached patients (M = 63%; p < .001), although there was no significant difference in the number of prevention priorities. Self-efficacy for provider communication (p < .001), managing chronic illness (p = .002), getting vaccines (p < .001), and completing preventive screening (p < .001) was lower among unattached compared with attached participants. The results indicate a suboptimal uptake of preventive care in rural communities. Furthermore, they highlight a concerning gap in uptake between attached and unattached patients and provide strategic information for developing and implementing preventive care policy and programs, a pressing need given the persistent provider shortage.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47956,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Promotion Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"15248399251350623\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Promotion Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399251350623\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399251350623","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

预防保健服务对整体健康至关重要,然而,农村社区的预防服务使用率很低。初级保健提供者在促进预防性服务(如接种疫苗、筛查)方面发挥着关键作用,但短缺导致五分之一的加拿大人没有初级保健提供者。本研究的目的是比较不列颠哥伦比亚省农村居民对初级保健临床医生的预防保健吸收情况。从2022年7月至9月,对有(附)和没有(不附)初级保健提供者的农村患者进行了定量横断面调查。参与者完成了评估预防活动完成情况、优先级和预防活动自我效能的措施。描述性统计用于比较预防保健完成情况和依恋状态。农村居民516人(附301人;215名未婚者完成了调查(M年龄= 50.63岁;74.4%的女性)。独立患者报告的预防服务完成率(M = 51%)低于联合患者(M = 63%;P < 0.001),但在优先预防的数量上没有显著差异。与有依附关系的参与者相比,无依附关系的参与者在提供者沟通(p < .001)、慢性病管理(p = .002)、接种疫苗(p < .001)和完成预防性筛查(p < .001)方面的自我效能更低。结果表明,在农村社区预防保健的次优吸收。此外,他们强调了依附和非依附患者之间的摄取差距,并为制定和实施预防性护理政策和计划提供了战略信息,这是持续提供者短缺的迫切需要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Differences in Preventive Care Uptake in Attached and Unattached Rural-Living Residents.

Preventive care services are crucial for overall health, yet, rural communities experience low rates of preventive service use. Primary care providers are pivotal in facilitating preventive service uptake (e.g., vaccinations, screenings) but shortages have left 1 in 5 Canadians without a primary care provider. The aim of this study was to compare preventive care uptake between BC rural residents attached and unattached to a primary care clinician. A quantitative cross-sectional survey of rural patients, both with (attached) and without (unattached) a primary care provider, was conducted from July to Sept 2022. Participants completed measures assessing prevention activity completion, priorities, and prevention activity self-efficacy. Descriptive statistics were used to compare preventive care completion and attachment status. A total of 516 rural residents (301 attached; 215 unattached) completed the survey (M age = 50.63 years; 74.4% female). Unattached patients reported lower prevention service completion rates (M = 51%) compared with attached patients (M = 63%; p < .001), although there was no significant difference in the number of prevention priorities. Self-efficacy for provider communication (p < .001), managing chronic illness (p = .002), getting vaccines (p < .001), and completing preventive screening (p < .001) was lower among unattached compared with attached participants. The results indicate a suboptimal uptake of preventive care in rural communities. Furthermore, they highlight a concerning gap in uptake between attached and unattached patients and provide strategic information for developing and implementing preventive care policy and programs, a pressing need given the persistent provider shortage.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Promotion Practice
Health Promotion Practice PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
126
期刊介绍: Health Promotion Practice (HPP) publishes authoritative articles devoted to the practical application of health promotion and education. It publishes information of strategic importance to a broad base of professionals engaged in the practice of developing, implementing, and evaluating health promotion and disease prevention programs. The journal"s editorial board is committed to focusing on the applications of health promotion and public health education interventions, programs and best practice strategies in various settings, including but not limited to, community, health care, worksite, educational, and international settings. Additionally, the journal focuses on the development and application of public policy conducive to the promotion of health and prevention of disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信