ABSTRACT
Objective To examine the relationship between ethnicity and experiences of primary care for people with multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs) and assess the relative importance of demographic, practice, and area-level factors as influences on primary care experiences across ethnic groups.
Design A retrospective study using 2018-19 GP Patient Survey data linked to the General Practice Workforce data, and the Office for National Statistics data.
Setting UK
Participants: 294,987 respondents with two or more long-term conditions with complete data on selected demographic variables (age, gender, ethnicity, economic activity), practice and area-level variables (number of full-time equivalent GPs and nurses, practice size, area-deprivation, area life expectancy and ethnic density).
Main outcome measures Multilevel regression analysis used to assess the relationship between ethnicity and experience of accessing primary care (i.e. satisfaction with appointment times, types and booking experience) and interacting with healthcare professionals (i.e. satisfaction with confidence and trust in healthcare professionals and the extent to which patients feel healthcare professionals listen to them, give them enough time, treat them with care and concern, involve them in healthcare decisions, and meet their needs). Separate regression models built for each outcome and included i) each covariate separately, ii) demographic factors (iii) demographic, practice, and areal-level factors.
Results Upon full adjustment Arab, Bangladeshi, Chinese, Indian, Pakistani, other Asian, mixed white and Asian, other white and other ethnic group people with MLTCs have both lower levels of satisfaction with primary care access and interacting with healthcare professionals compared with white British people. The influence of demographic, practice and area-level factors is not uniform across ethnic groups. For example, demographic factors account for the inequalities in levels of satisfaction with access to primary care between white British people and Black other, mixed other, mixed white & Black Caribbean and Gypsy & Irish Travellers. However, practice and area-level factors strengthen inequalities in the experience of accessing primary care for Bangladeshi, Indian and Pakistani people.
Conclusions Given that patient experience is a key aspect of healthcare quality and is said to be associated with favourable health outcomes, the inequalities identified in this study are concerning. The poorer experiences of primary care might be one mechanism by which people with MLTCs from minoritised ethnic groups have poorer health outcomes. In addition to the assessment of other practice and area-level factors, qualitative studies are required to understand and effectively address the sources of ethnic inequalities in primary care experiences for people with MLTCs.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work is funded by The Health Foundation (AIMS 1874695).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This paper is part of a wider project and Ethics committee/IRB of University of Sussex and King's College London who gave ethical approval for the project
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The study uses individual-level data from General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) which is available from Ipsos MORI via a data sharing agreement with NHS England. Although these data are anonymised, they are considered sensitive data in the UK by the Data Protection Act and, therefore, cannot be shared publicly. Information about applying to use data from GPPS can be found at https://gp-patient.co.uk/contact. The GPPS data was linked to data from the General Practice Workforce, and the Office for National Statistics (ONS) which is publicly available from https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/general-and-personal-medical-services and https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/respectively.
