understanding and addressing provider contribution to disparities michelle van ryn, ph.d., m.p.h....

van Ryn, Grantmakers in Health, 11- 6-03van Ryn, Grantmakers in Health, 11- 6-03

Understanding and Addressing Provider Contribution to Disparities

Michelle van Ryn, Ph.D., M.P.H. Michelle van Ryn, Ph.D., M.P.H. Director, Colorectal Cancer Quality Enhancement Research

Initiative, VA Health Services Research, Minneapolis VAMC

Associate Professor, University of Minnesota School of Public Health

[email protected]


Unequal Treatment: Confronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care.

IOM, National Academy of Sciences Press, 2002

• Disparities consistently found across a wide range of disease areas and clinical services.

• Disparities are found even when clinical factors, such as stage of disease presentation, co-morbidities, age, and severity of disease are taken into account.

• Disparities are found across a range of clinical settings, including public and private hospitals, teaching and non-teaching hospitals, etc.

• Disparities in care are associated with higher mortality among minorities


Why?

• Insurance a major contributor to receipt of guideline-consistent care (even in MD mention of a given treatment care).

• Treatment site associated with residential segregation is close behind.

• However, disparities persist independent of payer However, disparities persist independent of payer and within each payer category and have been and within each payer category and have been documented independent of treatment site.documented independent of treatment site.

• Disparities by class/SES probably as significant.• However, race/ethnicity disparities appear to persist

independent of class.


Treatment Treatment or or

Service PtService PtReceivedReceived

ProviderDecision-making

(Diagnosis,Treatment)

ProviderInterpretation of

Symptoms

Provider Provider cognition and affect cognition and affect

regarding help-seekerregarding help-seeker

Provider Characteristic

s

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture

Pt Cognitive & Affective Factors(e.g., acceptance of advice, attitude, self-efficacy, intention, feelings of

competence, attitude toward med care, trust)

Pt Behavior in Encounter

(e.g., question-asking self-disclosure, assertiveness)

Pt Satisfaction

Pt BehaviorPt Behavior (e.g. self management,

information-seeking, utilization)

Explicit (conscious)

Implicit (unconscious)

Encounter characteristics

Provider Behavior in Encounter

(e.g., participatory style, warmth, content, information giving,

question-asking)

Understanding the Provider Contribution to Disparities

van Ryn, Grantmakers in Health, 11- 6-03



Service PtService PtReceivedReceivedP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yC

lass

Culture

Pt Cognitive & Affective Factors(e.g., acceptance of advice, attitude, self-efficacy,

intention, feelings of competence, attitude toward med care, trust)

Pt BehaviorPt Behavior (e.g. self management, information-seeking,

utilization)

Why? Patient preference hypothesis.



Early favorite.• Strong evidence of subgroup differences in health beliefs. • Failure to link such health belief differences to treatment differences.• Studies examining role of patient preferences find that disparities persist controlling for patient preferences. (e.g. Ayanian et al, 1999, Conigliaro, 2002; Hannan & van Ryn et al, 1999, Kressin et al, 2002, Petersen, et al, 2002; van Ryn, et al, 2000;

Whittle, et al, 1997).



ServiceServiceReceivedReceived

Provider Characteristics

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture

Why? Provider decision-making hypothesis

• Kidney transplant & placement on waiting lists, even among children.• Cardiac care (both preventive & aggressive tx for CAD).• Quality of in-hospital care.• Pain assessment, detection & treatment, even among children, in ED for fractures, nursing homes, for cancer pain, at end-of-life.• Mental health assessment, diagnosis and treatment• Treatment for peripheral artery disease: Amputation vs. lower-extremity revascularization (in VA).

Provider decision-making has been shown to be a factor in disparities in:




What causes provider-driven disparities?

Several possible mechanisms:• Different, less evidence-based, providers see non-whites (site of

care explanation).• Providers use different decision making processes with whites

than non-whites. • Unmeasured variables that are (or are perceived to be) associated

with patient race/ethnicity influence provider decision-making.• Overt bias (unlikely to explain magnitude of effect given factors

against).

“Evidence is only one of many factors that play a role in clinical decision-making.” (Rubenfeld, 2001)


Provider cognition and affect

regarding help-seeker

HS

Rac

e/et

hni

city

HS

Rac

e/et

hni

city

Implicit Implicit (unconscious)(unconscious)

Explicit Explicit (conscious)(conscious)

There is ample empirical evidence that patient sex, age, diagnosis, marital status, sexual orientation, sickness and race/ethnicity can influence providers’ beliefs about and expectations of patients independent of other factors.

Example: Cardiac patients’ race/ethnicity and SES were found to independently and negatively influence physicians’ post-encounter ratings of patients’ personality, education, intelligence, career demands, and likely adherence (independent of physicians’ characteristics and patients’ personality,

clinical, and socio-demographic characteristics)

e.g., see Gerbert B., 1984; Hall et al., 1993; Kearney et al, 2000; Krupat et al., 1999; lewis et al., 1990; Revenson, 1989; Shortt, 2001; Ross et al., 1991; Stern et al., 2001; Stern and Arenson, 1989; Kelly et al., 1987; Schulman et al., 1999; van Ryn and Burke, 2000





s

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture



Hypothesized Mechanisms Through Which Providers Contribute to Disparities

There is evidence that providers’ over-apply population estimates to individual patients.

Epidemiologic data on subgroup likelihood may be incorporated into physicians’ general belief systems such that group data is inaccurately applied to individuals (statistical discrimination). (McKinley et al, 1986; van Ryn & Burke, 2000; Balsa & McGuire, 2001)

Effects moderated by clinical

uncertainty?

Beliefs regarding“base-rate” in populations







s

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture



Hypothesized Mechanisms Through Which Providers Hypothesized Mechanisms Through Which Providers Contribute to DisparitiesContribute to Disparities

• Bogart and colleagues found that physicians were more likely to provide highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) to HIV/AIDS patients when they perceived them to be likely to be adherent.

• Randomly assigned physicians to review patient vignettes that varied only on patient gender, disease severity, ethnicity, and risk group. Physicians were significantly more likely to rate the African American simulated patients as non-adherent. Bogart et al., 2000; Bogart et al, 2001

Provider Provider perception of perception of likelihood of likelihood of adherenceadherence







s

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture




Provider Provider perception of perception of

adherence, adherence, likelihood of likelihood of adequate SSadequate SS

• Cardiologist ratings of patients' likelihood of having adequate social support and/or participating in cardiac rehabilitation was found to predict physicians' recommendations for revascularization (independent of clinical appropriateness for revascularization and other demographic characteristics).• Same group of physicians were more likely to rate African American patients as lacking in social support and unlikely to participate in cardiac rehabilitation than white patients, indep of pt MOS social support score. van Ryn and Burke, 2000; van Ryn et al., 2001







s

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture




• Cardiologist ratings of patients' likelihood of having adequate social support and/or participating in cardiac rehabilitation as found to predict physicians' recommendations for revascularization (independent of clinical appropriateness for revascularization and other demographic characteristics).• Same group of physicians were more likely to rate African American patients as lacking in social support and unlikely to participate in cardiac rehabilitation than white patients, indep of pt MOS social support score. van Ryn and Burke, 2000; van Ryn et al., 2001


• When is this OK?• How are these “indications” assessed?

– Clinicians often have very little training or guidance in valid and reliable ways to assess the likelihood that a given patient has a social or behavioral characteristic.

– Considerable support for hypothesis that clinicians rely on “base-rates”, e.g. over-apply population statistics, to individual patients.

There is ample evidence that social and behavioral factors influences provider clinical decision-making, both explicitly (consciously)

and implicitly (unconsciously).

1. Shye et al 1998; Feldman et al, 1997; McKinlay et al,1996; 1997; Christakis, 1993; Wertz, 1993; Bradley, 1992; Grabet, 2000; Halm et al., 2000; Lockey and harden, 2001)


Provider cognition and affect

regarding help-seeker

HS

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yH

S R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

ProviderInterpretation of Symptoms

Cla

ss

Culture

Implicit Implicit (unconscious)(unconscious)

Explicit Explicit (conscious)(conscious)

Provider Characteristics

Setting

Examples:• Providers underestimated the amount of pain minority cancer patients were experiencing more often than white counterparts. (Sollner et al., 2001)

• Women’s chest pain more likely to be attributed to psychogenic causes even in presence of abnormal cardiac test results (Tobin et al, 1987)

We assign different meaning to the same behavior depending on the characteristics of the actor. Effect is exacerbated for ambiguous behavior1

1. Kunda, 1999; Kunda & Sherman-Williams 1993; Darley & Gross 2000; Darley & Gross 2000; Locksley, et al.1982; Sagar & Schofield 1980; Lepore & Brown 1997;Darley and Gross, 1983; Dunning and Sherman, 1997)







Symptoms




s

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture



• Oncologists’ were less able to accurately identify high levels of distress among their low income patients (& less likely to provide an appropriate therapeutic response) Cleeland et al., 1997.

• Providers reported more uncertainty in their management of breast cancer for women they thought were low SES (McKinlay,et al, 1998)

Provider Uncertainty







Symptoms




s

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture





Both medical students’ & MDs’ gave of normal children more negative assessments when they were told the child had been born prematurely.(Stern et al,2000;2001)






s

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture







question-asking)


The Self-fulfilling Prophecy

• Unconsciously activated stereotypes affect our behavior

Our behavior toward others influences their behavior in turn






s

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture







question-asking)


• Extensively studied in educational & job interviewing.

• Interviewers' behavior influenced by race of applicant

• Interviewer behavior influences applicant behavior.

content & affect

Implicated as factor in studies of disparities in dx of AD/HD,autism







Symptoms




s

Setting

Pt

Rac

e/et

hn

icit

yP

t R

ace/

eth

nic

ity

Cla

ss

Culture








question-asking)


–Differences in provider intake behaviors may have resulted in–Differences information obtained in the ED, and thus created–Differences in diagnoses


Summary• Considerable evidence that providers do incorporate beliefs

regarding patient social factors into their decisions.• Evidence of over-application of stereotypes and population

estimates to non-whites, low SES.• Evidence that provider perceptions of patients’

social/behavioral factors mediates at least some of the observed disparities (e.g. Bogart et al, van Ryn et al)

• Class effects likely to be as large or larger• Lots of noise about need to take patient social context, beliefs

and attitudes into account • Relative silence on when, why, how to assess and apply.


What role do social and behavioral factors play? What

role should they play?• Guidelines and performance measures are notably

sketchy on the role of social or behavioral factors. • Some specify behavior risk factors that either are, or

may be perceived to be, unevenly distributed by race/ethnicity (e.g. alcohol abuse).

• Others contain implicit social and behavioral expectations – leaving it up to the provider to determine whether they are realistic for the patient. Unclear what provider should do if s/he judges patient will not adhere (e.g. AD/HD - adherence to repeat visits).


Lack of clarity on role of social factors+ Lack of valid methods, encounter time, and provider

training in assessing patient status on such factors combined with

+ Prevalent stereotypes reinforced by pop. statistics= fertile ground for disparities in treatment

Need for explicit attention to the development of Need for explicit attention to the development of consensus on role of social factors in clinical decision-consensus on role of social factors in clinical decision-making. making. – What factors matter when?– How do we assess patient status on these factors? – How do we incorporate such assessment into

current clinical practice?


Recommended Funding PrioritiesRecommended Funding Priorities• Development of consensus on role of social factors in clinical

decision-making… – What factors matter when?

– How do we assess patient status on these factors?

– How do we incorporate such assessment into current clinical practice?

• System change to create conditions that support providers in accurate assessment and quality communication.

– Reimbursement methodologies

– Time allotted for encounters

• Increase non-white workforce

• Provider training incorporating best of cultural competence and stereotype reduction strategies


Current Initiatives Increase non-white workforce

• Intrinsically good idea: improving opportunity structure, diverse organizational members create beneficial effects.

• I support it.• I wonder how far will it take us in reducing disparities?• Class & professional socialization effects likely to persist• Minority groups subject to same, internalized stereotypes

and majority group members.• I support it.



Positive: • African Americans who saw African American provider reported

higher satisfaction levels than counterparts (LaVeist and Carroll, 2002)

• Race concordance increased ratings of providers’ participatory style. So did seeing a woman provider for both sexes and races (Cooper-Patrick et al, 1999)

Less Promising • Race concordance did not improve dx of depression (Cooper,

2002)• SES concordance, but not race concordance, positively predicted

time in encounter (Malat, 2001)


The Contact Hypothesis: prejudice is a result of ignorance.– “Getting to know one another” will solve problem.

• Refinement of hypothesis: under certain conditionscertain conditions contact can reduce prejudice. (Allport)– equal status (no power or resource differential)– common goals & interdependence– no competition– authority sanctions contact– (success at joint tasks)

• Recent meta-analysis of 203 studies (73% US)– Contact between individuals under stated conditions fairly consistently reduced

individual prejudice.– More so for majority than minority group members.



• In some instances where conditions are not met, bias increases.

• Are the conditions descriptive of medical student and residents’ joint experiences?

• What if jobs are perceived to be scarce?Also:• There is evidence that when faced with

disconfirming instances, we subtype.• More likely to subtype when disconfirming

instances hang together in some way.




Unresolved issues:• What are implications of allowing (or encouraging)

people to choose a provider by race/ethnicity? • What about social class discordance?

• Will working with more non-whites as peers in organization influence white provider implicit bias?

• Maybe, could make an argument based on current research either way.


Using EBM & QI to ameliorate disparities

• Some evidence that intensive Evidence-Based Medicine Quality Improvement interventions differentially benefit the most vulnerable (who have furthest to go). Thus, they show promise for eliminating race/ethnicity disparities in care.

Owen WF, Jr., Szczech LA, Frankenfield DL. Healthcare system interventions for inequality in quality: corrective action through evidence-based medicine. J Natl Med Assoc. Aug 2002;94(8 Suppl):83S-91S.

Sehgal AR. Impact of quality improvement efforts on race and sex disparities in hemodialysis. Jama. Feb 26 2003;289(8):996-1000.

Smith JH, Jr. Eliminating health disparities: our mission, our vision, our cause. Am Fam Physician. Oct 15 2001;64(8):1333-1334.


Using EBM to ameliorate disparities

Caveats:

• QI approaches limited to conditions with evidence base.

• Must account for or address effect of race/ethnicity and class on assessment

• Explicit attention to social and behavioral factors as contributors to treatment decision


• Training types that give information of “typical” characteristics and issues associated with a given subgroup likely to exacerbate problem.

• Improving interpersonal and communication skills – eliciting self-disclosure

– active listening

– self-awareness

… show promise for increasing likelihood providers will obtain individual information rather than rely on base-rates or implicit stereotypes.

Current InitiativesCultural Competence Training


• Possible unintended adverse effects:• Efforts at stereotype suppression can backfire

(“stereotype suppression rebound”).– When experimental participants are asked to

suppress stereotypes in arriving at judgements of an individual, they can do so.

– However, in some conditions initial suppression of stereotypes leads to increased activation and use in other settings encountered shortly thereafter.

Macrae et all, 1994. Out of mind but back in sight: stereotypes on the rebound. Journal of Personality and Social-Psychology, 67, 808-817



• Do these programs affect explicit beliefs? If so, for how long? – (Some evidence of at least a short term effect for program lead by

African American professor with diverse participants & affective component(Rudman et al, 2001).

• If they do, increases in conscious egalitarian intention should increase motivation to overcome automatic deleterious beliefs.

• Individuals with explicit egalitarian belief systems are less likely to activate negative implicit beliefs when exposure is neutral (but not when negative).

Blair, I. (2001). Implicit Stereotypes and Prejudice. Cognitive Social Psychology: The Princeton Symposium on the Legacy and Future of Social Cognition. G. Moskowitz. NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum.



• Under certain conditions individuals can consciously replace automatically activated stereotype with egalitarian response:– Must be aware of potential for judgment, emotions

and behaviors to be biased.

– Have awareness of stereotype activation.– Have high level of motivation.– Have sufficient cognitive resources (time and

cognitive capacity).

Blair, I. (2001). Implicit Stereotypes and Prejudice. Cognitive Social Psychology: The Princeton Symposium on the Legacy and Future of Social Cognition. G. Moskowitz. NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum.



• Perspective-taking has been successfully used to reduce stereotypes and prejudice. (Compared to a no-instruction control group and a “stereotype suppression group” that was instructed to actively try to avoid thinking about the person in a stereotypic manner.)

• For example, Whites who wrote about a day in the life of an elderly or Black person, showed less explicit and implicit stereotyping – "imagine a day in the life of this individual as if you were that

person, looking at the world through his eyes and walking through the world in his shoes.“

Galinsky, A. D. & Moskowitz, G. B. (2000). Decreasing Stereotype Expression, Stereotype Accessibility, and In-Group Favoritism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.


Potentially promising findings


• Current cultural competence programs target explicit beliefs.

• Test of addition of strategies to overcome automatic activation of negative beliefs needed.

• Relationship building, listening, and communication skills predictive of a wide range of improved outcomes.

• Unlikely to completely ameliorate disparities as sole approach.

• EVALUATION OF PROGRAMS NEEDED



Some recent studies show that when low-prejudice (in explicit beliefs) people get feedback regarding their behavior that are discrepant from their conscious beliefs &…– Experience guilt or negative self-evaluation as a result &

– Have freed up cognitive resources…

…they are able to exert control over implicit negative beliefs and reactions in a subsequent situation.

QI monitoring and feedback strategiesDisparities-specific QI?


Evidence-based & rigorous methods for incorporating social factors into clinical

decision-making• Lots of noise about need to take patient social context into

account.• Relative silence on when, why, how to assess and apply.• Considerable evidence that providers do incorporate beliefs

regarding patient social factors into their decisions.• Evidence of over-application of stereotypes and population

estimates to non-whites, low SES.• Evidence this mediates at least some of the observed

disparities. (e.g. Bogart et al, van Ryn et al)

• Class effects likely to be as large or larger.


Considerable evidence that stereotypes are more likely to be activated and applied (vs. individual information) when individuals are:– tired – distracted – pressed for time– anxious– cognitively busy

Probably because these conditions leave little cognitive resources for processing individuating information and/or suppressing stereotypes.

Need for system change:Situational factors influence the likelihood of

stereotype activation and application


Conclusion• Considerably more research on provider contribution

to disparities needed.

• Addressing the provider contribution to disparities likely to require a multi-modal and multilevel approach.

• There are few ideas for reducing disparities that have not already been suggested in other contexts for other or related reasons.

• Strategies to reduce disparities are likely to improve care for all.

• Significant devotion of resources and will required.


Recommended Funding PrioritiesRecommended Funding Priorities• Development of consensus on role of social factors in clinical

decision-making… – What factors matter when?

– How do we assess patient status on these factors?

– How do we incorporate such assessment into current clinical practice?

• System change to create conditions that support providers in accurate assessment and quality communication.

– Reimbursement methodologies

– Time allotted for encounters

• Increase non-white workforce

• Provider training incorporating best of cultural competence and stereotype reduction strategies


Despite massive evidence to the contrary…

… evidence indicates that people tend to believe that they can see

through stereotypes and are unprejudiced in their own

perceptions and expectancies.

understanding and addressing provider contribution to disparities michelle van ryn, ph.d., m.p.h....

Documents

raceethnicity disparities

disparities van ryn

ethnic disparities

health care

trust pt behavior

provider contribution

treatment differences

independent of treatment