Health care access and health-related quality of life among people with diabetes in the Southern Cone of Latin America—a cross-sectional analysis of data of the CESCAS I study.
Saved in:
| Title: | Health care access and health-related quality of life among people with diabetes in the Southern Cone of Latin America—a cross-sectional analysis of data of the CESCAS I study. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Kartschmit, Nadja (AUTHOR), Beratarrechea, Andrea (AUTHOR), Gutiérrez, Laura (AUTHOR), Cavallo, Ana Soledad (AUTHOR), Rubinstein, Adolfo Luis (AUTHOR), Irazola, Vilma (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Quality of Life Research. Apr2021, Vol. 30 Issue 4, p1005-1015. 11p. 1 Diagram, 4 Charts, 1 Graph. |
| Subjects: | Health services accessibility, Quality of life, Cross-sectional method, Data analysis, Cones |
| Geographic Terms: | Southern Cone of South America, South America |
| Abstract: | Purpose: Little is known on the association of health care access and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in people with diabetes in the Southern Cone of Latin America (SCLA). Methods: We analyzed data of 1025 participants of CESCAS I. To determine HRQoL, we used the SF-12 physical (PCS-12) and mental component summary (MCS-12). We compared four groups regarding HRQoL: (a) insured people without self-reported barriers to health care, (b) uninsured people without self-reported barriers to health care, (c) insured people with self-reported barriers to health care, and (d) uninsured people with self-reported barriers to health care. We conducted linear regressions with PCS-12 and MCS-12 as outcome. We adjusted for sociodemographic and disease-related factors and having access to a primary physician. Results: In the first group, there were 407, in the second 471, in the third 44, and in the fourth group 103 participants. Compared to the first group, PCS-12 was 1.9 points lower (95% Confidence Interval, CI: − 3.5, − 0.3) in the second, 4.5 points (95% CI: − 8.1, − 1) lower in the third, and 6.1 points lower (95% CI: − 8.7, − 3.6) in the fourth group. Compared to the first group, MCS-12 was 0.6 points lower (95% CI: − 2.7, 1.4) in the second, 4.8 points lower (95% CI: − 9.3, − 0.3) in the third, and 5.8 points lower (95% CI: − 9.1, − 2.5) in the fourth group. Conclusion: In the SCLA, impeded access to care is common in people with diabetes. Self-reported barriers to care may be more important than insurance status in determining HRQoL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Quality of Life Research is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Purpose: Little is known on the association of health care access and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in people with diabetes in the Southern Cone of Latin America (SCLA). Methods: We analyzed data of 1025 participants of CESCAS I. To determine HRQoL, we used the SF-12 physical (PCS-12) and mental component summary (MCS-12). We compared four groups regarding HRQoL: (a) insured people without self-reported barriers to health care, (b) uninsured people without self-reported barriers to health care, (c) insured people with self-reported barriers to health care, and (d) uninsured people with self-reported barriers to health care. We conducted linear regressions with PCS-12 and MCS-12 as outcome. We adjusted for sociodemographic and disease-related factors and having access to a primary physician. Results: In the first group, there were 407, in the second 471, in the third 44, and in the fourth group 103 participants. Compared to the first group, PCS-12 was 1.9 points lower (95% Confidence Interval, CI: − 3.5, − 0.3) in the second, 4.5 points (95% CI: − 8.1, − 1) lower in the third, and 6.1 points lower (95% CI: − 8.7, − 3.6) in the fourth group. Compared to the first group, MCS-12 was 0.6 points lower (95% CI: − 2.7, 1.4) in the second, 4.8 points lower (95% CI: − 9.3, − 0.3) in the third, and 5.8 points lower (95% CI: − 9.1, − 2.5) in the fourth group. Conclusion: In the SCLA, impeded access to care is common in people with diabetes. Self-reported barriers to care may be more important than insurance status in determining HRQoL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09629343 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s11136-020-02704-1 |
