TY - JOUR
T1 - Use of Accessible Examination Tables in the Primary Care Setting
T2 - A Survey of Physical Evaluations and Patient Attitudes
AU - Morris, Megan A.
AU - Maragh-Bass, Allysha C.
AU - Griffin, Joan M.
AU - Finney Rutten, Lila J.
AU - Lagu, Tara
AU - Phelan, Sean
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank Ashley Pitzer, who assisted with survey collection, and Avni Gupta, for her assistance in analyzing the data. This research was supported by the Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery. The funder had no role in the design or conduct of the study, the analysis or interpretation of the data, or the review or approval of the manuscript. The results were presented at the 2016 American Public Health Association Annual Meeting and Expo in Denver, CO.
Funding Information:
The authors would like to thank Ashley Pitzer, who assisted with survey collection, and Avni Gupta, for her assistance in analyzing the data. This research was supported by the Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery. The funder had no role in the design or conduct of the study, the analysis or interpretation of the data, or the review or approval of the manuscript. The results were presented at the 2016 American Public Health Association Annual Meeting and Expo in Denver, CO. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017, Society of General Internal Medicine.
PY - 2017/12/1
Y1 - 2017/12/1
N2 - Background: Accessible diagnostic equipment, including height-adjustable examination tables, is necessary to accommodate patients with disabilities. Studies demonstrate that only a minority of clinics provide accessible equipment. For clinics with this equipment, no studies have examined the use of such equipment in routine clinical care. Objective: In primary care clinics with and without height-adjustable examination tables, we compared the frequency and variation in physical evaluations on examination tables and patients’ perceptions of quality care. Design: Survey administered to patients at two primary care clinics in Rochester, MN, in 2015. One clinic had height-adjustable examination tables in every exam room; the other clinic had none. Patients: A total of 399 English-speaking adult primary care patients (61% participation). Main Measures: Participants were asked whether they were physically evaluated on a table during their clinical encounter. In addition, they completed two subscales of the Patient Perception of Quality of Care survey: Perceptions of Provider’s Bedside Manner and Perceptions of Provider’s Work. Key Results: Overall, there were no differences between clinics in the likelihood of patients being examined on an exam table or in their perceptions of quality of care. Across both clinics, patients who reported a disability were 27% less likely to be examined on a table, were less likely to rate their provider’s bedside manner favorably (74% vs. 59%) and to have positive perceptions of their provider’s work (46% vs. 32%) than patients without disabilities. Conclusions: The presence of accessible medical equipment was not associated with care delivered to patients. While this might not be meaningful for most patients, it could be problematic for patients with disabilities, who are less likely to be examined. Therefore, accessible equipment alone may not be sufficient to reduce disparities in the care experience. Provider- and organization-level factors must thus be considered in efforts to provide equitable care to patients with disabilities.
AB - Background: Accessible diagnostic equipment, including height-adjustable examination tables, is necessary to accommodate patients with disabilities. Studies demonstrate that only a minority of clinics provide accessible equipment. For clinics with this equipment, no studies have examined the use of such equipment in routine clinical care. Objective: In primary care clinics with and without height-adjustable examination tables, we compared the frequency and variation in physical evaluations on examination tables and patients’ perceptions of quality care. Design: Survey administered to patients at two primary care clinics in Rochester, MN, in 2015. One clinic had height-adjustable examination tables in every exam room; the other clinic had none. Patients: A total of 399 English-speaking adult primary care patients (61% participation). Main Measures: Participants were asked whether they were physically evaluated on a table during their clinical encounter. In addition, they completed two subscales of the Patient Perception of Quality of Care survey: Perceptions of Provider’s Bedside Manner and Perceptions of Provider’s Work. Key Results: Overall, there were no differences between clinics in the likelihood of patients being examined on an exam table or in their perceptions of quality of care. Across both clinics, patients who reported a disability were 27% less likely to be examined on a table, were less likely to rate their provider’s bedside manner favorably (74% vs. 59%) and to have positive perceptions of their provider’s work (46% vs. 32%) than patients without disabilities. Conclusions: The presence of accessible medical equipment was not associated with care delivered to patients. While this might not be meaningful for most patients, it could be problematic for patients with disabilities, who are less likely to be examined. Therefore, accessible equipment alone may not be sufficient to reduce disparities in the care experience. Provider- and organization-level factors must thus be considered in efforts to provide equitable care to patients with disabilities.
KW - access to care
KW - disability
KW - disparity
KW - primary care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85029600500&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85029600500&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11606-017-4155-2
DO - 10.1007/s11606-017-4155-2
M3 - Article
C2 - 28924919
AN - SCOPUS:85029600500
SN - 0884-8734
VL - 32
SP - 1342
EP - 1348
JO - Journal of General Internal Medicine
JF - Journal of General Internal Medicine
IS - 12
ER -