Article Figures & Data
Tables
Characteristic Weighted % Note: Unweighted number of observations; n per category varied from 8,926 to 9,011 because of missing data. Female 66.5 Age-group 18 – 29 y 17.8 30 – 39 y 22.0 40 – 49 y 21.1 50 – 59 y 15.5 60 y and older 23.5 Race/ethnicity White/other 78.3 Black 12.0 Hispanic 9.7 Education <High school 18.2 High school graduate 31.6 Some college 23.2 College graduate 27.0 Annual income <$25,000 54.5 $25,000 – $50,000 29.4 >$50,000 16.1 Marital status Married 48.5 Never married 23.1 Divorced 16.2 Widowed 10.0 Separated 2.2 Insurance None 11.2 Public 14.4 Private 74.1 Reported health status Excellent 16.8 Very good 37.0 Good 31.0 Fair 12.2 Poor 2.9 Region of country Northeast 19.2 Midwest 23.1 South 35.2 West 22.5 Urban/rural location Urban 81.5 Rural 18.5 - Table 2.
Unadjusted Weighted Percentages of Adults Without a Usual Source of Care: Comparisons Across Demographic Groups
Demographic Characteristic All Adults (n = 8,851) P Value* Adults With USC or Had No Preference (n = 8,333) P Value* Adults With or Preferred USC (n = 7,643) P Value* Note: Unweighted number of observations; actual n varies slightly by category. USC = usual source of care; NS = not significant. * χ2 for overall differences between subcategories of each demographic characteristic. Entire group 20.0 15.2 6.6 Sex ≥ .001 ≥ .001 ≥ .05 Male 28.6 24.2 7.7 Female 15.6 10.7 6.1 Age-group ≥ .001 ≥ .001 ≥ .001 18 – 29 y 36.4 29.0 14.2 30 – 39 y 25.8 19.9 9.1 40 – 49 y 17.5 13.1 5.8 50 – 59 y 14.3 11.3 3.8 ≥ 60 y 8.0 5.8 2.5 Race/ethnicity ≥ .001 ≥ .001 ≥ .001 White/other 18.2 13.9 5.7 Black 21.0 16.6 6.3 Hispanic 33.3 24.4 14.9 Education NS NS NS <High school 21.5 15.7 8.0 High school graduate 19.2 15.2 5.5 Some college 20.4 15.9 6.4 College graduate 19.3 14.1 7.0 Annual income NS NS ≥ .05 <$25,000 20.3 14.8 7.6 $25,000 – $50,000 19.4 15.5 5.5 >$50,000 19.6 16.0 5.4 Marital status ≥ .001 ≥ .001 ≥ .001 Married 15.5 11.3 5.4 Never married 33.6 27.5 11.4 Divorced 21.0 16.4 6.6 Widowed 8.1 5.7 2.7 Separated 20.0 11.9 10.3 Insurance ≥ .001 ≥ .001 ≥ .001 None 47.0 36.5 23.8 Public 12.2 8.2 4.7 Private 17.4 13.8 4.9 Reported health status ≥ .001 ≥ .001 NS Excellent 26.9 23.4 5.8 Very good 21.6 16.6 7.1 Good 17.7 13.0 6.2 Fair 13.0 6.9 7.0 Poor 12.0 5.3 7.4 Region of country ≥ .001 ≥ .001 ≥ .001 Northeast 14.5 10.8 4.6 Midwest 17.0 13.9 4.3 South 20.5 16.1 6.3 West 26.9 19.2 11.5 Urban/rural location ≥ .01 ≥ .05 ≥ .05 Urban 20.9 15.8 7.1 Rural 15.9 12.7 4.3 Characteristic All Adults (n = 8,851) Adults With USC or Had No Preference (n = 8,333) Adults With or Preferred USC (n = 7,643) Note: Unweighted number of observations. Odds ratios from multiple logistic regression adjusted for all other characteristics in the table. * P ≥ .001. † P ≥ .05. ‡ Not significant. § P ≥ .01. Sex Male 2.1* 2.5* 1.3† Female 1.0 1.0 1.0 Age-group 18 – 29 y 4.1* 3.8* 5.3* 30 – 39 y 3.0* 2.8* 3.4* 40 – 49 y 2.0* 1.9* 2.2* 50 – 59 y 1.6* 1.7* 1.3‡ 60 y and older 1.0 1.0 1.0 Race/ethnicity Hispanic 1.5* 1.4§ 1.5† Black 1.0‡ 1.0‡ 0.96‡ White 1.0 1.0 1.0 Education <High school 1.2‡ 1.5§ 0.65‡ High school 1.1‡ 1.3§ 0.60§ Some college 1.0‡ 1.2‡ 0.72‡ College graduate 1.0 1.0 1.0 Annual income <$25,000 0.98‡ 0.92‡ 1.2‡ $25 – $50,000 0.92‡ 0.91‡ 0.99‡ >$50,000 1.0 1.0 1.0 Marital status Never married 1.5* 1.6* 1.2‡ Divorced 1.3§ 1.4§ 1.2‡ Widowed 1.2‡ 1.2‡ 1.2‡ Separated 1.1‡ 0.84‡ 1.5‡ Married 1.0 1.0 1.0 Insurance None 3.2* 2.7* 4.8* Public 0.94‡ 0.86‡ 1.1‡ Private 1.0 1.0 1.0 Health status Excellent 2.0§ 3.7* 0.55‡ Very good 1.7† 2.7† 0.79‡ Good 1.3‡ 2.1‡ 0.74‡ Fair 1.1‡ 1.2‡ 1.0‡ Poor 1.0 1.0 1.0 Region of country West 2.0* 1.8* 2.2* South 1.5§ 1.6§ 1.2‡ Midwest 1.3‡ 1.4‡ 0.86‡ Northeast 1.0 1.0 1.0 Urban/rural location Urban 1.2‡ 1.2‡ 1.4† Rural 1.0 1.0 1.0 Reason Weighted % Note: Unweighted number of observations. * Response grouped into the “no preference for a usual source of care” category. Seldom or never sick* 66.2 Unable to afford 10.2 Recently moved to area 6.3 Other reason 3.7 Go to different places for different needs* 3.3 Usual source of care in area unavailable 3.0 Just changed insurance 2.5 Do not use doctors/treat myself* 2.2 Other insurance reason 1.5 Don’t know where to go 1.2
Additional Files
The Article in Brief
Adults' Lack of a Usual Source of Care: A Matter of Preference?
Anthony J. Viera, MD, and colleagues
Background People with a usual source of care (a regular doctor or a regular place where they get their health care) receive more preventive health services and have better control of chronic medical conditions. Yet in 2001, an estimated 52 million Americans did not have a usual source of care. This study set out to learn more about people who don�t have a usual source of care.
What This Study Found The most common reason people gave for lacking a usual source of care was that they were seldom or never sick. Only 10.2% of people said that cost was the reason. Overall, 72% of the estimated 42.7 million adults without a usual source of care in 2000 apparently had little or no preference for one, and a minority (28%) appeared to prefer to have one if they could.
Implications
- It is commonly assumed that removing such barriers as cost and lack of transportation should be the goal in ensuring that people have a usual source of care. The results of this study suggest that it might be more important to teach people the value of having a usual source of care, or to develop systems that allow people to experience a usual care source.
