Published 17 September 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b3797
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b3797

Editorials

Ethnic minorities and their perceptions of the quality of primary care

Greater tailoring of services to local populations and personalisation of care are needed

Societies are becoming more culturally diverse and this trend—which is driven by a combination of political and economic forces, globalisation, and improved access to travel—is set to continue. More than two decades of research, mainly from English language speaking countries, shows that ethnic minority people tend to have poorer outcomes than the white majority population for a range of diseases.¹ Research from the UK has, for example, shown that the risk of an emergency admission among South Asians with asthma is three times higher than the risk in white people, and is twice as high in black individuals.² Similar inequalities have also been noted with respect to risk of developing diabetes, ischaemic heart disease, and stroke.^{3 4 5 6} In the linked study (doi:10.1136/bmj.b3450), Mead and Roland assess why patients from ethnic minorities also tend to give lower evaluations of primary health care than white patients.⁷

The factors underpinning inequalities in health outcomes are complex, multi-faceted, and not well understood, which partly explains the limited progress in reducing them.⁸ Part of the explanation does, however, seem to lie in differences in the quality of care received, which has been the dominant explanation of findings from previous patient surveys of primary care provision. On the other hand, Mead and Roland’s analysis suggests that some of the differences in ratings of care might be explained by higher expectations in some ethnic minority groups.⁷

The General Practice Assessment Questionnaire (GPAQ) is a national (English) patient survey for primary care that was undertaken as part of the quality and outcomes framework. The national use of this tool reflects the increasing importance being assigned by policy makers to patient reported outcome measures. Mead and Roland have performed an innovative and potentially important secondary analysis of this dataset, investigating various parameters of care among the four main ethnic groupings in the UK. The major strengths of this study include the fact that the instruments used in the survey allowed assessment both of perceptions of care and also patient reports of actual care received. In addition, a large number of patients (including ethnic minority patients) completed the questionnaire and were included in the sample, and the authors adjusted for a range of potentially important confounding factors.

But despite these strengths, this secondary analysis has some important limitations (many of which the authors acknowledge). These shortcomings include the lack of a clear sampling frame, the resulting difficulties in trying to ascertain the response rate—let alone compare the characteristics of responding and non-responding patients—the failure to validate the instruments across cultures, the crude ethnic groupings used, and the substantial risk of residual confounding. It is also important to highlight that the dataset used did not involve any objective assessment of the actual quality of care delivered.

Given these limitations, one should be cautious about the suggestion that higher expectations of care in ethnic minority groups is a key factor underpinning the differences in perceptions of care. Indeed, the data suggest that, if anything, issues with patient reports of the quality of care are likely to be an important problem. This is particularly evident in Mead and Roland’s data from Chinese and black respondents’ assessments of receptionist and general practitioner communication, but also in data from Asian patients.⁸ This explanation is further supported by a large body of evidence showing inequalities in various process measures of care such as provision of preventative care, the responsiveness of services, and referrals for specialist assessment and care provision.^{9 10}

That said, the hypothesis about possible ethnic differences in expectations of care is intriguing and warrants further exploration in qualitative studies and descriptive studies using appropriately validated instruments in carefully defined population groups. Any residual differences in perceptions of care that are not adequately explained by structural factors (for example, socioeconomic considerations and the characteristics of the practice and general practitioner), discrimination, or differences in actual quality of care are more likely to be explained by differences in expectations of the types and models of care provided by health services (such as preferences with respect to evening and weekend opening) than by higher expectations.¹¹ This possibility should, therefore, be a consideration for future research.

Given the increased importance assigned to responsiveness and personalisation of care, the key practical message of this work is that practices need to identify and understand the priorities of their communities and tailor care accordingly. The emphasis thus needs to be on judging care providers by their success in meeting the needs of their local populations rather than on adjusting patient evaluations for the ethnic profile of the practice populations.¹²

Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b3797

¹ Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9AG

Research, doi:10.1136/bmj.b3450

---

Competing interests: AS chairs the National Clinical Assessment Service’s Equality & Diversity Forum and is primary investigator on studies funded by the Medical Research Council investigating new models of delivering smoking cessation services to South Asian populations and exploring approaches to adapting health promotion interventions for black and ethnic minority groups.

References

1. Bhopal R. Ethnicity, race and health in multicultural societies. Open University Press, 2007.
2. Netuveli G, Hurwitz B, Levy M, Fletcher M, Barnes G, Durham SR, et al. Ethnic variations in UK asthmas frequency, morbidity and health service use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2005;365:312-7.[Web of Science][Medline]
3. Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C, Robson J, Sheikh A, Brindle P. Predicting risk of type 2 diabetes in England and Wales: prospective derivation and validation of QDScore. BMJ 2009;338:b880.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C, Vinogradova Y, Robson J, Minhas R, Sheikh A, et al. Predicting cardiovascular risk in England and Wales: prospective derivation and validation of QRISK2. BMJ 2008;336:1475-82.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5. Bhopal R, Rahemtulla T, Sheikh A. Persistent high stroke mortality in Bangladeshi populations. BMJ 2005;331:1096-7.[Free Full Text]
6. NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre. Health Survey for England 2004: the health of minority ethnic groups—headline tables. http://www.ic.nhs.uk/webfiles/publications/hlthsvyeng2004ethnic/HealthSurveyForEngland161205_PDF%20.pdf.
7. Mead N, Roland M. Understanding why some ethnic minority patients evaluate medical care more negatively than white patients: a cross sectional analysis of a routine patient survey in English general practices. BMJ 2009;339:b3450.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8. Modood T, Berthoud R, Lakey J, Nazroo J, Smith P, Virdee S, et al. Ethnic minorities in Britain: diversity and disadvantage. Policy Studies Institute 1997.
9. Salman R. Assessing health needs of people from minority ethnic groups. Department of Health, 1998. http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4005618.
10. Worth A, Irshad T, Bhopal R, Brown D, Lawton J, Grant E, et al. Vulnerability and access to care for South Asian Sikh and Muslim patients with life limiting illness in Scotland: prospective longitudinal qualitative study. BMJ 2009;338:b183.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11. Sheikh A, Gatrad R, Dhami S. Consultations for people from minority groups. BMJ 2008;337:a273.[Free Full Text]
12. Lakhani M. No patient left behind: how can we ensure world class primary care for black and minority ethnic people? Department of Health, 2008. http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_084971.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Understanding why some ethnic minority patients evaluate medical care more negatively than white patients: a cross sectional analysis of a routine patient survey in English general practices

Nicola Mead and Martin Roland
BMJ 2009 339: b3450. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Predicting risk of type 2 diabetes in England and Wales: prospective derivation and validation of QDScore

Julia Hippisley-Cox, Carol Coupland, John Robson, Aziz Sheikh, and Peter Brindle
BMJ 2009 338: b880. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Consultations for people from minority groups

Aziz Sheikh, Rashid Gatrad, and Sangeeta Dhami
BMJ 2008 337: a273. [Extract] [Full Text]

Predicting cardiovascular risk in England and Wales: prospective derivation and validation of QRISK2

Julia Hippisley-Cox, Carol Coupland, Yana Vinogradova, John Robson, Rubin Minhas, Aziz Sheikh, and Peter Brindle
BMJ 2008 336: 1475-1482. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Persistent high stroke mortality in Bangladeshi populations

Raj Bhopal, Taslin Rahemtulla, and Aziz Sheikh
BMJ 2005 331: 1096-1097. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Online poll

Find out more on doc2doc >>