Health service utilization in immigrants with multiple sclerosis

PLoS One. 2020 Jul 9;15(7):e0234876. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234876. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

Background: Access to neurology specialty care can influence outcomes in individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS), but may vary based on patient sociodemographic characteristics, including immigration status.

Objective: To compare health services utilization in the year of MS diagnosis, one year before diagnosis and two years after diagnosis in immigrants versus long-term residents in Ontario, Canada.

Methods: We identified incident cases of MS among adults aged 20-65 years by applying a validated algorithm to health administrative data in Ontario, Canada, a region with universal health insurance and comprehensive coverage. We separately assessed hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, outpatient neurology visits, other outpatient specialty visits, and primary care visits. We compared rates of health service use in immigrants versus long-term residents using negative binomial regression models with generalized estimating equations adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, urban/rural residence, MS diagnosis calendar year, and comorbidity burden.

Results: From 2003 to 2014, there were 13,028 incident MS cases in Ontario, of whom 1,070 (8.2%) were immigrants. As compared to long-term residents, rates of hospitalization were similar (Adjusted rate ratio (ARR) 0.86; 95% CI: 0.73-1.01) in immigrants the year before MS diagnosis, but outpatient neurology visits (ARR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.87-0.99) were slightly less frequent. However, immigrants had higher rates of hospitalization during the diagnosis year (ARR 1.20, 95% CI: 1.04-1.39), and had greater use of outpatient neurology (ARR 1.17, 95% CI: 1.12-1.23) but fewer ED visits (ARR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.78-0.96). In the first post-diagnosis year, immigrants continued to have greater numbers of outpatient neurology visits (ARR 1.16; 95% CI: 1.10-1.23), but had fewer hospitalizations (ARR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.67-0.94).

Conclusions: Overall, our findings were reassuring concerning health services access for immigrants with MS in Ontario, a publicly funded health care system. However, immigrants were more likely to be hospitalized despite greater use of outpatient neurology care in the year of MS diagnosis. Reasons for this may include more severe disease presentation or lack of social support among immigrants and warrant further investigation.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Ambulatory Care / trends
  • Canada / ethnology
  • Cohort Studies
  • Emergency Service, Hospital / trends
  • Emigrants and Immigrants / psychology*
  • Female
  • Hospitalization / trends
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Mental Disorders / therapy
  • Mental Health Services / trends
  • Middle Aged
  • Multiple Sclerosis / psychology
  • Ontario / ethnology
  • Patient Acceptance of Health Care / ethnology*
  • Patient Acceptance of Health Care / psychology*
  • Primary Health Care / trends
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Social Class

Grants and funding

This study was funded through grants from the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada and the Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers. The funding sources had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. All authors had full access to the data in the study and the corresponding author had the final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication. The sponsors played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication. This study was supported by ICES, which is funded by an annual grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC). The opinions, results and conclusions reported in this paper are those of the authors and are independent from the funding sources. No endorsement by ICES or the Ontario MOHLTC is intended or should be inferred. Parts of this material are based on data and information compiled and provided by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI). However, the analyses, conclusions, opinions and statements expressed herein are those of the authors, and not necessarily those of CIHI. The funders provided support in the form of salaries for authors [SES, KF], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.