Search

Floating Catchment Area (FCA) methods are a popular tool to investigate accessibility to public facilities, in particular health care services. FCA approaches are attractive because, unlike other accessibility measures, they take into account the potential for congestion of facilities. This is done by 1) considering the population within the catchment area of a facility to calculate a variable that measures level of service, and then 2) aggregating the level of service by population centers subject to catchment area constraints. In this paper we discuss an effect of FCA approaches, an artifact that we term demand and level of service inflation. These artifacts are present in previous implementations of FCA methods. We argue that inflation makes interpretation of estimates of accessibility difficult, which has possible deleterious consequences for decision making. Next, we propose a simple and intuitive approach to proportionally allocate demandand and level of service in FCA calculations. The approach is based on a standardization of the impedance matrix, similar to approaches popular in the spatial statistics and econometrics literature. The result is a more intiuitive measure of accessibility that 1) provides a local version of the provider-to-population ratio; and 2) preserves the level of demand and the level of supply in a system. We illustrate the relevant issues with some examples, and then empirically by means of a case study of accessibility to family physicians in the Hamilton Census Metropolitan Area (CMA), in Ontario, Canada. Results indicate that demand and supply inflation/deflation affect the interpretation of accessibility analysis using existing FCA methods, and that the proposed adjustment can lead to more intuitive results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Attention to research and planning are increasingly being devoted to newcomer health, but the needs of newcomers with disabilities remain largely unknown. This information is difficult to determine since population-level data are rarely available on newcomers or on people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), although in Ontario, Canada these databases are accessible. This study compared the prevalence of IDD among first generation adult newcomers to adult non-newcomers in Ontario, and assessed how having IDD affected the health profile and health service use of newcomers. Methods: This population-based retrospective cohort study of adults aged 19–65 in 2010 used linked health and social services administrative data. Prevalence of IDD among newcomers (n = 1,649,633) and non-newcomers (n = 6,880,196) was compared. Among newcomers, those with IDD (n = 2,830) and without IDD (n = 1,646,803) were compared in terms of health conditions, and community and hospital service use. Results: Prevalence of IDD was lower in newcomers than non-newcomers (171.6 versus 898.3 per 100,000 adults, p<0.0001). Among newcomers, those with IDD were more likely than those without IDD to have comorbid physical health disorders, non-psychotic, psychotic and substance use disorders. Newcomers with IDD were also more likely to have psychiatry visits, and frequent emergency department visits and hospitalizations. Conclusion: First generation adult newcomers have lower rates of IDD than non-newcomers. How much of this difference is attributable to admission policies that exclude people expected to be high health service users versus how much is attributable to our methodological approach is unknown. Finding more medical and psychiatric comorbidity, and more health service use among newcomers with IDD compared to newcomers without IDD is consistent with patterns observed in adults with IDD more generally. To inform polices that support newcomers with IDD future research should investigate reasons for the prevalence finding, barriers and facilitators to timely health care access, and pathways to care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]