Low-Educated Women with Chronic Pain Were Less Often Selected to Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation Programs

Abstract

BackgroundThere is a lack of research about a potential education-related bias in assessment of patients with chronic pain. The aim of this study was to analyze whether low-educated men and women with chronic pain were less often selected to multidisciplinary rehabilitation than those with high education.MethodsThe population consisted of consecutive patients (n = 595 women, 266 men) referred during a three-year period from mainly primary health care centers for a multidisciplinary team assessment at a pain rehabilitation clinic at a university hospital in Northern Sweden. Patient data were collected from the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation National Pain Register. The outcome variable was being selected by the multidisciplinary team assessment to a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program. The independent variables were: sex, age, born outside Sweden, education, pain severity as well as the hospital, anxiety and depression scale (HADS).ResultsLow-educated women were less often selected to multidisciplinary rehabilitation programs than high-educated women (OR 0.55, CI 0.30–0.98), even after control for age, being born outside Sweden, pain intensity and HADS. No significant findings were found when comparing the results between high- and low-educated men.ConclusionOur findings can be interpreted as possible discrimination against low-educated women with chronic pain in hospital referrals to pain rehabilitation. There is a need for more gender-theoretical research emphasizing the importance of taking several power dimensions into account when analyzing possible bias in health care.

Physiotherapeutic interventions and physical activity for children in Northern Sweden with cerebral palsy: a register study from equity and gender perspectives

“…The patient’s need of care is given preference in terms of not causing pain and enhancing autonomy and equality [29]. Nevertheless, differences in health assessments and clinical decisions that cannot be medically justified occur [19], and are associated with patient sex, gender, or other social characteristics [30–33]. Equity may be questioned when gender differences are overlooked leading to a generalized healthcare, as well as when improper beliefs about such differences affect the choice of examination or treatment [34].…”

Meddling with middle modalities: a decomposition approach to mental health inequalities between intersectional gender and economic middle groups in northern Sweden

“…Exposure to gender violence is another extreme expression of gender inequalities that can impact mental health (23), and other forms of degrading or humiliating treatment in everyday life have also shown to be important for health and healthcare seeking in both Swedish women and men, but particularly among those socioeconomically disadvantaged (24, 25). Further processes of marginalization involve discrimination in the health system based on gender and/or socioeconomic disadvantage (25, 26), or refraining from seeking necessary health care due to shortage of funds (27). As such, there are multiple processes which may be relevant for leveraging between middle groups of economic and gender intersections in Sweden, and which thereby can act as pathways of embodiment upholding mental health inequalities.…”

Healthcare professional experiences with patients who participate in multimodal pain rehabilitation in primary care – a qualitative study

“…In a study by Hammarstrom et al [26], low-educated women were offered MMR less often by specialists. This was not reported in our study, but in the future, rehabilitation team members as well as rehabilitation actors on organizational levels (e.g., managers policy makers) must be more aware of how the intersection of gender, ethnicity, social class, and sexuality contribute to how patient needs are viewed and who is offered rehabilitation.…”