Is there equity of patient health outcomes across models of general practice in Aotearoa New Zealand? A national cross-sectional study

BackgroundPrimary care in Aotearoa New Zealand is largely delivered by general practices, heavily subsidised by government. Te Tiriti o Waitangi (1840) guarantees equal health outcomes for Maori and non-Maori, but differences are stark and longstanding. Seven models of primary care have evolved. We hypothesised that patient health outcomes would differ between models of care; and that Maori, Pacific peoples and those living in material deprivation would have poorer outcomes from primary care.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study of patient-level data from national datasets and practices, at 30 September 2018, using multilevel mixed effects regression analyses (patients clustered within practices). Primary outcomes, considered to be measures of unmet need for primary care, were polypharmacy (>= 65 years), HbA1c testing in adults with diabetes, childhood immunisations (6 months), ambulatory sensitive hospitalisations (0-14, 45-64 years) and emergency department attendances.Explanatory variables adjusted for patient and practice characteristics. Equity, by model of care, ethnicity and deprivation, was assumed if they showed no significant association with patient outcomes.Patient characteristics included: age, ethnicity, deprivation, multi-morbidity, first specialist assessments and practice continuity. Practice characteristics included: size, funding and doctor continuity. Clinical input (consultations and time with nurses and doctors) was considered a measure of practice response.ResultsThe study included 924 general practices with 4,491,964 enrolled patients. Traditional practices enrolled 73% of the population, but, on average, the proportion of Maori, Pacific and people living with material deprivation was low in any one Traditional practice. Patients with high health needs disproportionately enrolled in Maori, Pacific and Trust/NGO practices.There were multiple associations between models of care and patient health outcomes in fully adjusted regressions. No one model of care out-performed others across all outcomes. Patients with higher health need received more clinical input but this was insufficient to achieve equity in all outcomes. Being a Maori or Pacific patient, or living in material deprivation, across models of care, remained associated with poorer outcomes.ConclusionsModel-level associations with poor patient outcomes suggest inequity in measures that might be used to target investment in primary care.