Sociodemographic and Geographic Factors Associated With Non-Obstetrical Ultrasound Imaging Utilization: A Population-Based Study

• Published in: Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal
• Main Authors: Adams, Scott J., Yao, Shenzhen, Mondal, Prosanta, Lim, Hyun, Mendez, Ivar, Babyn, Paul
• Other Authors: Saskatchewan Health Research Foundation
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: SAGE Publications 2021
• Subjects: Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging; General Medicine; Canada; First Nations
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08465371211041148; http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/08465371211041148; http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full-xml/10.1177/08465371211041148

Objective: Ultrasound is one of the most commonly used imaging modalities, though some populations face barriers in accessing ultrasound services, potentially resulting in disparities in utilization. The objective of this study was to assess the association between sociodemographic and geographic factors and non-obstetrical ultrasound utilization in the province of Saskatchewan, Canada. Methods: All non-obstetrical ultrasound exams performed from 2014 to 2018 in Saskatchewan, Canada were retrospectively identified from province-wide databases. Univariate and multivariate Poisson regression analyses were performed to assess the association between ultrasound utilization and sex, age, First Nations status, Charlson Comorbidity Index, urban vs. rural residence, geographic remoteness, and neighborhood income. Results: A total of 1,324,846 individuals (5,857,044 person-years) were included in the analysis. Female sex (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR], 2.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.19-2.22), age (aIRR, 4.97; 95% CI, 4.90-5.05 for ≥57 years vs. <11 years), comorbidities (aIRR, 4.36 for Charlson Comorbidity Index >10 vs. 0; 95% CI, 3.78-5.03), and higher neighborhood income (aIRR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.05 for highest vs. lowest quintile) were associated with higher rates of ultrasound utilization. Individuals who were status First Nations (aIRR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.90-0.92) or resided in geographically remote areas (aIRR, 0.87 for most vs. least remote; 95% CI, 0.83-0.91) had lower rates of ultrasound utilization. Individuals who lived in a rural area also had lower rates of ultrasound utilization (aIRR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92-0.94). Conclusion: Substantial disparities exist in non-obstetrical ultrasound utilization among individuals in low-income neighborhoods, status First Nations individuals, and individuals in rural and remote communities.