The study is a two-part study, phase one is to better understand how primary care providers versus specialty providers lack of access to care for people with disabilities predicts increased costs of accessibility. Phase two pilot study’s purpose was to understand how the increased costs of inaccessibility for people with disabilities is perceived from the physicians’ and physician extenders’ perspective. People with disabilities have the right to receive the same timely health care from their providers as those without disabilities. In order to bring change and improve accessibility nationwide, transformational leadership is needed to bring cultural change and implementing standards in assessment of physical accessibility as well as penalties for noncompliance. In phase one, a descriptive comparative quantitative with the total provider population using the tool called the physical accessibility review survey was collected by Health Net and L.A. Care insurance companies in California. The total sample sized was (n = 2578), the primary care physicians’ group sample was (n = 1818) the critical elements where the M = 17.9136 (SD 3.53). In comparison the Specialist group sample was (n = 760) in which M = 17.6013 (SD 3.63) demonstrating that there is only a slight difference in provider type accessibility. The t-test found t (2.03), p = 0.043 thus there is statistical significance that primary care physicians’ offices did have better accessibility than specialists’ offices. Limited access was found to be at 2260 provider sites or 87.7% and only 318 or 12.3% of providers sites meet or exceed basic access. The phase two quantitative survey was sent out to 129 physicians and physician extenders. There were 12 participants in the pilot study. The survey found 91.67% of the providers indicated there were not written guidelines on how to manage people with disabilities. Additionally, 58.33% of the providers reported they do not have equipment available to assist a patient with physical disabilities and 55% providers felt costs were a barrier. Lastly, 58.33% providers thought that hospital admission and readmission could be reduced with improved accessibility. The implications in the research demonstrate a need to create a national standard of provider site assessment for accessibility and create repercussions for noncompliance through national policy change.
|Commitee:||Sines, Chad, Bennett, John|
|Department:||School of Business and Technology Management|
|School Location:||United States -- California|
|Source:||DAI-B 81/7(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Health care management, Nursing, Public health|
|Keywords:||Accessibility, Disabilities, Disability, Healthcare, Inaccessibility, PARS|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be