Skip Navigation Archive: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Archive: Agency for Healthcare Research Quality www.ahrq.gov
Archival print banner

This information is for reference purposes only. It was current when produced and may now be outdated. Archive material is no longer maintained, and some links may not work. Persons with disabilities having difficulty accessing this information should contact us at: https://info.ahrq.gov. Let us know the nature of the problem, the Web address of what you want, and your contact information.

Please go to www.ahrq.gov for current information.

National Healthcare Disparities Report, 2013

Highlights: Text Descriptions

Figure H.1. Average proportion of recommended care received across a panel of quality of care measures, 2005-2010

  2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Percent 66.4 68.3 69.4 69.3 69.9 69.8

Return to Document

Figure H.2. Number and proportion of all quality measures that are improving, not changing, or worsening, overall and for select populations

  Improving No Change Worsening
Total (n=168) 100 57 11
Hispanic (n=168) 98 60 10
Black (n=168) 96 61 11
Asian (n=123) 70 49 4
Poor (n=95) 51 37 7
AI/AN (n=88) 37 48 3
Neither Activity Limitation (n=26) 16 8 2
Basic Activity Limitations (n=25) 9 14 2
Complex Activity Limitations (n=24) 5 17 2

Key: AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; n = number of measures.
Improving = Quality is going in a positive direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.
No Change = Quality is not changing or is changing at an average annual rate less than or equal to 1% per year.
Worsening = Quality is going in a negative direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.
Note: For the vast majority of measures, trend data are available from 2000-2002 to 2010-2011. Basic activity limitations include problems with mobility, self-care, domestic life, or activities that depend on sensory functioning. Complex activity limitations include limitations experienced in work or in community, social, and civic life.

Return to Document

Figure H.3. Number and proportion of measures that are improving, not changing, or worsening, by setting of care

  Improving No Change Worsening
Hospital (n=39) 29 9 1
Home Health & Hospice (n=15) 9 6 NA
Nursing Home (n=19) 11 7 1
Ambulatory (n=86) 45 34 7

Key: n = number of measures.
Improving = Quality is going in a positive direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.
No Change = Quality is not changing or is changing at an average annual rate less than or equal to 1% per year.
Worsening = Quality is going in a negative direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.
Note: For the vast majority of measures, trend data are available from 2000-2002 to 2010-2011.

Return to Document

Figure H.4a. Quality of care, by setting and state, quality of ambulatory care

Lowest Quality Quartile Second Quartile Third Quartile Highest Quality Quartile
Arkansas Alabama Arizona Colorado
Georgia Alaska California Connecticut
Idaho Florida Hawaii Delaware
Kentucky Maryland Kansas Iowa
Illinois Montana Michigan Maine
Indiana Nevada Nebraska Massachusetts
Louisiana New Mexico New Jersey Minnesota
Mississippi North Carolina New York New Hampshire
Missouri Oklahoma Oregon North Dakota
Ohio Pennsylvania Rhode Island Utah
South Carolina Tennessee South Dakota Vermont
Texas Wyoming Virginia Washington
West Virginia NA NA Wisconsin

Return to Document

Figure H.4b. Quality of care, by setting and state, quality of hospital care

Lowest Quality Quartile Second Quartile Third Quartile Highest Quality Quartile
Arizona Alabama Colorado Idaho
Arkansas Alaska Florida Indiana
Hawaii California Georgia Iowa
Kentucky Connecticut Illinois Maine
Louisiana Delaware Nebraska Massachusetts
Maryland Kansas New Jersey Michigan
Mississippi Missouri Oregon Minnesota
New Mexico Montana Pennsylvania New Hampshire
New York Nevada South Dakota North Carolina
Oklahoma North Dakota Tennessee Ohio
West Virgina Rhode Island Texas South Carolina
Wyoming Washington Vermont Utah
NA NA Virginia Wisconsin

Return to Document

Figure H.4c. Quality of care, by setting and state, quality of home health and hospice care

Lowest Quality Quartile Second Quartile Third Quartile Highest Quality Quartile
Alaska California Alabama Delaware
Arkansas Colorado Arizona Kansas
Connecticut Florida Georgia Michigan
Hawaii Idaho Illinois Missouri
Kentucky Iowa Indiana Nevada
Minnesota Louisiana Maine New Jersey
New Mexico Mississippi Maryland North Carolina
New York Nebraska Massachusetts North Dakota
Ohio South Dakota Montana Pennsylvania
Oklahoma Tennessee New Hampshire Rhode Island
Oregon West Virginia Vermont South Carolina
Texas Wyoming Wisconsin Utah
Washington NA NA Virginia

Return to Document

Figure H.4d. Quality of care, by setting and state, quality of nursing home care

Lowest Quality Quartile Second Quartile Third Quartile Highest Quality Quartile
California Arizona Alaska Alabama
Florida Colorado Connecticut Arkansas
Illinois Idaho Delaware Hawaii
Louisiana Indiana Georgia Iowa
Maine Kentucky Kansas Massachusetts
Maryland Montana Mississippi Minnesota
Michigan New Mexico New Hampshire Missouri
Nevada North Carolina North Dakota Nebraska
Oregon Ohio Oklahoma New Jersey
Pennsylvania Texas Rhode Island New York
Virginia Utah Tennessee South Carolina
Washington Vermont Wyoming South Dakota
West Virginia NA NA Wisconsin

Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2012 State Snapshots.
Note: States are divided into quartiles based on health care score for each setting of care.

Return to Document

Figure H.5. Number and proportion of all access measures that are improving, not changing, or worsening, overall and for select populations

  Improving No Change Worsening
Total (n=15) 1 9 5
AI/AN (n=11) NA 8 3
Black (n=15) 1 10 4
Asian (n=13) 2 8 3
Poor (n=15) 5 7 3
Hispanic (n=15) 4 9 2
Basic Activity Limitation (n=14) 3 6 5
No Activity Limitation (n=15) 1 9 5
Complex Activity Limitation (n=15) 2 9 4

Key: AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; n = number of measures.
Improving = Access is going in a positive direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.
No Change = Access is not changing or is changing at an average annual rate less than or equal to 1% per year.
Worsening = Access is going in a negative direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.
Note: For the vast majority of measures, trend data are available from 2000-2002 to 2010-2011. Basic activity limitations include problems with mobility, self-care, domestic life, or activities that depend on sensory functioning. Complex activity limitations include limitations experienced in work or in community, social, and civic life.

Return to Document

Figure H.6. Average proportion of people across a panel of access to care measures reporting barriers to care, by race/ethnicity and family income, 2002-2011

  2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Total 24.1% 24.2% 24.3% 24.7% 25.2% 25.2% 25.4% 26.3% 26.4% 26.1%
Hispanic 35.4% 35.3% 35.6% 36.2% 35.5% 35.3% 35.9% 36.9% 35.8% 35.2%
Black 27.3% 28.2% 28.1% 28.7% 28.6% 28.0% 28.8% 29.6% 30.2% 29.5%
White 21.4% 21.5% 21.5% 21.7% 22.5% 22.6% 22.7% 23.5% 23.6% 23.2%
High Income 16.1% 16.0% 15.6% 16.3% 16.7% 16.5% 17.1% 16.7% 17.3% 16.6%
Middle Income 22.7% 22.5% 23.4% 23.5% 24.3% 24.9% 24.2% 25.5% 24.7% 25.1%
Low Income 32.0% 32.5% 32.0% 32.8% 33.3% 33.4% 33.7% 34.3% 35.0% 34.1%
Poor 36.6% 36.6% 37.1% 37.4% 37.1% 37.6% 38.4% 39.1% 38.1% 37.6%

Note: White and Black are non-Hispanic; Hispanic includes all races.

Return to Document

Figure H.7. Number and proportion of all quality measures for which members of selected groups experienced better, same, or worse quality of care compared with reference group

  Better Same Worse
Poor vs. High Income (n=107) 6 35 68
Black vs. White (n=196) 28 86 82
Hispanic vs. White (n=184) 37 75 72
AI/AN vs. White (n=114) 16 61 37
Asian vs. White (n=171) 48 81 42
Complex vs. No Activity Limitation (n=37) 9 15 13
Basic vs. No Activity Limitation (n=37) 10 15 12

Key: AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; NHW = non-Hispanic White; n = number of measures.
Better = Population received better quality of care than reference group.
Same = Population and reference group received about the same quality of care.
Worse = Population received worse quality of care than reference group.
Note: For each measure, the most recent data available to our team were analyzed; for the majority of measures, this represents data from 2010 and 2011. Basic activity limitations include problems with mobility, self-care, domestic life, or activities that depend on sensory functioning. Complex activity limitations include limitations experienced in work or in community, social, and civic life.

Return to Document

Figure H.8. Number and proportion of all access measures for which members of selected groups experienced better, same, or worse access to care compared with reference group

  Better Same Worse
Poor vs. High Income (n=21) NA 1 20
Hispanic vs. White (n=21) 4 4 13
AI/AN vs. White (n=14) NA 8 6
Black vs. White (n=21) 2 12 7
Asian vs. White (n=20) 4 11 5
Complex vs. No Activity Limitation (n=19) 4 3 12
Basic vs. No Activity Limitation (n=18) 4 3 11

Key: AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; n = number of measures.
Better = Population had better access to care than reference group.
Same = Population and reference group had about the same access to care.
Worse = Population had worse access to care than reference group.
Note: For each measure, the most recent data available to our team were analyzed; for the majority of measures, this represents data from 2010 and 2011. Basic activity limitations include problems with mobility, self-care, domestic life, or activities that depend on sensory functioning. Complex activity limitations include limitations experienced in work or in community, social, and civic life.

Return to Document

Figure H.9. Number and proportion of all quality measures for which disparities related to race, ethnicity, income, and activity limitation are improving, not changing, or worsening

  Worsening No Change Improving
Black vs. White (n=168) 12 125 31
Hispanic vs. White (n=158) 19 110 29
Poor vs. High Income (n=93) 6 70 17
Asian vs. White (n=123) 14 89 20
AI/AN vs. White (n=88) 15 64 9
Complex vs. No Activity Limitation (n=24) 3 20 1
Basic vs. No Activity Limitation (n=25) 1 23 1

Key: AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; n = number of measures.
Improving = Disparity is getting smaller at a rate greater than 1% per year.
No Change = Disparity is not changing or is changing at a rate less than or equal to 1% per year.
Worsening = Disparity is getting larger at a rate greater than 1% per year.
Note: For the vast majority of measures, trend data are available from 2000-2002 to 2010-2011. Basic activity limitations include problems with mobility, self-care, domestic life, or activities that depend on sensory functioning. Complex activity limitations include limitations experienced in work or in community, social, and civic life.

Return to Document

Figure H.10. Number and proportion of all access measures for which disparities related to race, ethnicity, income, and activity limitation are improving, not changing, or worsening

  Worsening No Change Improving
Poor vs. High Income (n=14) 1 10 3
Hispanic vs. White (n=15) 1 11 3
Asian vs. White (n=12) NA 10 2
Black vs. White (n=14) NA 13 1
AI/AN vs. White (n=10) NA 10 NA
Basic vs. No Activity Limitation (n=15) 2 9 4
Complex vs. No Activity Limitation (n=15) 1 12 2

Key: AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; n = number of measures.
Improving = Disparity is getting smaller at a rate greater than 1% per year.
No Change = Disparity is not changing or is changing at a rate less than or equal to 1% per year.
Worsening = Disparity is getting larger at a rate greater than 1% per year.
Note: For the vast majority of measures, trend data are available from 2000-2002 to 2010-2011. Basic activity limitations include problems with mobility, self-care, domestic life, or activities that depend on sensory functioning. Complex activity limitations include limitations experienced in work or in community, social, and civic life.

Return to Document

Figure H.11. Percentage of quality measures in the 2006, 2011, 2012, and 2013 reports for which a reliable estimate could not be generated

Year Asian NHOPI AI/AN Hispanic Poor
2006 Reports 33% 93% 47% 12% 60%
2011 Reports 19% 85% 42% 7% 46%
2012 Reports 14% 82% 42% 7% 45%
2013 Reports 12% 75% 40% 6% 40%

Key: NHOPI = Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native.
 

Return to Document

Page last reviewed May 2014
Page originally created May 2014
Internet Citation: Highlights: Text Descriptions. Content last reviewed May 2014. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. https://archive.ahrq.gov/research/findings/nhqrdr/nhdr13/highlights-txt.html

 

The information on this page is archived and provided for reference purposes only.

 

AHRQ Advancing Excellence in Health Care