Keywords
racial concordance - obstetrics - patient and provider - discordant dyads
Significant racial and ethnic disparities in maternal morbidity and mortality persist
in the United States. Black pregnant people are three to four times more likely to
die from pregnancy-related causes than White women.[1] Hispanics/Latinx pregnant people (herein referred to as Hispanics) have been shown
to have higher rates of severe maternal morbidity and are more likely to die from
hypertensive diseases in pregnancy.[2]
[3]
The various dimensions of structural racism are a foundational cause of health disparities,
impacting health at various levels.[4] One specific area where structural racism has an appreciable effect is at the level
of the patient–provider encounter.[5]
[6] Physician-held implicit biases[7] and negative racial stereotypes influence attitudes toward and expectations of patients
and, most, notably providers' diagnostic and treatment decisions.[8] A reduction in bias with cultural and linguistic congruency in racially and ethnically
concordant patient–physician dyads may increase trust, the basis of quality care.
Currently, research into the effect of racial concordance on experiences and outcomes
of birthing mothers is lacking. Given trends in the role of racial concordance in
various fields and the accentuation of the racial concordance benefit in complex medical
cases,[9]
[10] we seek to explore the effect of racial and ethnic concordance on the experiences
of birthing people undergoing obstetrical procedures in the second stage of labor
(e.g., operative vaginal delivery or intrapartum cesarean delivery). The rationale
for studying individuals undergoing operative interventions in the second stage is
that these individuals required unplanned, time-sensitive counseling with direct impacts
on maternal and, potentially, neonatal health. Thus, optimizing care in this setting
requires high-quality communication skills from a clinician and trust from the patient.
We hypothesize that individuals cared for by providers belonging to their perceived
same racial group (i.e., racial concordance between individual and their obstetric
provider) will report higher levels of satisfaction in their care compared with racially
discordant counterparts.
Materials and Methods
This is a prospective observational cohort of newly postpartum people who underwent
operative vaginal delivery or cesarean delivery in the second stage of labor at Northwestern
Memorial Hospital in Chicago, IL. This hospital is a quaternary care center in which
approximately 12,000 individuals give birth each year, including a socioeconomically
and racially diverse patient population. Over 150 obstetric providers participate
in labor and delivery care, including obstetrics and gynecology residents, maternal-fetal
medicine fellows, obstetrics and gynecology specialty faculty, maternal-fetal medicine
subspecialty faculty, and certified nurse midwives. When patients require operative
interventions in the second stage of labor, any of these individuals may be the primary
person responsible for counseling and consenting for intervention, although attending
physicians are involved in the care of all patients.
All postpartum individuals aged ≥18 years old who spoke English or Spanish and who
underwent an operative vaginal delivery or cesarean section in the second stage were
eligible for participation in the study. Each participant was identified by trained
research assistants during the postpartum hospitalization. Patients who did not speak
English were approached by a certified bilingual research assistant, and all study
protocols were conducted in the participant's language of choice. Biomedical and birth
outcome data were abstracted from the electronic medical record. Participants completed
a survey collecting sociodemographic information, as well as self-perceived race or
ethnicity. As part of the survey, participant were asked to identify their primary
obstetrician during the intrapartum period and to assign the individual a particular
race or ethnicity. Given that our study was conducted in an academic center, resident
and fellow physicians may play an equal or even greater role in intrapartum counseling.
Patients may not be aware of the academic hierarchy, and thus, we felt that it was
important not to direct participants to select their attending obstetrician. Rather,
they were instructed to complete the survey based on who they felt provided the bulk
of their intrapartum counseling, regardless of training level or practice type.
Participants were also administered the modified Interpersonal Processes of Care (IPC)
survey, a 29-item instrument that assesses several subdomains of communication, patient-centered
decision-making, and interpersonal style.[11] It has been validated in both English and Spanish, various racial groups and primarily
primary care (i.e., nonobstetric) settings to assess factors that contribute to health
outcomes and examine the impact of quality improvement endeavors. The IPC survey is
scored “so that higher scores indicate higher frequency of the labeled interpersonal
process, which means that higher scores sometimes indicate better processes (e.g.,
decided together) and sometimes indicate worse processes (e.g., lack of clarity”[11]; [Supplementary Appendix A] [available in the online version]). Subdomains include those of communication (hurried
communication, elicited concerns, explained results), decision-making (patient-centered
decision-making), and interpersonal style (compassionate, respectful, discriminated,
and disrespectful nursing staff).[11]
The exposure was participant-assigned racial concordance or discordance with their
obstetrical provider (i.e., participant–physician dyad). The primary outcome was the
median IPC subscore focused on participant assessment of discrimination due to race
or ethnicity. Secondary outcomes were all median IPC domain subscores. Assuming an
α of 0.05 and 80% power, we estimated a need for 74 persons (37 in each group) to
detect a difference of 0.3 points on the IPC survey between racially concordant versus
discordant groups. Bivariable analyses were performed using chi-square or Fisher's
exact test, for categorical variables, and t-test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test, for continuous variables. Statistical significance
was set at p<0.05. All data were analyzed in R (version 3.6.2). IRB approval was obtained from
Northwestern University (STU00212861).
Results
In total, 168 patients were approached, 107 (63.6%) agreed to participate, and 87
(81.3%) completed the survey (n=49 racially discordant, n=38 concordant). The final sample included 87 individuals, of which 49 were in racially
discordant dyads and 38 were in racially concordant dyads.
When compared with racially discordant dyads, participants in racially concordant
dyads were more likely to identify as White (76.3 vs. 11.4%, p ≤ 0.001), be older (p=0.017), have completed a higher degree of education (p=0.03), and have a higher household income (p=0.002; [Table 1]). Intrapartum characteristics, including mode of delivery, were not significantly
different between groups ([Table 2]).
Table 1
Sociodemographic characteristics
Variable
|
Concordant (n=38)
|
Discordant (n=49)
|
p-Value
|
Age (y)
|
18–24
|
1 (2.6)
|
12 (24.5)
|
0.017
|
25–29
|
8 (21.1)
|
10 (20.4)
|
30–35
|
22 (57.9)
|
17 (34.7)
|
36–40
|
7 (18.4)
|
8 (16.3)
|
40 or older
|
0 (0.0)
|
2 (4.1)
|
Race/ethnicity
|
White
|
29 (76.3)
|
5 (11.4)
|
<0.001
|
Black
|
5 (13.2)
|
10 (22.7)
|
LatinX
|
3 (7.9)
|
20 (45.5)
|
Asian
|
1 (2.6)
|
7 (15.9)
|
Pacific Islander
|
0 (0.0)
|
2 (4.5)
|
Participant primary language
|
English
|
35 (97.2)
|
40 (83.3)
|
0.071
|
Spanish
|
1 (2.8)
|
8 (16.7)
|
Education
|
High school or less
|
4 (10.5)
|
10 (20.4)
|
0.03
|
Some college
|
4 (10.5)
|
14 (28.6)
|
College or advanced degree
|
30 (78.9)
|
25 (51.0)
|
Income ($)
|
<25,000
|
2 (5.3)
|
11 (22.4)
|
0.002
|
25,001–40,000
|
7 (18.4)
|
9 (18.4)
|
40,001–75,000
|
2 (5.3)
|
12 (24.5)
|
≥75,000 or more
|
27 (71.1)
|
17 (34.7)
|
Insurance type
|
Private payor
|
32 (84.2)
|
27 (55.1)
|
0.005
|
Government payor
|
6 (15.8)
|
22 (44.9)
|
Provider race/ethnicity
|
White
|
29 (78.4)
|
39 (83.0)
|
0.273
|
Black
|
5 (13.5)
|
4 (8.5)
|
LatinX
|
2 (5.4)
|
0 (0.0)
|
Asian
|
1 (2.7)
|
4 (8.5)
|
Language provider used
|
English
|
38 (100.0)
|
47 (95.9)
|
0.502
|
Spanish
|
0 (0.0)
|
2 (4.1)
|
Interpreter used by provider (if applicable)
|
0 (0.0)
|
2 (4.1)
|
0.502
|
Participant language preference
|
English
|
37 (97.4)
|
46 (93.9)
|
0.629
|
Spanish
|
1 (2.6)
|
3 (6.1)
|
Note: Data displayed as n (%).
Table 2
Clinical characteristics
Variable
|
Concordant (n=38)
|
Discordant (n=49)
|
p-Value
|
BMI (kg/m2)
|
18.5–25
|
2 (5.3)
|
3 (6.1)
|
0.255
|
25–30
|
18 (47.4)
|
14 (28.6)
|
30–35
|
11 (28.9)
|
13 (26.5)
|
35–40
|
5 (13.2)
|
11 (22.4)
|
40+
|
2 (5.3)
|
8 (16.3)
|
Nulliparous
|
33 (86.8)
|
32 (65.3)
|
0.026
|
Mode of delivery
|
Cesarean delivery
|
25 (65.8)
|
32 (65.3)
|
1.0
|
Operative
|
13 (34.2)
|
17 (34.7)
|
Primary cesarean delivery
|
24 (96.0)
|
27 (84.4)
|
0.215
|
Mode of operative delivery
|
Forceps
|
12 (92.3)
|
14 (82.4)
|
0.613
|
Vacuum
|
1 (7.7)
|
3 (17.6)
|
|
Failed operative delivery
|
0 (0.0)
|
4 (13.3)
|
0.114
|
Use of neuraxial anesthesia
|
37 (97.4)
|
48 (98.0)
|
1.000
|
Third or fourth degree laceration
|
4 (30.8)
|
5 (29.4)
|
1.0
|
Surgical complications[a]
|
5 (13.2)
|
13 (26.5)
|
0.183
|
Abbreviation: BMI, body mass index.
Note: Data presented as n (%).
a Exploratory laparotomy, postpartum hemorrhage (defined as estimated blood loss>1L)[16], emergent hysterectomy, and/or visceral injury at time of laparotomy.
No significant difference was noted between racially concordant and discordant dyads
in the IPC survey domains of communication, shared decision-making, interpersonal
style (compassion and respect), or discrimination ([Table 3]). Importantly, participants reported a generally a favorable perception toward lack
of discrimination, as well as communication, patient-centered decision-making, and
interpersonal style. In the secondary analysis comparing participants by race/ethnicity,
there was no statistical significance in IPC survey results between groups ([Table 4]).
Table 3
IPC survey results, stratified by racial concordance
Variable
|
Concordant (n=38)
|
Discordant (n=49)
|
p
-Value
|
Median score [IQR]
|
Median score [IQR]
|
Discriminated
|
Discriminated due to race/ethnicity[a]
|
4.00 [4.00, 4.00]
|
4.00 [4.00, 5.00]
|
0.551
|
Disrespectful nursing staff[a]
|
4.00 [4.00, 4.00]
|
4.00 [4.00, 4.00]
|
0.829
|
Communication
|
Hurried communication—lack of clarity[a]
|
6.00 [5.00, 8.00]
|
7.00 [5.00, 9.00]
|
0.527
|
Elicited concerns, responded[b]
|
15.00 [13.00, 15.00]
|
15.00 [13.00, 15.00]
|
0.955
|
Explained results, medications[b]
|
19.00 [17.00, 20.00]
|
18.00 [15.00, 20.00]
|
0.152
|
Decision-making
|
Patient-centered decision-making—decided together[b]
|
17.00 [14.00, 20.00]
|
17.00 [14.00, 20.00]
|
0.649
|
Interpersonal style
|
Compassionate, respectful[b]
|
25.00 [23.00, 25.00]
|
25.00 [22.00, 25.00]
|
0.631
|
Abbreviations: IPC, Interpersonal Processes of Care; IQR, interquartile range.
Notes: For discriminated subdomain: discriminated due to race/ethnicity.
For communication subdomain: hurried communication scores range from 5 to 25, elicited
concerns, responded scores range from 3 to 14, and explained results, medications
scores range from 4 to 20.
For decision-making subdomain, scores range from 4 to 20.
For Interpersonal Style subdomain, scores range from 5 to 25.
a Higher score indicates a less favorable perception of the interpersonal care process.
b Higher score indicates a more favorable perception of the interpersonal care process.
Table 4
IPC survey results, stratified by postpartum participant race/ethnicity
Variable
|
Black
|
LatinX
|
White
|
p
-Value
|
Median score [IQR]
|
Median score [IQR]
|
Median score [IQR]
|
Discriminated
|
Discriminated due to race/ethnicity[a]
|
4.00 [4.00, 5.00]
|
4.00 [4.00, 4.00]
|
4.00 [4.00, 5.00]
|
0.216
|
Disrespectful nursing staff[a]
|
4.00 [4.00, 4.00]
|
4.00 [4.00, 4.00]
|
4.00 [4.00, 4.00]
|
0.576
|
Communication
|
Hurried communication—lack of clarity[a]
|
7.00 [5.00, 8.00]
|
7.50 [5.75, 9.25]
|
6.00 [5.00, 8.00]
|
0.249
|
Elicited concerns, responded[b]
|
15.00 [11.00, 15.00]
|
15.00 [13.75, 15.00]
|
14.00 [13.00, 15.00]
|
0.774
|
Explained results, medications[b]
|
19.00 [17.00, 20.00]
|
18.00 [15.50, 20.00]
|
18.50 [16.00, 20.00]
|
0.806
|
Decision-making
|
Patient-centered decision-making—decided together[b]
|
17.00 [14.00, 19.00]
|
17.50 [12.50, 20.00]
|
17.00 [14.00, 20.00]
|
0.774
|
Interpersonal style
|
Compassionate, respectful[b]
|
25.00 [23.00, 25.00]
|
25.00 [22.50, 25.00]
|
25.00 [23.00, 25.00]
|
0.696
|
Abbreviations: IPC, Interpersonal Processes of Care; IQR, interquartile range.
Notes: For discriminated subdomain, scores range from 4 to 20.
For communication subdomain: hurried communication scores range from 5 to 25, elicited
concerns, responded scores range from 3 to 14, explained results, medications scores
range from 4 to 20.
For decision-making subdomain, scores range from 4 to 20.
For Interpersonal Style subdomain, scores range from 5 to 25.
a Higher score indicates a less favorable perception of the interpersonal care process.
b Higher score indicates a more favorable perception of the interpersonal care process.
Discussion
We found that older, White, English-speaking persons with higher degrees of education
and income were more likely to be racially concordant with their providers. In contrast
to our hypothesis, we identified no meaningful differences in patient-reported IPC
by racial concordance or self-reported race/ethnicity.
Previous data, mostly derived from the nonobstetric literature, emphasize the role
of racial concordance in different health outcomes. White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian
patients who were racially/ethnically concordant with their provider reported greater
satisfaction with their physician compared with discordant groups.[12] Racial and ethnic concordance was associated with an increased likelihood of seeking
preventive care,[13] using a higher volume of health services,[12] and a lower likelihood of postponing or delaying care in Black and Hispanic patients.[14] Within the realm of obstetrics, Fryer et al demonstrate that under the care of Black
physicians, the mortality rate for Black newborns is significantly lower as compared
with those cared for by White physicians.[10]
Strengths and Limitations
Strengths and Limitations
A major strength of the study is the inclusion of patients who underwent operative
vaginal deliveries or cesarean deliveries conducted in the second stage. This specific
scenario was chosen because these are bounded procedures that require more in-depth
counseling in a stressful period, making the role of communication quality much more
critical than in less stressful health care interactions. Importantly, due to the
presence of one or two clinicians during these scenarios and the close proximity of
study participation to the clinical events, provider communication could be assessed
more specifically, thereby reducing recall bias or confusion regarding counseling
by multiple providers.
This study was not without limitations. Despite planned oversampling of Black and
LatinX patients, our team was still unable to obtain necessary sample sizes to fully
explore these concordant groups due to disproportionately fewer minority providers.
Therefore, our study is likely underpowered to detect a difference in the primary
outcome. An additional limitation is that the IPC survey has not been validated in
obstetrics and, thus, may not capture key obstetric processes of care. Newly developed
metrics for obstetrical quality of care aimed at identifying and remediating obstetric
racism, such as the Patient Reported Experience Measure of OBstetric racism (PREM-OB)
Scale, emphasize the role of communication[15] but have yet to be tested within the clinical scenario in which our study was conducted—thus
limiting our study's generalizability and external validity. Finally, as with any
survey-based study, residual recall and selection biases limit the generalizability
of our findings.
Conclusion
The racial disparities in obstetrics warrant further examination of patient–provider
factors that may contribute to poor outcomes, as well as those that may limit or prevent
further discrepancies in morbidity and mortality among different racial/ethnic groups.
Studies performed in nonobstetric fields have demonstrated that racial concordance
between patients and providers has a positive impact on patient adherence, trust,
and use of health care services. While our study did not detect differences in perceptions
of IPC between racially concordant and discordant groups, further research examining
racial concordance in obstetrics is essential. As future studies examine the role
of racial concordance in obstetrics, the disparities in the health care provider workforce
remain a challenge.