2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/211522
Type:
Research Study
Title:
CONCORDANCE BETWEEN THE MSU RURALITY INDEX AND SELF REPORT OF RURALITY
Abstract:
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to describe the concordance between the Montana State University (MSU) Rurality Index and family self-report of rurality. Rationale: The classification of rurality has an influence on allocation of health resources. It also is believed to influence the costs of health care for those with chronic illnesses. Methods: Families of children with chronic pulmonary illnesses were given a structured interview focused on gaps in resources and out of pocket expenses. The interview asked for information about place of residence (rural, suburban, or urban) and the costs associated with caring for their children. Results: 150 families of children completed the interview; 93 self-identified as urban/suburban and 57 self-identified as rural. Rurality related data were sent to the MSU Center for Rural Health and the MSU Rurality Index was calculated. There was a lack of concordance for 35 (23%) of the families when compared to self-report. 8/35 (22%) families reported rural but were classified as urban by the MSU Rurality Index and 27/35 (77%) families reported urban, but classified as rural by the MSU Rurality Index. When families reported they lived in a rural environment, 40% of out of pocket costs were accounted for by transportation. However, when the MSU Rurality Index was used only 32.7% of the out of pocket costs were accounted for by transportation. Loss of wages as a percentage of out of pocket costs did not change between the two methods of indicating rurality, however the actual loss of wages were estimated at $11,247 for families when they self-identified as living in a rural environment compared to $17,203 for families identified as rural according to the MSU Rurality Index. Implications: There are multiple definitions and classifications of rural, suburban or urban. These classifications are used to set policies that affect funding for health, education, and infrastructure, as well as other federal programs. Because the MSU Rurality Index relies heavily on distance to emergency care some individuals are classified as living in a more urban environment when emergency care is available, however, the emergency care is limited to such an extent that it is basically transport to the state trauma center. There is a need for further understanding of rurality and the impact on families with children with chronic illnesses.
Keywords:
Montana State University Rurality Index; Family self repot; Rurality
Repository Posting Date:
20-Feb-2012
Date of Publication:
20-Feb-2012
Other Identifiers:
5358
Sponsors:
Western Institute of Nursing

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typeResearch Studyen_GB
dc.titleCONCORDANCE BETWEEN THE MSU RURALITY INDEX AND SELF REPORT OF RURALITYen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/211522-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The purpose of this paper is to describe the concordance between the Montana State University (MSU) Rurality Index and family self-report of rurality. Rationale: The classification of rurality has an influence on allocation of health resources. It also is believed to influence the costs of health care for those with chronic illnesses. Methods: Families of children with chronic pulmonary illnesses were given a structured interview focused on gaps in resources and out of pocket expenses. The interview asked for information about place of residence (rural, suburban, or urban) and the costs associated with caring for their children. Results: 150 families of children completed the interview; 93 self-identified as urban/suburban and 57 self-identified as rural. Rurality related data were sent to the MSU Center for Rural Health and the MSU Rurality Index was calculated. There was a lack of concordance for 35 (23%) of the families when compared to self-report. 8/35 (22%) families reported rural but were classified as urban by the MSU Rurality Index and 27/35 (77%) families reported urban, but classified as rural by the MSU Rurality Index. When families reported they lived in a rural environment, 40% of out of pocket costs were accounted for by transportation. However, when the MSU Rurality Index was used only 32.7% of the out of pocket costs were accounted for by transportation. Loss of wages as a percentage of out of pocket costs did not change between the two methods of indicating rurality, however the actual loss of wages were estimated at $11,247 for families when they self-identified as living in a rural environment compared to $17,203 for families identified as rural according to the MSU Rurality Index. Implications: There are multiple definitions and classifications of rural, suburban or urban. These classifications are used to set policies that affect funding for health, education, and infrastructure, as well as other federal programs. Because the MSU Rurality Index relies heavily on distance to emergency care some individuals are classified as living in a more urban environment when emergency care is available, however, the emergency care is limited to such an extent that it is basically transport to the state trauma center. There is a need for further understanding of rurality and the impact on families with children with chronic illnesses.en_GB
dc.subjectMontana State University Rurality Indexen_GB
dc.subjectFamily self repoten_GB
dc.subjectRuralityen_GB
dc.date.available2012-02-20T12:00:03Z-
dc.date.issued2012-02-20T12:00:03Z-
dc.date.accessioned2012-02-20T12:00:03Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipWestern Institute of Nursingen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.