Table 3.

Multivariate Associations with Women's Preventive Care Outcomes^a: Impact of Specific Types of CAM Care (Boldface Indicates Associations with p < 0.05)

	Chlamydia screeningb		Breast cancer screeningc		Cervical cancer screeningd
	OR	p	OR	p	OR	p
Medical care
Conventional care	2.389	0.000	154.730	0.000	19.934	0.000
Naturopathy	0.830	0.032	0.736	0.000	1.351	0.000
Acupuncture	0.920	0.509	1.028	0.597	1.161	0.000
Massage	1.040	0.569	1.196	0.000	1.324	0.000
Chiropractic	0.866	0.000	1.035	0.118	1.066	0.000
Measurement yeare	1.018	0.056	0.973	0.000	1.030	0.000
Geographic area
% Racial/ethnic minorityf	1.003	0.007	0.998	0.001	1.002	0.003
Median family incomef,g	0.995	0.000	1.002	0.072	1.006	0.000
Median adult educationf,h	0.986	0.260	1.098	0.000	1.126	0.000
Extent rurali	0.970	0.000	0.997	0.603	0.976	0.000
Enrollee age	0.986	0.000	1.020	0.000	0.980	0.000
Morbidity burdenj	1.455	0.000	1.467	0.000	1.448	0.000
Insurance product
Fee for service	1.000	–	1.000	–	1.000	–
Point-of-service	1.334	0.000	1.047	0.225	1.124	0.000
Preferred provider organization	1.190	0.000	1.020	0.594	0.992	0.750
Health maintenance organization	1.277	0.000	1.173	0.006	1.064	0.132

^aAssociations were tested using logistic regression models with standard errors corrected for clustering of years within enrollees. The three models, one for each of the preventive care outcomes, included all predictors shown on the rows, with an additional adjustment for insurance company. The p value testing the association between each covariate and outcome was based on a Z-score.

^bFor each measurement year, the sample included women with continuous coverage under a single identifiable insurance product for the measurement year, aged 16–25 years in the measurement year, with one or more claims for either conventional or CAM care during the measurement year, and with claims-based evidence of sexual activity by the end of the measurement year. The analysis sample included 55,943 woman-year records with data on all variables.

^cFor each measurement year, the sample included women with continuous coverage for both the measurement year and the prior year, who were covered by a single identifiable insurance product during the measurement year, aged 52–64 years in the measurement year, with one or more claims for either conventional or CAM care during at least 1 of the 2 years, and with no claims-based evidence of a bilateral mastectomy by the end of the measurement year. The analysis sample included 129,597 woman-year records with data on all variables.

^dFor each measurement year, the sample included women with continuous coverage for the entire period spanning the measurement year and the 2 prior years, who were covered by a single identifiable insurance product during the measurement year, aged 21–64 years in the measurement year, with one or more claims for either conventional or CAM care during at least 1 of the 3 years, and with no claims evidence of a hysterectomy by the end of the measurement year. The analysis sample included 210,408 woman-year records with data on all variables.

^eMeasurement year was computed as a deviation from the earliest measurement year for the outcome (2000 for Chlamydia screening, 2001 for breast cancer screening, and 2002 for cervical cancer screening).

^fBased on the 2000 U.S. census for the geographic area comprising the first three digits of the enrollee's ZIP code of residence.

^gMedian family income was computed in $1000 increments.

^hMedian education level was modeled as an ordinal predictor: 1, high school graduate; 2, less than 1 year college; 3, 1+ years college with no degree; 4, associate's degree; 5, baccalaureate degree; 6, postbaccalaureate degree.

ⁱExtent rural was modeled as an ordinal predictor: 1, metropolitan core; 2, metropolitan high commuting area; 3, metropolitan low commuting area; 4, micropolitan core; 5, micropolitan high commuting area; 6, micropolitan low commuting area; 7, small town core; 8, small town high commuting area; 9, small town low commuting area; 10, rural.

^jBased on the Johns Hopkins ACG System's resource utilization band (RUB): 0, nonuser; 1, healthy user; 2, low morbidity; 3, moderate; 4, high; 5, very high.