Skip to main content

Table 2 Association between utilisation of rehabilitation services (general/ outpatient/ inpatient) and migrant background in 2011

From: Utilisation of rehabilitation services for non-migrant and migrant groups of higher working age in Germany – results of the lidA cohort study

 Model 0Model 1aModel 2bModel 3cReductiond (%)
General rehabilitation services (n=6303/ nevents=808)
 OR (95%-CI)
  Non-EMBRef.Ref.Ref.Ref. 
  G1 EMB0.90 (0.72-1.11)0.86 (0.67-1.10)0.86 (0.67-1.10)0.91 (0.68-1.23)-1.11
  G2 EMB1.06 (0.91-1.22)1.06 (0.92-1.23)1.07 (0.80-1.41)1.05 (0.79-1.39)0.94
 AME
  Non-EMBRef.Ref.Ref.Ref. 
  G1 EMB-0.0122-0.0168-0.0169-0.010414.75
  G2 EMB0.00600.00680.00720.004721.67
R20.0000.0060.0170.057 
Inpatient rehabilitation services (n=6044/ nevents=549) 
 OR (95%-CI)
  Non-EMBRef.Ref.Ref.Ref. 
  G1 EMB1.09 (0.82-1.45)1.04 (0.79-1.37)1.04 (0.78-1.37)1.16 (0.84-1.60)-6.42
  G2 EMB1.12 (0.95-1.33)1.14 (0.84-1.53)1.14 (0.82-1.58)1.10 (0.79-1.54)1.79
 AME
  Non-EMBRef.Ref.Ref.Ref. 
  G1 EMB0.00710.00270.00310.0118-66.20
  G2 EMB0.00960.01040.01040.007521.88
R20.0000.0120.0280.078 
Outpatient rehabilitation services (n=5754/ nevents=259)
 OR (95%-CI)
  Non-EMBRef.Ref.Ref.Ref. 
  G1 EMB0.52 (0.31-0.85)*0.51 (0.30-0.85)*0.50 (0.30-0.84)**0.42 (0.22-0.82)*19.23
  G2 EMB0.92 (0.59-1.44)0.92 (0.56-1.53)0.93 (0.57-1.53)0.91 (0.56-1.501.09
 AME
  Non-EMBRef.Ref.Ref.Ref. 
  G1 EMB-0.0238-0.0292-0.0302-0.0382-60.50
  G2 EMB-0.0035-0.0033-0.0028-0.0037-5.71
R20.0040.0060.0120.023 
  1. OR Odds Ratio, CI confidence interval, Ref. reference, AME Average marginal effect, R2 Nagelkerke pseudo-R2; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01
  2. aadjusted for year of birth, sex, and occupational class
  3. bfurther adjusted for the quality of leadership, influence at work, work-privacy conflict, work stress (ERI), and phys. environmental and burdensome factors
  4. cfurther adjusted for self-rated health and language at home
  5. dreduction of effect size between model 0 and 3