Disparities in Surgical Intervention and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Racial/Ethnic Groups With Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Racial and socioeconomic disparities in spine surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis persist in the United States, potentially contributing to unequal health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes. This is important as lumbar spondylolisthesis is one of the most common causes of surgical low back pain, and low back pain is the largest disabler of individuals worldwide. Our objective was to assess the relationship between race, socioeconomic factors, treatment utilization, and outcomes in patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS: This cohort study analyzed prospectively collected data from 9941 patients diagnosed with lumbar spondylolisthesis between 2015 and 2020 at 5 academic hospitals. Exposures were race, socioeconomic status, health coverage, and HRQoL measures. Main outcomes and measures included treatment utilization rates between racial groups and the association between race and treatment outcomes using logistic regression, adjusting for patient characteristics, socioeconomic status, health coverage, and HRQoL measures. RESULTS: Of the 9941 patients included (mean [SD] age, 67.37 [12.40] years; 63% female; 1101 [11.1%] Black, Indigenous, and People of Color [BIPOC]), BIPOC patients were significantly less likely to use surgery than White patients (odds ratio [OR] = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.62-0.75). Furthermore, BIPOC race was associated with significantly lower odds of reaching the minimum clinically important difference for physical function (OR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.60; 0.91) and pain interference (OR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.97). Medicaid beneficiaries were significantly less likely (OR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.92) to reach a clinically important improvement in HRQoL when accounting for race. CONCLUSION: This study found that BIPOC patients were less likely to use spine surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis despite reporting higher pain interference, suggesting an association between race and surgical utilization. These disparities may contribute to unequal HRQoL outcomes for patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis and warrant further investigation to address and reduce treatment disparities.

Under Pressure: Emotional Reactions to Stress of Neurosurgeons and Neurosurgical Trainees.

OBJECTIVE: Neurosurgeons demonstrate some of the highest levels of burnout among surgeons, yet little research has been done to understand the underlying stressors that neurosurgeons and trainees experience and the emotional responses to them. Our goal was to conduct a feasibility study identifying job stressors and emotional responses among neurosurgeons rather than generalize findings across the profession. METHODS: Emphasizing a qualitative approach in this feasibility and descriptive study, we strategically selected a small sample of neurosurgical attendings, residents, and fellows at 2 United States academic neurosurgical departments to ensure an in-depth analysis laying the groundwork for future extensive research. Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding work-related stressors and high- and low-arousal emotional responses to these stressors, as well as a standardized Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses evaluating types of stressors and emotional responses reported were assessed based on participant training level. RESULTS: Participants identified 3 main stressors: 1) administrative deficiencies; 2) delivering bad news/saving lives; and 3) work-life balance. A low frequency of negative emotional responses was reported, but those reported were mainly high-arousal emotions. Limited prior training in coping strategies was also reported. We also found that residents, fellows, and faculty surgeons reported about work stressors and coping strategies differently. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study provide an understanding of neurosurgical professionals' unique emotional landscape, emphasizing the need for reforms in administrative practices, enhanced, healthy coping strategies, and career stage-specific mental health support.

Social Vulnerability, COVID-19, Racial Violence, and Depressive Symptoms: a Cross-sectional Study in the Southern United States.

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, the novel 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic. In May 2020, George Floyd was murdered, catalyzing a national racial reckoning. In the Southern United States, these events occurred in the context of a history of racism and high rates of poverty and discrimination, especially among racially and ethnically minoritized populations. OBJECTIVES: In this study, we examine social vulnerabilities, the perceived impacts of COVID-19 and the national racial reckoning, and how these are associated with depression symptoms in the South. METHODS: Data were collected from 961 adults between June and November 2020 as part of an online survey study on family well-being during COVID-19. The sample was majority female (87.2%) and consisted of 661 White participants, 143 Black participants, and 157 other racial and ethnic minoritized participants. Existing social vulnerability, perceived impact of COVID-19 and racial violence and protests on families, and depressive symptoms were assessed. Hierarchical regression analysis was used to predict variance in depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Half of the sample (52%) reported a negative impact of COVID-19, and 66% reported a negative impact of national racial violence/protests. Depressive symptoms were common with 49.8% meeting the cutoff for significant depressive symptoms; Black participants had lower levels of depressive symptoms. Results from the hierarchical regression analysis indicate social vulnerabilities and the perceived negative impact of COVID-19 and racial violence/protests each contribute to variance in depressive symptoms. Race-specific sensitivity analysis clarified distinct patterns in predictors of depressive symptoms. CONCLUSION: People in the South report being negatively impacted by the confluence of the COVID-19 pandemic and the emergence of racial violence/protests in 2020, though patterns differ by racial group. These events, on top of pre-existing social vulnerabilities, help explain depressive symptoms in the South during 2020.

Family Strengthening in the Context of COVID-19: Adapting a Community-Based Intervention from Kenya to the United States.

COVID-19 led to widespread disruption of services that promote family well-being. Families impacted most were those already experiencing disparities due to structural and systemic barriers. Existing support systems faded into the background as families became more isolated. New approaches were needed to deliver evidence-based, low-cost interventions to reach families within communities. We adapted a family strengthening intervention developed in Kenya ("Tuko Pamoja") for the United States. We tested a three-phase participatory adaptation process. In phase 1, we conducted community focus groups including 11 organizations to identify needs and a community partner. In phase 2, the academic-community partner team collaboratively adapted the intervention. We held a development workshop and trained community health workers to deliver the program using an accelerated process combining training, feedback, and iterative revisions. In phase 3, we piloted Coping Together with 18 families, collecting feedback through session-specific surveys and participant focus groups. Community focus groups confirmed that concepts from Tuko Pamoja were relevant, and adaptation resulted in a contextualized intervention-"Coping Together"-an 8-session virtual program for multiple families. As in Tuko Pamoja, communication skills are central and applied for developing family values, visions, and goals. Problem-solving and coping skills then equip families to reach goals, while positive emotion-focused activities promote openness to change. Sessions are interactive, emphasizing skills practice. Participants reported high acceptability and appropriateness, and focus groups suggested that most content was understood and applied in ways consistent with the theory of change. The accelerated reciprocal adaptation process and intervention could apply across resource-constrained settings.