Health equity research in obstetric anesthesia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Health equity is an important priority for obstetric anesthesia, but describing disparities in perinatal care process and health outcome is insufficient to achieve this goal. Conceptualizing and framing disparity is a prerequisite to pose meaningful research questions. We emphasize the need to hypothesize and test which mechanisms and drivers are instrumental for disparities in perinatal processes and outcomes, in order to target, test and refine effective countermeasures. RECENT FINDINGS: With an emphasis on methodology and measurement, we sketch how health systems and disparity research may advance maternal health equity by narrating, conceptualizing, and investigating social determinants of health as key drivers of perinatal disparity, by identifying the granular mechanism of this disparity, by making the economic case to address them, and by testing specific interventions to advance obstetric health equity. SUMMARY: Measuring social determinants of health and meaningful perinatal processes and outcomes precisely and accurately at the individual, family, community/neighborhood level is a prerequisite for healthcare disparity research. A focus on elucidating the precise mechanism driving disparity in processes of obstetric care would inform a more rational effort to promote health equity. Implementation scientists should rigorously investigate in prospective trials, which countermeasures are most efficient and effective in mitigating perinatal outcome disparities.

Low Skepticism and Positive Attitudes About Advance Care Planning Among African Americans: a National, Mixed Methods Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: African Americans have low engagement in advance care planning (ACP). This has been attributed to healthcare distrust and skepticism about ACP. A better understanding of these attitudes is needed to address health disparities related to end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: To explore the ACP-related values and beliefs of diverse African American communities across the USA and then the perceived value of an inexpensive end-of-life conversational game. DESIGN: Prospective, convergent, mixed methods cohort study involving fifteen underserved, African American communities across the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 428 who attended events at purposively sampled sites, 90% consented to the research; 37% participated in one of 15 focus groups (n = 141). INTERVENTION: An end-of-life conversation game, played in groups of 4-6. MAIN MEASURES: The validated, 7-item ACP values and beliefs questionnaire (scaled 7 = least skeptical, 49 = most skeptical) was administered pre-game. Post-game focus groups explored perceptions about ACP and the intervention. KEY RESULTS: Participants had positive attitudes (low skepticism) about ACP with a median score of 12.00 (7.00, 20.00). Values and beliefs did not significantly differ by geographical region; however, rural areas were observed to be slightly more skeptical than urban areas (median score 14.00 vs. 11.00, p = 0.002). Themes from focus groups converged with survey data showing participants valued the ACP process and consider further engagement in ACP to be worthwhile. Subthemes emphasized the need for and value of ACP. CONCLUSIONS: Skepticism about ACP may contribute to low rates of ACP engagement in underserved African American communities. The positive attitudes uncovered in our study either negate previous findings or suggest reduced skepticism. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03456921 ).

Knowledge, Perceptions, and Preferred Information Sources Related to COVID-19 Among Central Pennsylvania Adults Early in the Pandemic: A Mixed Methods Cross-Sectional Survey.

PURPOSE: To explore public knowledge, understanding of public health recommendations, perceptions, and trust in information sources related to COVID-19. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of central Pennsylvanian adults evaluated self-reported knowledge, and a convergent, mixed methods design was used to assess beliefs about recommendations, intended behaviors, perceptions, and concerns related to infectious disease risk, and trust of information sources. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 5,948 adults. The estimated probability of correct response for the basic knowledge score, weighted with confidence, was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.79-0.80). Knowledge was significantly higher in patients with higher education and nonminority race. While the majority of respondents reported that they believed following CDC recommendations would decrease the spread of COVID-19 in their community and intended to adhere to them, only 65.2% rated social isolation with the highest level of belief and adherence. The most trusted information source was federal public health websites (42.8%). Qualitative responses aligned with quantitative data and described concerns about illness, epidemiologic issues, economic and societal disruptions, and distrust of the executive branch's messaging. The survey was limited by a lack of minority representation, potential selection bias, and evolving COVID-19 information that may impact generalizability and interpretability. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge about COVID-19 and intended adherence to behavioral recommendations were high. There was substantial distrust of the executive branch of the federal government, however, and concern about mixed messaging and information overload. These findings highlight the importance of consistent messaging from trusted sources that reaches diverse groups.

Voices from the Pandemic: A Qualitative Study of Family Experiences and Suggestions regarding the Care of Critically Ill Patients.

Rationale: Intensive care unit (ICU) visitation restrictions during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic have drastically reduced family-engaged care. Understanding the impact of physical distancing on family members of ICU patients is needed to inform future policies. Objectives: To understand the experiences of family members of critically ill patients with COVID-19 when physically distanced from their loved ones and to explore ways clinicians may support them. Methods: This qualitative study of an observational cohort study reports data from 74 family members of ICU patients with COVID-19 at 10 United States hospitals in four states, chosen based on geographic and demographic diversity. Adult family members of patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 during the early phase of the pandemic (February-June 2020) were invited to participate in a phone interview. Interviews followed a semistructured guide to assess four constructs: illness narrative, stress experiences, communication experiences, and satisfaction with care. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using an inductive approach to thematic analysis. Results: Among 74 interviewees, the mean age was 53.0 years, 55% were white, and 76% were female. Physical distancing contributed to substantial stress and harms (nine themes). Participants described profound suffering and psychological illness, unfavorable perceptions of care, and weakened therapeutic relationship between family members and clinicians. Three communication principles emerged as those most valued by family members: contact, consistency, and compassion (the 3Cs). Family members offered suggestions to guide clinicians faced with communicating with physically distanced families. Conclusions: Visitation restrictions impose substantial psychological harms upon family members of critically ill patients. Derived from the voics of family members, our findings warrant strong consideration when implementing visitation restrictions in the ICU and advocate for investment in infrastructure (including staffing and videoconferencing) to support communication. This study offers family-derived recommendations to operationalize the 3Cs to guide and improve communication in times of physical distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

'Us-Versus-Them': Othering in COVID-19 public health behavior compliance.

OBJECTIVE: We explored public perceptions about the COVID-19 pandemic to learn how those attitudes may affect compliance with health behaviors. METHODS: Participants were Central Pennsylvania adults from diverse backgrounds purposively sampled (based on race, gender, educational attainment, and healthcare worker status) who responded to a mixed methods survey, completed between March 25-31, 2020. Four open-ended questions were analyzed, including: "What worries you most about the COVID-19 pandemic?" We applied a pragmatic, inductive coding process to conduct a qualitative, descriptive content analysis of responses. RESULTS: Of the 5,948 respondents, 538 were sampled for this qualitative analysis. Participants were 58% female, 56% with ≥ bachelor's degree, and 50% from minority racial backgrounds. Qualitative descriptive analysis revealed four themes related to respondents' health and societal concerns: lack of faith in others; fears of illness or death; frustration at perceived slow societal response; and a desire for transparency in communicating local COVID-19 information. An "us-versus-them" subtext emerged; participants attributed non-compliance with COVID-19 behaviors to other groups, setting themselves apart from those Others. CONCLUSION: Our study uncovered Othering undertones in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, occurring between groups of like-minded individuals with behavioral differences in 'compliance' versus 'non-compliance' with public health recommendations. Addressing the 'us-versus-them' mentality may be important for boosting compliance with recommended health behaviors.