Association between ethnicity, language and metformin prescriptions in U.S. community health center patients with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Metformin treatment is a recommended first-line medication for patients with type 2 diabetes. Latino patients are subject to factors that may modify their level of diabetes care, including medication prescription. We evaluated the odds of and times to metformin prescription among non-Latino whites, English-preferring Latinos, and Spanish-preferring Latinos with diabetes. METHODS: We constructed a retrospective cohort of 154,368 adult patients from 835 community health centers (CHCs) across 20 states who were diagnosed with diabetes during the study. Patients were from non-Latino white, English-preferring Latino, and Spanish-preferring Latino ethnic/language groups. We modeled adjusted odds of metformin prescription and adjusted hazards (time-to-event) of metformin prescription after diabetes diagnosis and high hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c > 9) test results. RESULTS: English-preferring Latinos had similar odds of metformin prescription (Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.01 (95% CI = 0.93, 1.09)), slightly lower time to metformin prescription after diabetes diagnosis (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.06(95% CI = 1.04, 1.09)), and similar time to metformin prescription after a high HbA1c result (HR = 1.04 (0.99, 1.09)) compared to non-Latino whites. Spanish-preferring Latinos had higher odds of metformin prescription (OR) = 1.42 (95% CI = 1.33, 1.52), and less time to prescription after diabetes diagnosis (HR = 1.18 (1.15, 1.20)) and after a high HbA1c result (HR = 1.15 (1.11, 1.20)). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of metformin prescription patterns among non-Latino whites, English-preferring Latinos, and Spanish-preferring Latinos did not suggest a lower or slower tendency to prescribe metformin in Latino patients. Understanding disparities in diabetes diagnosis may require further investigation of medication adherence barriers, diet and exercise counseling, and multi-level influences on diabetes outcomes in Latino patients.

Stakeholder perspectives on social screening in US healthcare settings.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the health impacts of social conditions has led US healthcare systems to consider identifying and addressing social adversity-e.g. food, housing, and transportation insecurity-in care delivery settings. Social screening is one strategy being used to gather patient information about social circumstances at the point of care. While several recent studies describe the rapid proliferation of social screening activities, little work has explored either why or how to implement social screening in clinical settings. Our study objectives were to assess diverse healthcare stakeholder perspectives on both the rationale for social screening and evidence needed to inform practice and policy-relevant implementation decisions. METHODS: We convened five focus groups with US experts representing different stakeholder groups: patient advocates, community-based organizations, healthcare professionals, payers, and policymakers. In total, 39 experts participated in approximately 90-minute long focus groups conducted between January-March 2021. A inductive thematic analysis approach was used to analyze discussions. RESULTS: Three themes emerged from focus groups, each reflecting the tension between the national enthusiasm for screening and existing evidence on the effectiveness and implementation of screening in clinical settings: (1) ambiguity about the rationale for social screening; (2) concerns about the relavence of screening tools and approaches, particularly for historically marginalized populations; (3) lack of clarity around the resources needed for implementation and scaling. CONCLUSION: While participants across groups described potential benefits of social screening, they also highlighted knowledge gaps that interfered with realizing these benefits. Efforts to minimize and ideally resolve these knowledge gaps will advance future social screening practice and policy.

Social Care Recommendations in National Diabetes Treatment Guidelines.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: An expanding body of research documents associations between socioeconomic circumstances and health outcomes, which has led health care institutions to invest in new activities to identify and address patients' social circumstances in the context of care delivery. Despite growing national investment in these "social care" initiatives, the extent to which social care activities are routinely incorporated into care for patients with type II diabetes mellitus (T2D), specifically, is unknown. We conducted a scoping review of existing T2D treatment and management guidelines to explore whether and how these guidelines incorporate recommendations that reflect social care practice categories. RECENT FINDINGS: We applied search terms to locate all T2D treatment and management guidelines for adults published in the US from 1977 to 2021. The search captured 158 national guidelines. We subsequently applied the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine framework to search each guideline for recommendations related to five social care activities: Awareness, Adjustment, Assistance, Advocacy, and Alignment. The majority of guidelines (122; 77%) did not recommend any social care activities. The remainder (36; 23%) referred to one or more social care activities. In the guidelines that referred to at least one type of social care activity, adjustments to medical treatment based on social risk were most common [34/36 (94%)]. Recommended adjustments included decreasing medication costs to accommodate financial strain, changing literacy level or language of handouts, and providing virtual visits to accommodate transportation insecurity. Ensuring that practice guidelines more consistently reflect social care best practices may improve outcomes for patients living with T2D.

Mental health and diabetes self-management: assessing stakeholder perspectives from health centers in Northern Mexico.

BACKGROUND: People living with diabetes have an increased risk of developing mental health issues. Mexico has observed a high prevalence of people living with diabetes suffering from mental health issues, such as anxiety and depression. Self-management programs have demonstrated promise in helping participants address and prevent not only physiological health complications but mental health issues as well. This qualitative study aimed to understand the mental health benefits of a diabetes self-management intervention for health centers in Northern Mexico and opportunities for improvement through assessing stakeholder perspectives. METHODS: Trained research staff used a semi-structured questionnaire guide to conduct all interviews and focus groups from February-May 2018. Individual interviews (n = 16) were conducted face-to-face at four health center sites among all health center directors and key staff located throughout the state of Sonora. One focus group (n = 41) was conducted at each of the four health centers among intervention participants. Directed content analysis was used to establish themes by understanding relationships, identifying similar experiences, and determining patterns across datasets. RESULTS: In total 57 health center directors, health center staff, and intervention participants were involved in the interviews and focus groups across the four health centers. Overall the analysis identified four themes throughout the data, two were categorized as benefits and two as improvements. The primary themes for participant benefits were an increase in self-efficacy and social support to manage their chronic conditions. These were evident from not only participant perspectives, but health staff observations. Conversely, increased family involvement, and increased mental health integration and services within diabetes care were identified themes for opportunities to improve the intervention to be more inclusive and holistic. CONCLUSION: All stakeholders observed the benefits for intervention participants and opportunities for more inclusivity of the family and integration as well as an increase in mental health services. The themes identified demonstrated a need to more proactively enhance and utilize diabetes self-management as a means to improve mental health outcomes among people living with diabetes in Mexico. This is an opportunity to employ a more comprehensive approach to diabetes self-management, and integrate mental health services into overall diabetes care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02804698 . Registered on June 17, 2016.

Non-communicable disease prevention in Mexico: policies, programs and regulations.

Non-communicable diseases (NCD), such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease, have become a leading cause of the death in Mexico. The federal government has addressed this issue through developing NCD prevention plans, regulations and policies (PRPs) that seek to address social and environmental factors, which was led by the National Institute of Public Health and Ministry of Health in concert with various non-governmental organizations. This review aims to synthesize and summarize national NCD prevention PRPs addressing social and environmental factors passed from 2010 to 2016, and to assess the extent to which these efforts successfully addressed factors contributing to the epidemic. In total nine federal NCD prevention PRPs were identified from a scan that examined executive and legislative PRPs, which identified five documents. A scoping review was conducted for evaluation studies and reports corresponding to these PRPs. The majority of PRPs focused on nutrition, specifically the access and promotion of food. Studies and reports demonstrated that taxation on energy-dense low-nutrient foods and sugar-sweetened beverages were the most effective. Other PRPs had various issues with implementation, mostly related to adherence and resources available. Overall, there lacked evidence of evaluative work on several NCD prevention PRPs, specifically assessing implementation and effectiveness. Additionally, PRPs did not sufficiently address integration of clinical, social, environmental approaches and access to physical activity. While the Mexican federal government has taken the initial steps to address the multifactorial causes of NCD, firm political commitment and investment of significant resources are still needed.

Feasibility and acceptability of a beverage intervention for Hispanic adults: results from a pilot randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and acceptability of a beverage intervention in Hispanic adults. DESIGN: Eligible individuals identified as Hispanic, were 18-64 years old and had BMI 30·0-50·0 kg/m2. Participants were randomized 2:2:1 to one of three beverages: Mediterranean lemonade (ML), green tea (GT) or flavoured water control (FW). After a 2-week washout period, participants were asked to consume 32 oz (946 ml) of study beverage daily for 6 weeks and avoid other sources of tea, citrus, juice and sweetened beverages; water was permissible. Fasting blood samples were collected at baseline and 8 weeks to assess primary and secondary efficacy outcomes. SETTING: Tucson, AZ, USA.ParticipantsFifty-two participants were recruited over 6 months; fifty were randomized (twenty-one ML, nineteen GT, ten FW). Study population mean (sd) age 44·6 (sd 10·2) years, BMI 35·9 (4·6) kg/m2; 78 % female. RESULTS: Forty-four (88 %) completed the 8-week assessment. Self-reported adherence was high. No significant change (95 % CI) in total cholesterol (mg/dl) from baseline was shown -1·7 (-14·2, 10·9), -3·9 (-17·2, 9·4) and -13·2 (-30·2, 3·8) for ML, GT and FW, respectively. Mean change in HDL-cholesterol (mg/dl) -2·3 (-5·3, 0·7; ML), -1·0 (-4·2, 2·2; GT), -3·9 (-8·0, 0·2; FW) and LDL-cholesterol (mg/dl) 0·2 (-11·3, 11·8; ML), 0·5 (-11·4, 12·4; GT), -9·8 (-25·0, 5·4; FW) were also non-significant. Fasting glucose (mg/dl) increased significantly by 5·2 (2·6, 7·9; ML) and 3·3 (0·58, 6·4; GT). No significant change in HbA1c was demonstrated. Due to the small sample size, potential confounders and effect modifiers were not investigated. CONCLUSIONS: Recruitment and retention figures indicate that a larger-scale trial is feasible; however, favourable changes in cardiometabolic biomarkers were not demonstrated.

Protocol for LINKS (linking individual needs to community and clinical services): a prospective matched observational study of a community health worker community clinical linkage intervention on the U.S.-Mexico border.

BACKGROUND: Latinos are currently the largest and fastest growing racial/ethnic group in the United States and have the lowest rates nationally of regular sources of primary care. The changing demographics of Latino populations have significant implications for the future health of the nation, particularly with respect to chronic disease. Community-based agencies and clinics alike have a long history of engaging community health workers (CHWs) to provide a broad range of tangible and emotional support strategies for Latinos with chronic diseases. In this paper, we present the protocol for a community intervention designed to evaluate the impact of CHWs in a Community-Clinical Linkage model to address chronic disease through innovative utilization of electronic health records (EHRs) and application of mixed methodologies. Linking Individual Needs to Community and Clinical Services (LINKS) is a 3-year, prospective matched observational study designed to examine the feasibility and impact of CHW-led Community-Clinical Linkages in reducing chronic disease risk and promoting emotional well-being among Latinos living in three U.S.-Mexico border communities. METHODS: The primary aim of LINKS is to create Community-Clinical Linkages between three community health centers and their respective county health departments in southern Arizona. Our primary analysis is to examine the impact of the intervention 6 to 12-months post program entry. We will assess chronic disease risk factors documented in the EHRs of participants versus matched non-participants. By using a prospective matched observational study design with EHRs, we have access to numerous potential comparators to evaluate the intervention effects. Secondary analyses include modeling within-group changes of extended research-collected measures. This approach enhances the overall evaluation with rich data on physical and emotional well-being and health behaviors of study participants that EHR systems do not collect in routine clinical practice. DISCUSSION: The LINKS intervention has practical implications for the development of Community-Clinical Linkage models. The collaborative and participatory approach in LINKS illustrates an innovative evaluation framework utilizing EHRs and mixed methods research-generated data collection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study protocol was retrospectively registered, approved, and made available on Clinicaltrials.gov by NCT03787485 as of December 20, 2018.

Feasibility and acceptability of a beverage intervention for Hispanic adults: a protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In the U.S., Hispanics have among the highest rates of overweight and obesity when compared to other racial/ethnic groups placing them at a greater risk for obesity-related disease. Identifying intervention strategies to reduce caloric intake and/or improve cardiometabolic health in Hispanics is critical to reducing morbidity and mortality among this large and growing population. Evidence exists to support diet-specific behavioral interventions, including beverage modifications, in reducing obesity-related health risks. However, the acceptability and feasibility of a beverage intervention in obese Hispanic adults has not been robustly evaluated. METHODS: The objective of this pilot study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a randomized, controlled beverage intervention in 50 obese Hispanic adults ages 18-64 over 8-weeks. Eligible participants were obese (30-50.0 kg/m2), between the ages 18-64, self-identified as Hispanic, and were able to speak, read, and write in either English and/or Spanish. Study recruitment was completed August 2017. Upon the completion of baseline assessments, participants will be randomized to either Mediterranean lemonade, Green Tea, or flavored water control. After completing a 2-week washout period, participants will be asked to consume 32 oz. per day of study beverage for 6-weeks while avoiding all other sources of tea, lemonade, citrus, juice, and other sweetened beverages; water is permissible. Primary outcomes will be recruitment, retention, and acceptability of the intervention strategies. Our study will also evaluate participant-reported tolerance and as an exploratory aim, assess safety/toxicity-related to renal and/or liver function. Fasting blood samples will be collected at baseline and 8-weeks to assess the primary efficacy outcomes: total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL). Secondary outcomes include fasting glucose, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP). DISCUSSION: This pilot study will provide important feasibility, safety, and early efficacy data necessary to design a larger, adequately-powered randomized controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02911753 ( ClinicalTrials.gov ). Registered September 19, 2016. Last updated November 1, 2017.

Adjusting Clinical Plans Based on Social Context.

BACKGROUND: Social risk data collection is expanding in community health centers (CHCs). We explored clinicians' practices of adjusting medical care based on their awareness of patients' social risk factors-that is, changes they make to care plans to mitigate the potential impacts of social risk factors on their patients' care and health outcomes-in a set of Texas CHCs. METHODS: Convergent mixed methods. Surveys/interviews explored clinician perspectives on adjusting medical care based on patient social risk factors. Survey data were analyzed with descriptive statistics; interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis and inductive coding. RESULTS: Across 4 CHCs, we conducted 15 clinician interviews and collected 97 surveys. Interviews and surveys overall indicated support for adjustment activities. Two main themes emerged: 1) clinicians reported making frequent adjustments to patient care plans based on their awareness of patients' social contexts, while simultaneously expressing concerns about adjustment; and 2) awareness of patients' social risk factors, and clinician time, training, and experience all influenced clinician adjustments. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians at participating CHCs described routinely adjusting patient care plans based on their patients' social contexts. These adjustments were being made without specific guidelines or training. Standardization of adjustments may facilitate the contextualization of patient care through shared decision making to improve outcomes.

Patient and Patient Caregiver Perspectives on Social Screening: A Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Health care policy and practice-level enthusiasm around social screening has emerged in the absence of a clear appreciation for how patients feel about these activities. Yet patient and caregiver perspectives should be used to establish the rationale and inform the design and implementation of social screening initiatives. METHODS: We conducted a systematic scoping review to better understand patient and patient caregiver perspectives regarding multidomain social screening in US health care settings. RESULTS: We identified 16 articles. Thirteen studies assessed the perspectives of patients; a partially overlapping 9 studies assessed the perspectives of adult patient caregivers. Most articles assessing the acceptability of social screening reported that patients and patient caregivers generally found it to be acceptable. Notably, there was some variation by screening approach and prior experiences in health care settings, as well as mixed findings by race/ethnicity and gender. Participants from several articles raised concerns regarding data documentation and sharing, highlighting the potential for social data to contribute to provider bias. CONCLUSION: The themes emerging in this diverse set of largely descriptive studies warrant deeper and more rigorous exploration as social screening initiatives expand in health care settings across the United States.

Determining Regional Differences in Barriers to Accessing Health Care Among Farmworkers Using the National Agricultural Workers Survey.

Farmworkers are an essential workforce in the U.S. We assessed the regions in the National Agricultural Workers Survey on the difficulty of accessing health care among farmworkers in the U.S. The study included 9577 farmworkers. Farmworkers in all regions were more likely to report having difficulty accessing health care because it was too expensive. The overall odds ratio for difficulty accessing health care was lower in the MW after adjusting. Farmworkers employed in the SE had greater difficulty accessing health care because of language barriers. Farmworkers employed in CA had difficulty accessing health care in the U.S. because it was too expensive or far away. Results follow previous studies on barriers to access health care among the farmworker population. Understanding regional disparities in the presence of barriers to accessing health care among farmworkers is an essential step to improving equitable health care access in the U.S.

Feasibility and Outcomes of Meta Salud Diabetes Behavioral Health Intervention: A Pilot Study of a Community Health Worker-Administered Educational Intervention to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease and Its Complications among Hispanic Patients with Type-2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Hispanics in the United States experience a greater burden of type-2 diabetes (T2D), with a prevalence rate (17%) more than twice that of non-Hispanic whites (8%). Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death among people with T2D. A culturally appropriate behavioral health intervention that addresses healthy lifestyle promotion is an impactful approach for health systems with scarce medical resources and a high prevalence of chronic conditions, including obesity and high blood pressure, which increase the likelihood of CVD mortality among type-2 diabetics. PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility and outcomes of a behavioral intervention to decrease CVD and complications in a Hispanic diabetic population. METHODS: Meta Salud Diabetes (MSD), a behavioral intervention effective in a Mexican population, consists of a 13-week intervention addressing CVD and T2D knowledge and risk reduction. It was implemented in a sample of Hispanic diabetic patients from two federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). Clinical and behavioral variables were measured at baseline, postintervention, and 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: The feasibility of MSD was rated as successful by all FQHC staff and well-received by both staff and study participants, with positive remarks about the culturally relevant components of the intervention. The sample size was n = 30 (baseline), n = 23 (postintervention), and n = 19 (1-year follow-up). Of note, quantitative results showed trending decreases in Hba1c (7.06; 6.80; 6.30), blood pressure (132/83; 126/80; 123/78), and total cholesterol (160; 159; 154). CONCLUSION: MSD is a feasible intervention and can address the need to improve health outcomes among Hispanic patients with T2D.

Assessing Implementation of Social Screening Within US Health Care Settings: A Systematic Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: Though a growing crop of health care reforms aims to encourage health care-based social screening, no literature has synthesized existing social screening implementation research to inform screening practice and policymaking. METHODS: Systematic scoping review of peer-reviewed literature on social screening implementation published 1/1/2011-2/17/2022. We applied a 2-concept search (health care-based screening; social risk factors) to PubMed and Embase. Studies had to explore the implementation of health care-based multi-domain social screening and describe 1+ outcome related to the reach, adoption, implementation, and/or maintenance of screening. Two reviewers extracted data related to key study elements, including sample, setting, and implementation outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-two articles met inclusion criteria. Reach (n = 7): We found differences in screening rates by patient race/ethnicity; findings varied across studies. Patients who preferred Spanish had lower screening rates than English-preferring patients. Adoption (n = 13): Workforce education and dedicated quality improvement projects increased screening adoption. Implementation (n = 32): Time was the most cited barrier to screening; administration time differed by tool/workforce/modality. Use of standardized screening tools/workflows improved screening integration. Use of community health workers and/or technology improved risk disclosure and facilitated screening in resource-limited settings. Maintenance (n = 1): Only 1 study reported on maintenance; results showed a drop in screening over 21 months. CONCLUSIONS: Critical evidence gaps in social screening implementation persist. These include gaps in knowledge about effective strategies for integrating social screening into clinical workflows and ways to maximize screening equity. Future research should leverage the rapidly increasing number of screening initiatives to elevate and scale best practices.

Social Risk Screening and Response Equity: Assessment by Race, Ethnicity, and Language in Community Health Centers.

INTRODUCTION: Little has previously been reported about the implementation of social risk screening across racial/ethnic/language groups. To address this knowledge gap, the associations between race/ethnicity/language, social risk screening, and patient-reported social risks were examined among adult patients at community health centers. METHODS: Patient- and encounter-level data from 2016 to 2020 from 651 community health centers in 21 U.S. states were used; data were extracted from a shared Epic electronic health record and analyzed between December 2020 and February 2022. In adjusted logistic regression analyses stratified by language, robust sandwich variance SE estimators were applied with clustering on patient's primary care facility. RESULTS: Social risk screening occurred at 30% of health centers; 11% of eligible adult patients were screened. Screening and reported needs varied significantly by race/ethnicity/language. Black Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic patients were approximately twice as likely to be screened, and Hispanic White patients were 28% less likely to be screened than non-Hispanic White patients. Hispanic Black patients were 87% less likely to report social risks than non-Hispanic White patients. Among patients who preferred a language other than English or Spanish, Black Hispanic patients were 90% less likely to report social needs than non-Hispanic White patients. CONCLUSIONS: Social risk screening documentation and patient reports of social risks differed by race/ethnicity/language in community health centers. Although social care initiatives are intended to promote health equity, inequitable screening practices could inadvertently undermine this goal. Future implementation research should explore strategies for equitable screening and related interventions.

Association of Health-Related Social Needs With Quality and Utilization Outcomes in a Medicare Advantage Population With Diabetes.

Importance: Recent research highlights the association of social determinants of health with health outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Objective: To examine associations between health-related social needs (HRSNs) and health care quality and utilization outcomes in a Medicare Advantage population with T2D. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used medical and pharmacy claims data from 2019. An HRSN survey was given between October 16, 2019, and February 29, 2020, to Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. Inclusion criteria were diagnosis of T2D, age of 20 to 89 years, continuous Medicare Advantage enrollment in 2019, and response to the HRSN survey. Data were analyzed between June 2021 and January 2022. Exposures: Enrollment in Medicare Advantage, diagnosis of T2D, and completion of a survey on HRSNs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality outcomes included diabetes medication adherence, statin adherence, completion of a glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) laboratory test in the past 12 months, and controlled HbA1c. Utilization outcomes included all-cause hospitalization, potentially avoidable hospitalization, emergency department discharge, and readmission. Results: Of the 21 528 Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with T2D included in the study (mean [SD] age, 71.0 [8.3] years; 55.4% women), most (56.9%) had at least 1 HRSN. Among the population with T2D reporting HRSNs, the most prevalent were financial strain (73.6%), food insecurity (47.5%), and poor housing quality (39.1%). In adjusted models, loneliness (odds ratio [OR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99), lack of transportation (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.92), utility insecurity (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.98), and housing insecurity (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.91) were each associated with lower diabetes medication adherence. Loneliness and lack of transportation were associated with increased emergency visits (marginal effects of 173.0 [95% CI, 74.2-271.9] and 244.6 [95% CI, 150.4-338.9] emergency visits per 1000 beneficiaries for loneliness and transportation, respectively). Food insecurity was the HRSN most consistently associated with higher acute care utilization (marginal effects of 84.6 [95% CI, 19.8-149.4] emergency visits, 30.4 [95% CI, 9.5-51.3] inpatient encounters, and 17.1 [95% CI, 4.7-29.5] avoidable hospitalizations per 1000 beneficiaries). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with T2D, some HRSNs were associated with care quality and utilization. The results of the study may be used to direct interventions to the social needs most associated with T2D health outcomes and inform policy decisions at the insurance plan and community level.

"Wanting the Best for Our Folks"-A Mixed Methods Analysis of Community Health Center Social Risk Screening Initiatives.

BACKGROUND: Many community health centers (CHC) are scaling social risk screening in response to growing awareness of the influence of social adversity on health outcomes and concurrent incentives for social risk data collection. We studied the implementation of social risk screening in Texas CHCs to inform best practices and understand equity implications. METHODS: Convergent mixed methods of 3 data sources. Using interviews and surveys with CHC providers and staff, we explored social risk screening practices to identify barriers and facilitators; we used electronic health record (EHR) data to assess screening reach and disparities in screening. RESULTS: Across 4 urban/suburban Texas CHCs, we conducted 27 interviews (15 providers/12 staff) and collected 97 provider surveys; 2 CHCs provided EHR data on 18,672 patients screened during the study period. Data revealed 2 cross-cutting themes: 1) there was broad support for social risk screening/care integration that was rooted in CHCs' mission and positionalities, and 2) barriers to social risk screening efforts were largely a result of limited time and staffing. Though EHR data showed screens per month and screens/encounters increased peri-pandemic (4.1% of encounters in 8/2019 to 46.1% in 2/2021), there were significant differences in screening rates by patient race/ethnicity and preferred language (P < .001). In surveys, 90.0% of surveyed providers reported incorporating social risk screening into patient conversations; 28.6% were unaware their clinic had an embedded screening tool. CONCLUSIONS: Study CHCs were in the early stages of standardizing social risk screening. Differences in screening reach by patient demographics raise concerns that social screening initiatives, which often serve as a path to resource/service connection, might exacerbate disparities. Overcoming barriers to reach, sustainability, and equity requires supports targeted to program design/development, workforce capacity, and quality improvement.

Advancing health equity through social care interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To use evidence on addressing racism in social care intervention research to create a framework for advancing health equity for all populations with marginalized social identities (e.g., race, gender, and sexual orientation). Such groups have disproportionate social needs (e.g., food insecurity) and negative social determinants of health (SDOH; e.g., poverty). We recommend how the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) could advance health equity for marginalized populations through social care research and care delivery. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: This commentary is informed by a literature review of social care interventions that were affiliated with healthcare systems; input from health equity researchers, policymakers, and community leaders attending the AHRQ Health Equity Summit; and consensus of the authors. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We recommend that AHRQ: (1) create an ecosystem that values research on SDOH and the effectiveness and implementation of social care interventions in the healthcare sector; (2) work with other federal agencies to (a) develop position statements with actionable recommendations about racism and other systems that perpetuate marginalization based on social identity and (b) develop aligned, complementary approaches to research and care delivery that address social marginalization; (3) advance both inclusive care delivery and inclusive research teams; (4) advance understanding of racism as a social determinant of health and effective strategies to mitigate its adverse impact on health; (5) advance the creation and scaling of effective strategies for addressing SDOH in healthcare systems, particularly in co-creation with community partners; and (6) require social care intervention researchers to use methods that advance our understanding of social health equity. CONCLUSIONS: AHRQ, as a federal agency, could help advance health equity using a range of strategies, including using the agency's levers to ensure AHRQ stakeholders examine and address the unique experiences of socially marginalized populations in SDOH and social care intervention research.

Disparities in HbA1c testing between aging US Latino and non-Latino white primary care patients.

US Latinos disproportionately face diabetes-related disparities compared to non-Latino Whites. A number of barriers, including linguistic and cultural discordance, have been consistently linked to these disparities. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) testing is used to assess glycemic control among individuals living with diabetes. This study aimed to compare HbA1c levels and corresponding testing rates among non-Latino Whites and Latinos with both English and Spanish preference from a national cohort of primary care patients within community health centers. We analyzed electronic health records from patients who turned 50 years of age (n = 66,921) and were diagnosed with diabetes during or prior to the study period. They also must have been under observation for at least one year from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2017. We calculated the rates of HbA1c tests each person received over the number of years observed and used covariate-adjusted negative binomial regression to estimate incidence rate ratios for Spanish preferring Latinos and English preferring Latinos compared to non-Latino Whites. Spanish preferring Latinos (rate ratio = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.16-1.30), regardless of HbA1c level, had higher testing rates than non-Latino Whites and English preferring Latinos. English preferring Latinos with controlled HbA1c levels had higher rates of HbA1c testing compared to non-Latino whites. Overall, the Latinos with Spanish preference maintained higher HbA1c testing rates and had disproportionately higher rates of uncontrolled HbA1c levels compared to non-Latino whites. Future efforts should focus on understanding effective approaches to increasing engagement among Spanish preferring Latinos and addressing organizational-level barriers, given HbA1c disparities.

Health conditions among farmworkers in the Southwest: An analysis of the National Agricultural Workers Survey.

Agricultural jobs pose many challenges to the health and wellbeing of a disadvantaged population. In the Southwest region, the socioeconomic factors of living along the U.S.-Mexico border, migration patterns, lack of access to health care, low utilization of health care services, lack of health insurance, and highly demanding occupation may uniquely affect health outcomes for farmworkers. This paper presents descriptive information for professionals to improve access to care by tackling barriers afforded by the agricultural industry. The National Agricultural Worker Survey (NAWS) is an employment-based, random-sample survey of U.S. agricultural workers in six regions: East, Southeast, Midwest, Southwest, Northwest, and California. We examined farmworkers' self-reported health conditions, including asthma, diabetes, high blood pressure, other chronic conditions, or any condition by region from 2013 to 2016. We used logistic regression to determine differences in lifetime prevalence of health conditions between farmworkers in the Southwest region (n = 727) and farmworkers in other regions (n = 8,850) using weighted data. After adjusting for age, gender, income, insurance status, and English-speaking ability, the odds of high blood pressure and other condition were similar in all regions. The prevalence of diabetes was almost double in the Southwest (114.2 per 1,000 farmworkers). The odds of diabetes were 1.31 (95% CI 0.99, 1.74) times greater in the Southwest region than in the other regions. Asthma was the only condition that was lower in the Southwest (22 per 1,000 farmworkers) compared to the other regions. The odds of asthma were 0.61 (95% CI 0.36, 1.03) times lower in the Southwest region than in other regions. The results follow previous studies on the prevalence of asthma among the farmworker population and elevated probability of chronic diseases including diabetes among the Latino population in the U.S.

Diabetes Screening and Monitoring Among Older Mexican-Origin Populations in the U.S.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study is to examine diabetes screening and monitoring among Latino individuals as compared with non-Latino White individuals and to better understand how we can use neighborhood data to address diabetes care inequities. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study linked with neighborhood-level Latino subgroup data obtained from the American Community Survey. We used generalized estimating equation negative binomial and logistic regression models adjusted for patient-level covariates to compare annual rates of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) monitoring for those with diabetes and odds of HbA1c screening for those without diabetes by ethnicity and among Latinos living in neighborhoods with low (0.0-22.0%), medium (22.0-55.7%), and high (55.7-98.0%) population percent of Mexican origin. RESULTS: Latino individuals with diabetes had 18% higher rates of HbA1c testing than non-Latino White individuals with diabetes (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] 1.18 [95% CI 1.07-1.29]), and Latinos without diabetes had 25% higher odds of screening (adjusted odds ratio 1.25 [95% CI 1.15-1.36]) than non-Latino White individuals without diabetes. In the analyses in which neighborhood-level percent Mexican population was the main independent variable, all Latinos without diabetes had higher odds of HbA1c screening compared with non-Latino White individuals, yet only those living in low percent Mexican-origin neighborhoods had increased monitoring rates (aRR 1.31 [95% CI 1.15-1.49]). CONCLUSIONS: These findings reveal novel variation in health care utilization according to Latino subgroup neighborhood characteristics and could inform the delivery of diabetes care for a growing and increasingly diverse Latino patient population. Clinicians and researchers whose work focuses on diabetes care should take steps to improve equity in diabetes and prevent inequity in treatment.