Uptake and Equity in Influenza Vaccination Among Veterans with VA Coverage, Veterans Without VA Coverage, and Non-Veterans in the USA, 2019-2020.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is a primary method of reducing the burden of influenza, yet uptake is neither optimal nor equitable. Single-tier, primary care-oriented health systems may have an advantage in the efficiency and equity of vaccination. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of Veterans' Health Administration (VA) coverage with influenza vaccine uptake and disparities. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. PARTICIPANTS: Adult respondents to the 2019-2020 National Health Interview Survey. MAIN MEASURES: We examined influenza vaccination rates, and racial/ethnic and income-based vaccination disparities, among veterans with VA coverage, veterans without VA coverage, and adult non-veterans. We performed multivariable logistic regressions adjusted for demographics and self-reported health, with interaction terms to examine differential effects by race/ethnicity and income. KEY RESULTS: Our sample included n=2,277 veterans with VA coverage, n=2,821 veterans without VA coverage, and n=46,456 non-veterans. Veterans were more often White and male; among veterans, those with VA coverage had worse health and lower incomes. Veterans with VA coverage had a higher unadjusted vaccination rate (63.0%) than veterans without VA coverage (59.1%) and non-veterans (46.5%) (p<0.05 for each comparison). In our adjusted model, non-veterans were 11.4 percentage points (95% CI -14.3, -8.5) less likely than veterans with VA coverage to be vaccinated, and veterans without VA coverage were 6.7 percentage points (95% CI -10.3, -3.0) less likely to be vaccinated than those with VA coverage. VA coverage, compared with non-veteran status, was also associated with reduced racial/ethnic and income disparities in vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: VA coverage is associated with higher and more equitable influenza vaccination rates. A single-tier health system that emphasizes primary care may improve the uptake and equity of vaccination for influenza, and possibly other pathogens, like SARS-CoV2.

Trends and Disparities in the Distribution of Outpatient Physicians' Annual Face Time with Patients, 1979-2018.

BACKGROUND: Physician time is a valuable yet finite resource. Whether such time is apportioned equitably among population subgroups, and how the provision of that time has changed in recent decades, is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To investigate trends and racial/ethnic disparities in the receipt of annual face time with physicians in the USA. DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional. SETTING: National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 1979-1981, 1985, 1989-2016, 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Office-based physicians. MEASURES: Exposures included race/ethnicity (White, Black, and Hispanic); age (<18, 18-64, and 65+); and survey year. Our main outcome was patients' annual visit face time with a physician; secondary outcomes include annual visit rates and mean visit duration. RESULTS: Our sample included n=1,108,835 patient visits. From 1979 to 2018, annual outpatient physician face time per capita rose from 40.0 to 60.4 min, an increase driven by a rise in mean visit length and not in the number of visits. However, since 2005, mean annual face time with a primary care physician has fallen, a decline offset by rising time with specialists. Face time provided per physician changed little given growth in the physician workforce. A racial/ethnic gap in physician visit time present at the beginning of the study period widened over time. In 2014-2018, White individuals received 70.0 min of physician face time per year, vs. 52.4 among Black and 53.0 among Hispanic individuals. This disparity was driven by differences in visit rates, not mean visit length, and in the provision of specialist but not primary care. LIMITATION: Self-reported visit length. CONCLUSION: Americans' annual face time with office-based physicians rose for three decades after 1979, yet is still allocated inequitably, particularly by specialists; meanwhile, time spent by Americans with primary care physicians is falling. These trends and disparities may adversely affect patient outcomes. Policy change is needed to assure better allocation of this resource.

Specialty Care Utilization Among Adults with Limited English Proficiency.

BACKGROUND: People with limited English proficiency (LEP) face greater barriers to accessing medical care than those who are English proficient (EP). Language-related differences in the use of outpatient care across the full spectrum of physician specialties have not been studied. OBJECTIVE: To compare outpatient visit rates to physicians in 28 specialties by people with LEP vs EP. DESIGN: Multivariable negative binomial regression analysis of nationally representative data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (pooled 2013-2018) with adjustment for age, sex, and self-reported health status. PARTICIPANTS: 149,611 survey respondents aged 18 and older. EXPOSURE: LEP, defined as taking the survey in a language other than English. MAIN MEASURES: Annual per capita adjusted visit rate ratios (ARRs) comparing visit rates by LEP and EP persons to individual specialties, and to three categories of specialties: (1) primary care (internal or family medicine, geriatrics, general practice, or obstetrics/gynecology), (2) medical-subspecialties, or (3) surgical specialties. KEY RESULTS: Patients with LEP were underrepresented in 26 of 28 specialties. Disparities were particularly large for the following: pulmonology (ARR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.20-0.35), orthopedics (ARR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.30-0.40), otolaryngology (ARR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.27-0.59), and psychiatry (ARR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.32-0.58). Among individuals with several specific common chronic conditions, LEP-EP disparities in visits to specialties in those conditions generally persisted. Disparities were larger for medical subspecialties (ARR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.36-0.46) and surgical specialties (ARR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.42-0.50) than for primary care (ARR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with LEP are underrepresented in most outpatient specialty practices, particularly medical subspecialties and surgical specialties. Our findings highlight the need to remove language barriers to physician services in order to ensure access to the full spectrum of outpatient specialty care for people with LEP.

Financial Hardships Caused by Out-of-Pocket Abortion Costs in Texas, 2018.

Objectives. To identify financial hardships related to costs of obtaining abortion care in Texas, which has the highest uninsured rate in the United States and restricts insurance coverage for abortions. Methods. We surveyed patients seeking abortion at 12 Texas clinics in 2018 regarding costs and financial hardships related to abortion care. We compared mean out-of-pocket costs and the percentage reporting hardships across income and insurance categories. Results. Of 603 respondents, 42% were Latinx, 25% White, and 21% Black or African American, and most (62.0%) reported having low incomes (< 200% federal poverty level). Mean out-of-pocket costs were $634, which varied little across insurance groups. Patients with low incomes were more likely to obtain financial assistance from an abortion fund than were wealthier patients (12.3% vs 1.6%, respectively; P < .05). Financial hardships related to abortion costs were more common among uninsured (57.6%) and publicly insured (55.1%) patients than those with private insurance (48.2%). One in 5 (19.8%) uninsured respondents delayed buying food to pay for abortion care. Conclusions. Restrictions on insurance coverage for abortions result in high out-of-pocket costs and major financial hardships for most patients with low incomes in Texas. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(5):758-761. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306701).

Association of Texas' 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Pregnancy With the Number of Facility-Based Abortions in Texas and Surrounding States.

Importance: Texas' 2021 ban on abortion in early pregnancy may demonstrate how patterns of abortion might change following the US Supreme Court's June 2022 decision overturning Roe v Wade. Objective: To assess changes in the number of abortions and changes in the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents performed at 12 or more weeks of gestation in the first 6 months following implementation of Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB 8), which prohibited abortions after detection of embryonic cardiac activity. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective study of a sample of 50 Texas and out-of-state abortion facilities using an interrupted time series analysis to assess changes in the number of abortions, and Poisson regression to assess changes in abortions at 12 or more weeks of gestation. Data included 68 820 Texas facility-based abortions and 11 287 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents during the study period from September 1, 2020, to February 28, 2022. Exposures: Abortion care obtained after (September 2021-February 2022) vs before (September 2020-August 2021) implementation of SB 8. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were changes in the number of facility-based abortions for Texas residents, in Texas and out of state, in the month after implementation of SB 8 compared with the month before. The secondary outcome was the change in the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation during the 6-month period after the law's implementation. Results: Between September 2020 and August 2021, there were 55 018 abortions in Texas and 2547 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents. During the 6 months after SB 8, there were 13 802 abortions in Texas and 8740 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents. Compared with the month before implementation of SB 8, the number of Texas facility-based abortions significantly decreased from 5451 to 2169 (difference, -3282 [95% CI, -3171 to -3396]; incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.43 [95% CI, 0.36-0.51]) in the month after SB 8 was implemented. The number of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents significantly increased from 222 to 1332 (difference, 1110 [95% CI, 1047-1177]; IRR, 5.38 [95% CI, 4.19-6.91]). Overall, the total documented number of Texas facility-based and out-of-state abortions among Texas residents significantly decreased from 5673 to 3501 (absolute change, -2172 [95% CI, -2083 to -2265]; IRR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56-0.79]) in the first month after SB 8 was implemented compared with the previous month. Out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation increased from 17.1% (221/1291) to 31.0% (399/1289) (difference, 178 [95% CI, 153-206]) during the period between September 2021 and February 2022 (P < .001 for trend). Conclusions and Relevance: Among a sample of abortion facilities, the 2021 Texas law banning abortion in early pregnancy (SB 8) was significantly associated with a decrease in the documented total of facility-based abortions in Texas and obtained by Texas residents in surrounding states in the first month after implementation compared with the previous month. Over the 6 months following SB 8 implementation, the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation significantly increased.

Hospital Assets Before and After Private Equity Acquisition.

This study assesses changes in hospitals' capital assets after private equity acquisition.

Inequality and the health-care system in the USA.

Widening economic inequality in the USA has been accompanied by increasing disparities in health outcomes. The life expectancy of the wealthiest Americans now exceeds that of the poorest by 10-15 years. This report, part of a Series on health and inequality in the USA, focuses on how the health-care system, which could reduce income-based disparities in health, instead often exacerbates them. Other articles in this Series address population health inequalities, and the health effects of racism, mass incarceration, and the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Poor Americans have worse access to care than do wealthy Americans, partly because many remain uninsured despite coverage expansions since 2010 due to the ACA. For individuals with private insurance, rising premiums and cost sharing have undermined wage gains and driven many households into debt and even bankruptcy. Meanwhile, the share of health-care resources devoted to care of the wealthy has risen. Additional reforms that move forward, rather than backward, from the ACA are sorely needed to mitigate health and health-care inequalities and reduce the financial burdens of medical care borne by non-wealthy Americans.

Health and Financial Consequences of 24 States' Decision to Opt Out of Medicaid Expansion.

Twenty-four states have opted out of expanding Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act. We projected the number of persons who will remain uninsured because of the Medicaid opt-outs and used data from three prior studies to predict the health and financial impacts of the opt-outs. We estimate that as a result of the opt-outs, 7.74 million people who would have gained coverage will remain uninsured. This will result in between 7,076 and 16,945 more deaths than had all states opted-in, as well as 708,195 more persons screening positive for depression, 239,557 more persons suffering catastrophic medical expenditures, 420,273 fewer diabetics receiving medication, 193,735 fewer mammograms, and 441,260 fewer Pap smears. Many low-income adults will suffer health and financial harms because of their state's refusal to expand Medicaid coverage.

Health, Access to Care, and Financial Barriers to Care Among People Incarcerated in US Prisons.

Importance: Decades-old data indicate that people imprisoned in the US have poor access to health care despite their constitutional right to care. Most prisons impose co-payments for at least some medical visits. No recent national studies have assessed access to care or whether co-pays are associated with worse access. Objective: To determine the proportion of people who are incarcerated with health problems or pregnancy who used health services, changes in the prevalence of those conditions since 2004, and the association between their state's standard prison co-payment and care receipt in 2016. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis was conducted in October 2023 and used data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics' 2016 Survey of Prison Inmates, a nationally representative sample of adults in state or federal prisons, with some comparisons to the 2004 version of that survey. Exposures: The state's standard, per-visit co-payment amount in 2016 compared with weekly earnings at the prison's minimum wage. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported prevalence of 13 chronic physical conditions, 6 mental health conditions, and current severe psychological distress assessed using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale; proportion of respondents with such problems who did not receive any clinician visit or treatment; and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) comparing the likelihood of no clinician visit according to co-payment level. Results: Of 1 421 700 (unweighted: n = 24 848; mean [SD] age, 35.3 [0.3] years; 93.2% male individuals) prison residents in 2016, 61.7% (up from 55.9% in 2004) reported 1 or more chronic physical conditions; among them, 13.8% had received no medical visit since incarceration. A total of 40.1% of respondents reported ever having a mental health condition (up from 24.5% in 2004), of whom 33.0% had received no mental health treatment. A total of 13.3% of respondents met criteria for severe psychological distress, of whom 41.7% had not received mental health treatment in prison. Of state prison residents, 90.4% were in facilities requiring co-payments, including 63.3% in facilities with co-payments exceeding 1 week's prison wage. Co-payments, particularly when high, were associated with not receiving a needed health care visit (co-pay ≤1 week's wage: aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.10-1.86; co-pay >1 week's wage: aOR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.61-2.93). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that many people who are incarcerated with health problems received no care, particularly in facilities charging co-payments for medical visits.

Access to care following Planned Parenthood's termination from Texas' Medicaid network: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore Planned Parenthood Medicaid patients' experiences getting reproductive health care in Texas after the state terminated Planned Parenthood providers from its Medicaid program in 2021. STUDY DESIGN: Between January and September 2021, we recruited Medicaid patients who obtained care at Planned Parenthood health centers prior to the state termination using direct mailers, electronic messages, community outreach, and flyers in health centers. We conducted baseline and 2-month follow-up semistructured phone interviews about patients' previous experiences using Medicaid at Planned Parenthood and other providers and how the termination affected their care. We qualitatively analyzed the data using the principles of grounded theory. RESULTS: We interviewed 30 patients, 24 of whom completed follow-up interviews. Participants reported that Planned Parenthood reliably accepted different Medicaid plans, worked with patients to ameliorate the structural barriers they face to care, and referred them to other providers as needed. After Planned Parenthood's termination from the Texas Medicaid program, participants faced difficulties accessing care elsewhere, including same-day appointments and on-site medications. Consequences included delayed or forgone reproductive health care, including contraception, and emotional distress. CONCLUSIONS: Planned Parenthood Medicaid patients found it difficult to connect with other providers for reproductive health care and to obtain evidence-based care following the organization's termination from Medicaid. Ensuring all Medicaid patients have freedom to choose providers would improve access to quality contraception and other reproductive health care. IMPLICATIONS: Medicaid-funded reproductive health care access is restricted for people living on low incomes when providers do not reliably accept all Medicaid plans or cannot participate in Medicaid. This situation can lead to lower quality care, delayed or forgone care, and emotional distress.

Projected Health Outcomes Associated With 3 US Supreme Court Decisions in 2022 on COVID-19 Workplace Protections, Handgun-Carry Restrictions, and Abortion Rights.

Importance: Several recent US Supreme Court rulings have drawn criticism from the medical community, but their health consequences have not been quantitatively evaluated. Objective: To model health outcomes associated with 3 Supreme Court rulings in 2022 that invalidated workplace COVID-19 vaccine or mask-and-test requirements, voided state handgun-carry restrictions, and revoked the constitutional right to abortion. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytical modeling study estimated outcomes associated with 3 Supreme Court rulings in 2022: (1) National Federation of Independent Business v Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which invalidated COVID-19 workplace protections; (2) New York State Rifle and Pistol Association Inc v Bruen, Superintendent of New York State Police (Bruen), which voided state laws restricting handgun carry; and (3) Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization (Dobbs), which revoked the constitutional right to abortion. Data analysis was performed from July 1, 2022, to April 7, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: For the OSHA ruling, multiple data sources were used to calculate deaths attributable to COVID-19 among unvaccinated workers from January 4 to May 28, 2022, and the share of these deaths that would have been prevented by the voided protections. To model the Bruen decision, published estimates of the consequences of right-to-carry laws were applied to 2020 firearm-related deaths (and injuries) in 7 affected jurisdictions. For the Dobbs ruling, the model assessed unwanted pregnancy continuations, resulting from the change in distance to the closest abortion facility, and then excess deaths (and peripartum complications) from forcing these unwanted pregnancies to term. Results: The decision model projected that the OSHA decision was associated with 1402 additional COVID-19 deaths (and 22 830 hospitalizations) in early 2022. In addition, the model projected that 152 additional firearm-related deaths (and 377 nonfatal injuries) annually will result from the Bruen decision. Finally, the model projected that 30 440 fewer abortions will occur annually due to current abortion bans stemming from Dobbs, with 76 612 fewer abortions if states at high risk for such bans also were to ban the procedure; these bans will be associated with an estimated 6 to 15 additional pregnancy-related deaths each year, respectively, and hundreds of additional cases of peripartum morbidity. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that outcomes from 3 Supreme Court decisions in 2022 could lead to substantial harms to public health, including nearly 3000 excess deaths (and possibly many more) over a decade.

Public health and the epidemic of incarceration.

An unprecedented number of Americans have been incarcerated in the past generation. In addition, arrests are concentrated in low-income, predominantly nonwhite communities where people are more likely to be medically underserved. As a result, rates of physical and mental illnesses are far higher among prison and jail inmates than among the general public. We review the health profiles of the incarcerated; health care in correctional facilities; and incarceration's repercussions for public health in the communities to which inmates return upon release. The review concludes with recommendations that public health and medical practitioners capitalize on the public health opportunities provided by correctional settings to reach medically underserved communities, while simultaneously advocating for fundamental system change to reduce unnecessary incarceration.

African American patient experiences with a rapid HIV testing program in an urban public clinic.

BACKGROUND: Of 1174 new human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) cases diagnosed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 2008, a total of 771 (66%) were among African Americans. Philadelphia recently introduced a citywide rapid HIV testing program in public clinics. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study among 60 African Americans undergoing rapid HIV testing in one of Philadelphia's public clinics located in a zip code with high HIV incidence. Employing grounded theory, we used semistructured interviews to assess patients' motivations, perceptions, and clinical experiences with rapid HIV testing. Interviews were transcribed and coded; 20% were double coded to enhance reliability. RESULTS: Primary motivations for undergoing rapid HIV testing included: testing during routine clinical care, presenting for care with symptomatic sexually transmitted infections or opportunistic infections, knowing someone living with HIV/ AIDS, and perceiving oneself at risk for HIV. Most patients reported positive experiences with rapid testing and preferred it to conventional testing because it eliminated the need for return visits and decreased anxiety; however, many expressed concerns about accuracy of rapid HIV testing. Barriers to HIV testing among this population included low self-perceived risk, HIV stigma, and reported homophobia in respondents' communities. CONCLUSION: This rapid testing program was acceptable, convenient, and preferred over conventional HIV testing. Providing educational information about rapid and confirmatory HIV testing may further enhance acceptability of rapid HIV testing in this population. Nationwide expansion of rapid HIV testing in public health centers is an important and acceptable means of achieving President Obama's National AIDS Strategy goals of reducing racial disparities in HIV infection and improving linkage to HIV/AIDS treatment and care services.

Medication-assisted therapy for opioid-dependent incarcerated populations in New Mexico: statewide efforts to increase access.

An acute awareness of the profound social and medical costs associated with heroin and opiate addiction in New Mexico has led a group of advocates from public health, state and local governments, corrections, academia, and community activists to collaborate for the purpose of increasing access to medication-assisted therapy (MAT) with buprenorphine and methadone in New Mexico. This paper describes these collaborations, with a focus on the evolution of harm reduction approaches to substance abuse disorders and successful efforts to make MAT available to incarcerated persons.

A randomized trial of methadone initiation prior to release from incarceration.

Individuals who use heroin and illicit opioids are at high risk for infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and other blood-borne pathogens, as well as incarceration. The purpose of the randomized trial reported here is to compare outcomes between participants who initiated methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) prior to release from incarceration, with those who were referred to treatment at the time of release. Participants who initiated MMT prior to release were significantly more likely to enter treatment postrelease (P < .001) and for participants who did enter treatment, those who received MMT prerelease did so within fewer days (P = .03). They also reported less heroin use (P = .008), other opiate use (P = .09), and injection drug use (P = .06) at 6 months. Initiating MMT in the weeks prior to release from incarceration is a feasible and effective way to improve MMT access postrelease and to decrease relapse to opioid use.