¿No Hay Racismo?: application of the levels of racism framework to Latinx perspectives on barriers to health and wellbeing.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to increase understanding of the forms of systemic racism experienced by Latinx communities in North Carolina during the COVID-19 pandemic as identified by Latinx community health workers (CHWs) and community-based organization (CBO) leaders. METHODS: We held three focus groups in July 2022 (N = 16) with CHWs and CBO leaders in Spanish to discuss policy and community interventions that improved access to resources during the COVID-19 pandemic; policy or community interventions needed to improve care of Latinx communities; and lessons learned to improve the health of Latinx communities in the future. We performed directed and summative qualitative content analysis of the data in the original language using the Levels of Racism Framework by Dr. Camara Jones to identify examples of implicitly and explicitly discussed forms of systemic racism. RESULTS: Latinx CHWs and CBO leaders implicitly discussed numerous examples of all levels of racism when seeking and receiving health services, such as lack of resources for undocumented individuals and negative interactions with non-Latinx individuals, but did not explicitly name racism. Themes related to institutionalized racism included: differential access to resources due to language barriers; uninsured or undocumented status; exclusionary policies not accounting for cultural or socioeconomic differences; lack of action despite need; and difficulties obtaining sustainable funding. Themes related to personally-mediated racism included: lack of cultural awareness or humility; fear-inciting misinformation targeting Latinx populations; and negative interactions with non-Latinx individuals, organizations, or institutions. Themes related to internalized racism included: fear of seeking information or medical care; resignation or hopelessness; and competition among Latinx CBOs. Similarly, CHWs and CBO leaders discussed several interventions with systems-level impact without explicitly mentioning policy or policy change. CONCLUSION: Our research demonstrates community-identified examples of racism and confirms that Latinx populations often do not name racism explicitly. Such language gaps limit the ability of CHWs and CBOs to highlight injustices and limit the ability of communities to advocate for themselves. Although generally COVID-19 focused, themes identified represent long-standing, systemic barriers affecting Latinx communities. It is therefore critical that public and private policymakers consider these language gaps and engage with Latinx communities to develop community-informed anti-racist policies to sustainably reduce forms of racism experienced by this unique population.

Financing community partnerships for health equity: Findings and insights from cross-sector professionals.

OBJECTIVE: To enhance understanding of financial alignment challenges facing cross-sector partnerships (CSPs) pursuing health equity and offer insights to guide research and practice. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: We collected data through surveys and interviews with cross-sector professionals in 16 states, 2020-2021. STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed 51 CSP leaders and received 26 responses. Following administration of the surveys to CSP leaders, we also conducted interviews with cross-sector professionals. The data are analyzed descriptively, comparatively, and qualitatively using thematic analysis. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: For quantitative survey data, we compare partnership responses, differentiating perceived levels of alignment among partnerships certified by the Pathways Community HUB Institute (PCHI), partnerships interested in certification, and partnerships without connection to the PCHI® Model of care coordination. For interviews, we engaged CSP professionals and those who fund their work. Two research team members took notes for interviews, which were combined and made available for review by those interviewed. Data were analyzed independently by two team members who met to integrate, identify, and finalize thematic findings. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Our work supports previous findings that financing is a challenge for CSPs, while also suggesting that PCHI-certified partnerships may perceive greater progress in financial alignment than others. We identify four major financial barriers: limited and competitive funding; state health service delivery structures; cultural and practice divides across healthcare, social service, and public health sectors; and needs for further evidence of cross-sector service impacts on client health and costs. We also offer a continuum of measures of financial sustainability progress and identify key issues relating to financial incentivization/accountability. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest a need for public policy reviews and improvements to aid CSPs in addressing financial alignment challenges. We also offer a measurement framework and ideas to guide research and practice on financial alignment, based on empirical data.

Systemic Racism Affecting Latinx Population Health During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: Perspectives of Latinx Community Health Workers and Community-Based Organization Leaders.

Introduction: The purpose of this study is to identify forms of systemic racism experienced by Latinx communities in North Carolina during the COVID-19 pandemic as identified by Latinx community health workers (CHWs) and community-based organization (CBO) leaders. Methods: We conducted three focus groups in July 2022 (N=16). We performed qualitative analysis of data using an iterative inductive approach of the original language in Dedoose. Results: Four central themes emerged: (1) Access to resources for Latinx individuals; (2) Immediate, transitional, and future fears; (3) Benefits of CHWs; and (4) Lessons learned. Discussion: Institutional and state policies often do not involve community members, such as CHWs and CBO leaders, at the start of the development process, leading to ineffective interventions that perpetuate health disparities and systemic racism. Health Equity Implications: Community-informed policy recommendations can improve alignment of community and policy priorities to create more effective interventions to address systemic racism and promote health equity.

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.

Neighborhood Poverty and Distance to Pediatric Hospital Care.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the relationship between neighborhood poverty and geographic access to pediatric inpatient care. METHODS: This is a retrospective, cross-sectional study using 2017-18 hospital and demographic data, as well as geographic data from the 2010 census. Acute care hospitals in 17 states were included, comprising approximately one-third of the national population. The main outcome was distance to capable pediatric hospital care by neighborhood Area Deprivation Index (ADI), both overall and by urbanicity. RESULTS: Median distance to pediatric hospital care increased linearly with poverty across ADI national deciles (Pearson coefficient of 0.986; P < .001). The most advantaged neighborhoods were a median of 2.5 miles from the nearest pediatric capable hospital (interquartile range [IQR] 1.2-5.6) while those in the most disadvantaged were a median of 13.8 miles away (IQR 3.3-35.9; P < .001). The nearest hospital admitted children in 51.17% (7927) of advantaged neighborhoods (lowest national ADI quintile) and only 26.02% (3729) of disadvantaged neighborhoods (highest national ADI quintile). The association between poverty and median distance to care was observed in rural, suburban, and urban census block groups (P < .001 for all trends). In suburban neighborhoods, children from the most disadvantaged neighborhoods were 3 times as likely as children from the most advantaged neighborhoods to live more than 20 miles from pediatric inpatient care (27.85%, 456,533 of children from bottom quintile neighborhoods vs 9.24%, 259,787 of children from top quintile neighborhoods, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Distances to capable pediatric hospital care are greater from poor than affluent neighborhoods. This carries potential implications for disparities in pediatric health outcomes.

The social vulnerability metric (SVM) as a new tool for public health.

OBJECTIVE: To derive and validate a new ecological measure of the social determinants of health (SDoH), calculable at the zip code or county level. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: The most recent releases of secondary, publicly available data were collected from national U.S. health agencies as well as state and city public health departments. STUDY DESIGN: The Social Vulnerability Metric (SVM) was constructed from U.S. zip-code level measures (2018) from survey data using multidimensional Item Response Theory and validated using outcomes including all-cause mortality (2016), COVID-19 vaccination (2021), and emergency department visits for asthma (2018). The SVM was also compared with the existing Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) to determine convergent validity and differential predictive validity. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: The data were collected directly from published files available to the public online from national U.S. health agencies as well as state and city public health departments. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The correlation between SVM scores and national age-adjusted county all-cause mortality was r = 0.68. This correlation demonstrated the SVM's robust validity and outperformed the SVI with an almost four-fold increase in explained variance (46% vs. 12%). The SVM was also highly correlated (r ≥ 0.60) to zip-code level health outcomes for the state of California and city of Chicago. CONCLUSIONS: The SVM offers a measurement tool improving upon the performance of existing SDoH composite measures and has broad applicability to public health that may help in directing future policies and interventions. The SVM provides a single measure of SDoH that better quantifies associations with health outcomes.

Identifying violence against persons at a safety-net hospital: Evidence from the first 6 months of implementation.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence and predictors of screening for violence against persons and victim service utilization within an integrated safety-net health system. STUDY SETTING: Emergency Department (ED) at Parkland Hospital-Dallas County's largest safety-net provider of services for minority and underinsured and uninsured patients. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal study during the first 6 months of a universal violence against persons screener. DATA COLLECTION: Health records were extracted for all patients with a visit to the ED between January and July, 2021. Modeling described the patient population across screening (screened vs. not screened) and, among those screened, the results (positive vs. negative), average time spent in the ED, and referral patterns for victim services. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: During the study period, 65,563 unique patients with 95,555 encounters occurred. Seventy-one percent (n = 67,535) were screened for violence against persons and, of those, 2% screened positive (n = 1349). Of the patients who screened positive, 1178 (87%) were referred to and 806 (60%) received care at victim services. Implementing screening did not increase the length of stay at ED. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic implementation of comprehensive violence screening at a safety-net system can result in robust identification and timely referrals to victim services.

Effects of a standardized community health worker intervention on hospitalization among disadvantaged patients with multiple chronic conditions: A pooled analysis of three clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effects of a standardized community health worker (CHW) intervention on hospitalization. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Pooled data from three randomized clinical trials (n = 1340) conducted between 2011 and 2016. STUDY DESIGN: The trials in this pooled analysis were conducted across diseases and settings, with a common study design, intervention, and outcome measures. Participants were patients living in high-poverty regions of Philadelphia and were predominantly Medicaid insured. They were randomly assigned to receive usual care versus IMPaCT, an intervention in which CHWs provide tailored social support, health behavior coaching, connection with resources, and health system navigation. Trial one (n = 446) tested two weeks of IMPaCT among hospitalized general medical patients. Trial two (n = 302) tested six months of IMPaCT among outpatients at two academic primary care clinics. Trial three (n = 592) tested six months of IMPaCT among outpatients at academic, Veterans Affairs (VA), and Federally Qualified Health Center primary care practices. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: The primary outcome for this study was all-cause hospitalization, as measured by total number of hospital days per patient. Hospitalization data were collected from statewide or VA databases at 30 days postenrollment in Trial 1, twelve months postenrollment in Trial 2, and nine months postenrollment in Trial 3. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Over 9398 observed patient months, the total number of hospital days per patient in the intervention group was 66 percent of the total in the control group (849 days for 674 intervention patients vs 1258 days for 660 control patients, incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.66, P < .0001). This reduction was driven by fewer hospitalizations per patient (0.27 vs 0.34, P < .0001) and shorter mean length of stay (4.72 vs 5.57 days, P = .03). The intervention also decreased rates of hospitalization outside patients' primary health system (18.8 percent vs 34.8 percent, P = .0023). CONCLUSIONS: Data from three randomized clinical trials across multiple settings show that a standardized CHW intervention reduced total hospital days and hospitalizations outside the primary health system. This is the largest analysis of randomized trials to demonstrate reductions in hospitalization with a health system-based social intervention.

Food insecurity, health care utilization, and health care expenditures.

OBJECTIVE: To disentangle the relationships among food insecurity, health care utilization, and health care expenditures. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: We use national data on 13 465 adults (age ≥ 18) from the 2016 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), the first year of the food insecurity measures. STUDY DESIGN: We employ two-stage empirical models (probit for any health care use/expenditure, ordinary least squares, and generalized linear models for amount of utilization/expenditure), controlling for demographics, health insurance, poverty status, chronic conditions, and other predictors. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Our results show that the likelihood of any health care expenditure (total, inpatient, emergency department, outpatient, and pharmaceutical) is higher for marginal, low, and very low food secure individuals. Relative to food secure households, very low food secure households are 5.1 percentage points (P < .001) more likely to have any health care expenditure, and have total health care expenditures that are 24.8 percent higher (P = .011). However, once we include chronic conditions in the models (ie, high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, emphysema, high cholesterol, cancer, diabetes, arthritis, and asthma), these underlying health conditions mitigate the differences in expenditures by food insecurity status (only the likelihood of any having any health care expenditure for very low food secure households remains statistically significant). CONCLUSIONS: Policy makers and government agencies are focused on addressing deficiencies in social determinants of health and the resulting impacts on health status and health care utilization. Our results indicate that chronic conditions are strongly associated with food insecurity and higher health care spending. Efforts to alleviate food insecurity should consider the dual burden of chronic conditions. Finally, future research can address specific mechanisms underlying the relationships between food security, health, and health care.

Methodology of the Discrimination in the United States survey.

OBJECTIVE: To describe survey methods used to examine reported experiences of discrimination against African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, Native Americans, women, and LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) adults. DATA SOURCE AND STUDY DESIGN: Data came from a nationally representative, probability-based telephone survey of 3453 US adults, conducted January-April 2017. METHODS: We examined the survey instrument, sampling design, and weighting of the survey, and present selected survey findings. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Examining reported discrimination experienced by multiple groups in a telephone survey requires attention to details of sampling and weighting. In health care settings, 32 percent of African Americans reported discrimination, as did 23 percent of Native Americans, 20 percent of Latinos, 18 percent of women, 16 percent of LGBTQ adults, and 13 percent of Asian Americans. Also, 51 percent of LGBTQ adults, 42 percent of African Americans, and 38 percent of Native Americans reported identity-based violence against themselves or family members; 57 percent of African Americans and 41 percent of women reported discrimination in pay or promotions; 50 percent of African Americans, 29 percent of Native Americans, and 27 percent of Latinos reported being discriminated against in interactions with police. CONCLUSIONS: Even the small selection of results presented in this article as examples of survey measures show a pattern of substantial reported discrimination against all six groups studied.

Discrimination in the United States: Perspectives for the future.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize findings from this Special Issue, which examine reported experiences of discrimination among six underrepresented groups in public opinion research-blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, Asian Americans, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ) adults, and women. DATA SOURCE AND STUDY DESIGN: Data come from a nationally representative, probability-based telephone survey of 3453 US adults, conducted January-April 2017. METHODS: We calculated the percent of adults reporting discrimination in several domains, including health care. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In health care encounters, 32 percent of black adults reported discrimination, as did 23 percent of Native Americans, 20 percent of Latinos, 18 percent of women, 16 percent of LGBTQ adults, and 13 percent of Asian Americans. Significant shares also reported experiencing racial, gender, or LGBTQ identity-based violence against themselves or family members, including 51 percent of LGBTQ adults, 42 percent of blacks, 38 percent of Native Americans, and 21 percent of women. At least one in seven blacks (22 percent), LGBTQ adults (18 percent), Latinos (17 percent), and Native Americans (15 percent) reported avoiding health care for themselves or family members over concerns of anticipated discrimination or unfair treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, this polling effort illustrates the significant and widespread level of discrimination against many groups in America today, as well as the complex manifestation of these experiences across different groups and different areas of life. While it is beyond the scope of these results to make specific recommendations for how to end discrimination in each area of life we studied, this Special Issue provides important evidence that more research and practice on discrimination are sorely needed in health services research.

"Are you accepting new patients?" A pilot field experiment on telephone-based gatekeeping and Black patients' access to pediatric care.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine whether name and accent cues that the caller is Black shape physician offices' responses to telephone-based requests for well-child visits. METHOD AND DATA: In this pilot study, we employed a quasi-experimental audit design and examined a stratified national sample of pediatric and family practice offices. Our final data include information from 205 audits (410 completed phone calls). Qualitative data were blind-coded into binary variables. Our case-control comparisons using McNemar's tests focused on acceptance of patients, withholding information, shaping conversations, and misattributions. FINDINGS: Compared to the control group, "Black" auditors were less likely to be told an office was accepting new patients and were more likely to experience both withholding behaviors and misattributions about public insurance. The strength of associations varied according to whether the cue was based on name or accent. Additionally, the likelihood and ways office personnel communicated that they were not accepting patients varied by region. CONCLUSIONS: Linguistic profiling over the telephone is an aspect of structural racism that should be further studied and perhaps integrated into efforts to promote equitable access to care. Future research should look reactions to both name and accent, taking practice characteristics and regional differences into consideration.

Building a Workforce for Future Health Systems: Reflections from Health Policy and Systems Research.

INTRODUCTION: The era of the Sustainable Development Goals calls for multidisciplinary research and intersectoral approaches to addressing health challenges. This presents a unique opportunity for multidisciplinary fields concerned with complex systems. Those working in system-oriented fields such as health policy and systems research (HPSR) and health services research must be forward-thinking in optimizing their collective ability to address these global challenges. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this commentary was to share reflections on challenges and strategies in managing the HPSR workforce in order to stimulate dialogue and cross-learning across similar fields. STRATEGIES/FINDINGS: The following strategies are discussed here: definitional clarity of expected competencies and coordination across HPS researchers, national investment in HPSR, institutional capacity for coproduction of knowledge across different types of actors, and participatory leadership. CONCLUSIONS: Creative approaches in training, financing, developing, and leading the diverse workforce required to strengthen health systems can pave the way for its full-time and part-time members to work together.

Identifying Homeless Medicaid Enrollees Using Enrollment Addresses.

OBJECTIVE: To design and test the validity of a method to identify homelessness among Medicaid enrollees using mailing address data. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Enrollment and claims data on Medicaid expansion enrollees in Hennepin and Ramsey counties who also provided self-reported information on their current housing situation in a psychosocial needs assessment. STUDY DESIGN: Construction of address-based indicators and comparison with self-report data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Among 1,677 enrollees, 427 (25 percent) self-reported homelessness, of whom 328 (77 percent) had at least one positive address indicator. Depending on the type of addresses included in the indicator, sensitivity to detect self-reported homelessness ranged from 30 to 76 percent and specificity from 79 to 97 percent. CONCLUSIONS: An address-based indicator can identify a large proportion of Medicaid enrollees who are experiencing homelessness. This approach may be of interest to researchers, states, and health systems attempting to identify homeless populations.

The Changing Roles of Community Health Workers.

OBJECTIVE: To examine what different types of employers value in hiring community health workers (CHWs) and determine what new competencies CHWs might need to meet workforce demands in the context of an evolving payment landscape and substantial literature suggesting that CHWs are uniquely qualified to address health disparities. STUDY DESIGN: We used a multimethod approach, including a literature review, development of a database of 76 programs, interviews with 24 key informants, and a qualitative comparison of major CHW competency lists. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We find a shift in CHW employment settings from community-based organizations to hospitals/health systems. Providers that hire CHWs directly, as opposed to partnering with community organizations, report that they value education and training more highly than traditional characteristics, such as peer status. We find substantial similarities across competency lists, but a gap in competencies that relate to CHWs' ability to integrate into health systems while maintaining their unique identity. CONCLUSIONS: As CHW integration into health care organizations advances, and as states move forward with CHW certification efforts, it is important to develop new competencies that relate to CHW-health system integration. Chief among them is the ability to explain and defend the CHW's unique occupational identity.