Pathogen disgust is associated with interpersonal bias among healthcare professionals.

Background and objectives: Pathogen avoidance is a fundamental motive that shapes many aspects of human behavior including bias against groups stereotypically linked to disease (e.g. immigrants, outgroup members). This link has only been examined in convenience samples and it is unknown how pathogen avoidance processes operate in populations experiencing prolonged and heightened pathogen threat such as healthcare professionals. We examined whether healthcare professionals demonstrate the same link between pathogen disgust and intergroup bias as has been documented among the general population. Methodology: Participants (N = 317; 210 healthcare professionals) were recruited using snowball sampling to take an online survey. Participants completed the Three Domain Disgust Scale to assess pathogen, sexual and moral disgust. Participants then rated their perceptions of a fictitious immigrant group ('Krasneeans') and the degree to which they endorsed group-binding moral values. Results: Compared to control participants, healthcare professionals reported lower levels of pathogen disgust, but not sexual or moral disgust. However, regardless of profession, higher pathogen disgust was associated with viewing Krasneeans as less likeable and more unclean. Additionally, regardless of profession, higher pathogen disgust was associated with greater endorsement of group-binding moral values, although healthcare professionals reported greater overall endorsement of group-binding moral values than did control participants. Conclusions and implications: Although healthcare professionals demonstrated lower levels of pathogen disgust, they nevertheless exhibited largely the same relationship between pathogen disgust and interpersonal biases as did control participants. One practical implication of this association is that pathogen avoidance motives may contribute to inequitable patient treatment in healthcare settings.

Patient Ethnicity Affects Triage Assessments and Patient Prioritization in U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Emergency Departments.

Ethnic minority patients receive lower priority triage assignments in Veteran's Affairs (VA) emergency departments (EDs) compared to White patients, but it is currently unknown whether this disparity arises from generalized biases across the triage assessment process or from differences in how objective and/or subjective institution-level or person-level information is incorporated into the triage assessment process, thus contributing to disparate treatment.The VA database of electronic medical records of patients who presented to the VA ED from 2008 to 2012 was used to measure patient ethnicity, self-reported pain intensity (PI) levels, heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), and nurse-provided triage assignment, the Emergency Severity Index (ESI) score. Multilevel, random effects linear modeling was used to control for demographic and clinical characteristics of patients as well as age, gender, and experience of triage nurses.A total of 359,642 patient/provider encounters between 129,991 VA patients and 774 nurses were included in the study. Patients were 61% non-Hispanic White [NHW], 28% African-American, 7% Hispanic, 2% Asian-American, <1% American Indian/Alaska Native, and 1% mixed ethnicity. After controlling for demographic characteristics of nurses and patients, African-American, Hispanic, and mixed-ethnicity patients reported higher average PI scores but lower HRs and RRs than NHW patients. NHW patients received higher priority ESI ratings with lower PI when compared against African-American patients. NHW patients with low to moderate HRs also received higher priority ESI scoring than African-American, Hispanic, Asian-American, and Mixed-ethnicity patients; however, when HR was high NHWs received lower priority ESI ratings than each of the minority groups (except for African-Americans).This study provides evidence for systemic differences in how patients' vital signs are applied for determining ESI scores for different ethnic groups. Additional prospective research will be needed to determine how this specific person-level mechanism affects healthcare quality and outcomes.

Birth weight predicted baseline muscular efficiency, but not response of energy expenditure to calorie restriction: An empirical test of the predictive adaptive response hypothesis.

OBJECTIVES: Aiming to test the evolutionary significance of relationships linking prenatal growth conditions to adult phenotypes, this study examined whether birth size predicts energetic savings during fasting. We specifically tested a Predictive Adaptive Response (PAR) model that predicts greater energetic saving among adults who were born small. METHODS: Data were collected from a convenience sample of young adults living in Albuquerque, NM (n = 34). Indirect calorimetry quantified changes in resting energy expenditure (REE) and active muscular efficiency that occurred in response to a 29-h fast. Multiple regression analyses linked birth weight to baseline and postfast metabolic values while controlling for appropriate confounders (e.g., sex, body mass). RESULTS: Birth weight did not moderate the relationship between body size and energy expenditure, nor did it predict the magnitude change in REE or muscular efficiency observed from baseline to after fasting. Alternative indicators of birth size were also examined (e.g., low v. normal birth weight, comparison of tertiles), with no effects found. However, baseline muscular efficiency improved by 1.1% per 725 g (S.D.) increase in birth weight (P = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Birth size did not influence the sensitivity of metabolic demands to fasting-neither at rest nor during activity. Moreover, small birth size predicted a reduction in the efficiency with which muscles convert energy expended into work accomplished. These results do not support the ascription of adaptive function to phenotypes associated with small birth size. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 28:484-492, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Ethnic Disparities in Emergency Severity Index Scores among U.S. Veteran's Affairs Emergency Department Patients.

BACKGROUND: The goal of these analyses was to determine whether there were systematic differences in Emergency Severity Index (ESI) scores, which are intended to determine priority of treatment and anticipate resource needs, across categories of race and ethnicity, after accounting for patient-presenting vital signs and examiner characteristics, and whether these differences varied among male and female Veterans Affairs (VA) ED patients. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used a large national database of electronic medical records of ED patients from twenty-two U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ED stations to determine whether ESI assignments differ systematically by race or ethnicity. Multi-level, random effects linear modeling was used to control for demographic characteristics and patient's vital signs (heart rate, respiratory rate, and pain level), as well as age, gender, and experience of triage nurses. The dataset included 129,991 VA patients presenting for emergency care between 2008 and 2012 (91% males; 61% non-Hispanic White, 28% Black, 7% Hispanic, 2% Asian, <1% American Indian/Alaska Native, 1% mixed ethnicity) and 774 nurses for a total of 359,642 patient/examiner encounters. Approximately 13% of the variance in ESI scores was due to patient characteristics and 21% was due to the nurse characteristics. After controlling for characteristics of nurses and patients, Black patients were assigned less urgent ESI scores than White patients, and this effect was more prominent for Black males compared with Black females. A similar interaction was found for Hispanic males. It remains unclear how these results may generalize to EDs and patient populations outside of the U.S. VA Health Care system. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest the possibility that subgroups of VA patients receive different ESI ratings in triage, which may have cascading, downstream consequences for patient treatment quality, satisfaction with care, and trust in the health equity of emergency care.

Pain patients and who they live with: a correlational study of coresidence patterns and pain interference.

BACKGROUND: Mixed associations have been observed between various aspects of 'social support' and patient pain experiences. OBJECTIVE: To explore the possibility that more basic social factors, namely coresidence patterns, may be associated with variability in patient pain experiences. METHODS: Relationships between coresidence partners and self-reported pain that interferes with activities were examined in a large representative sample of home health care patients (n=11,436; age range 18 to 107 years, mean [± SD] age 66.3±16.1 years; 55% females). RESULTS: After controlling for sex, age and behavioural risks, compared with living alone, coresidence with an intimate affiliate (eg, spouse, relative) predicted greater pain interference (Cohen's d = 0.10 to 1.72), and coresidence with a less intimate type of affiliate (eg, friend, paid help) predicted lower pain interference (Cohen's d = -0.21 to -0.83). In general, however, coresidence patterns accounted for small proportions of variance in pain interference, and the magnitudes of these effects varied widely according to patients' sex, age and diagnosis. DISCUSSION: The findings suggest that fundamental components of patient's home-living environment may be associated with potential costs and benefits related to clinically relevant pain functioning for some subgroups of patients. CONCLUSION: Further research that incorporates quantitative and qualitative assessments of patient pain functioning is warranted to better understand how objective and subjective characteristics of patients' home-living environment may inform the development of more individualized pain treatment options for patients with differing social circumstances.