Increased Mortality of Black Incarcerated and Hospitalized People: a Single State Cohort Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify racial disparities in mortality and post-hospitalization outcomes among incarcerated individuals that were hospitalized during their incarceration period. METHODS: We designed a retrospective cohort study using administrative and hospital data collected from a preferred healthcare referral center for all Massachusetts jails and prisons between January 2011 and December 2018 with linkage to Massachusetts Vital Records and Statistics. We identified 4260 incarcerated individuals with complete data on race/ethnicity that were hospitalized during the study period. The primary study indicators were age, race, ethnicity, length of hospital stay, Elixhauser comorbidity score, incarceration facility type, and number of hospital admissions. The primary outcome was time to death. RESULTS: Of the incarcerated individuals that were hospitalized, 2606 identified as White, 1214 identified as Black, and 411 people who identified as some other race. The hazard of death significantly increased by 3% (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.02-1.03) for each additional yearly increase in age. After adjusting for the interaction between race and age, Black race was significantly associated with 3.01 increased hazard (95% CI: 1.75-5.19) of death for individuals hospitalized while incarcerated compared to White individuals hospitalized while incarcerated. Hispanic ethnicity and being incarcerated in a prison facility was not associated with time to mortality, while increased mean Elixhauser score (HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.06-1.08) and ≥ 3 hospital admissions (HR: 2.47; 95% CI: 2.07-2.95) increased the hazard of death. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest disparities exist in the mortality outcomes among Black and White individuals who are hospitalized during incarceration, with an increased rate of death among Black individuals. Despite hypothesized equal access to healthcare within correctional facilities, our findings suggest that incarcerated and hospitalized Black individuals may experience worse disparities than their White counterparts, which has not been previously explored or reported in the literature. In addition to decarceration, advocacy, and political efforts, increased efforts to support research access to datasets of healthcare outcomes, including hospitalization and death, for incarcerated people should be encouraged. Further research is needed to identify and address the implicit and explicit sources of these racial health disparities across the spectrum of healthcare provision.

Stakeholder-engaged research is necessary across the criminal-legal spectrum.

People with lived experience of incarceration have higher rates of morbidity and mortality compared to people without history of incarceration. Research conducted unethically in prisons and jails led to increased scrutiny of research to ensure the needs of those studied are protected. One consequence of increased restrictions on research with criminal-legal involved populations is reluctance to engage in research evaluations of healthcare for people who are incarcerated and people who have lived experience of incarceration. Ethical research can be done in partnership with people with lived experience of incarceration and other key stakeholders and should be encouraged. In this article, we describe how stakeholder engagement can be accomplished in this setting, and further, how such engagement leads to impactful research that can be disseminated and implemented across disciplines and communities. The goal is to build trust across the spectrum of people who work, live in, or are impacted by the criminal-legal system, with the purpose of moving toward health equity.

Getting started in jail, prison, and legal system research.

Extensive health inequities exist for persons with criminal-legal involvement in the USA. Researchers, both novice and experienced, are critical in documenting these inequities and implementing programs that address the many health and social problems of this population. However, working with currently or formerly incarcerated persons brings new challenges to researchers that may have not been previously considered as necessary. Because incarcerated persons were systemically exploited by biomedical researchers until reform following the Civil Rights Movement, resulting in their designation as a vulnerable population in the Code of Federal Regulations, enhanced protections are necessary in implementing contemporary research involving incarcerated persons. These enhanced protections can delay or prolong the regulatory approval process, particularly to the novice carceral system researcher, which may discourage some from engaging with this important population. Drawing on the many years of experience working with incarcerated persons accumulated by the Sexual Health Empowerment (S)HE Team at the University of Kansas Medical Center (KUMC), this article offers some concrete steps toward getting started in this work.

Qualitative exploration of the medical learner's journey into correctional health care at an academic medical center and its implications for medical education.

Correctional systems in several U.S. states have entered into partnerships with academic medical centers (AMCs) to provide healthcare for persons who are incarcerated. One AMC specializing in the care of incarcerated patients is the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston (UTMB), which hosts the only dedicated prison hospital in the U.S. and supplies 80% of the medical care for the entire Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). Nearly all medical students and residents at UTMB take part in the care of the incarcerated. This research, through qualitative exploration using focus group discussions, sets out to characterize the correctional care learning environment medical trainees enter. Participants outlined an institutional culture of low prioritization and neglect that dominated the learning environment in the prison hospital, resulting in treatment of the incarcerated as second-class patients. Medical learners pointed to delays in care, both within the prison hospital and within the TDCJ system, where diagnostic, laboratory, and medical procedures were delivered to incarcerated patients at a lower priority compared to free-world patients. Medical learners elaborated further on ethical issues that included the moral judgment of those who are incarcerated, bias in clinical decision making, and concerns for patient autonomy. Medical learners were left to grapple with complex challenges like the problem of dual loyalties without opportunities to critically reflect upon what they experienced. This study finds that, without specific vulnerable populations training for both trainees and correctional care faculty to address these institutional dynamics, AMCs risk replicating a system of exploitation and neglect of incarcerated patients and thereby exacerbating health inequities.

The eroding principle of justice in teaching medical professionalism.

This article examines the difficulties encountered in teaching professionalism to medical students in the current social and political climate where economic considerations take top priority in health care decision making. The conflict between the commitment to advocate at all times the interests of one's patients over one's own interests is discussed. With personal, institutional, tech industry, pharmaceutical industry, and third-party payer financial imperatives that stand between patients and the delivery of health care, this article investigates how medical ethics instructors are to teach professionalism in a responsible way that does not avoid dealing with the principle of justice.