Understanding Health Equity in Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are measures of patients' health that are conveyed directly by individual patients. These measures serve as instruments to evaluate the impact of interventions on any aspect of patients' health, from specific symptoms to broader quality of life indicators. However, their effectiveness relies on capturing relevant factors accurately. Whereas they are commonly used in clinical trials, PROs extend their influence across health care settings, informing clinicians, health care payers, regulators, and administrators to guide quality improvement and reimbursement decisions. Neglecting health equity considerations in PRO development and implementation widens health disparities, leading to biased interpretations, medical mismanagement, and poor health outcomes among marginalized groups. To foster equitable health care, efforts must focus on considering the values of underrepresented populations in PRO design, addressing barriers to completion, enhancing representation in research, providing cultural competency training for clinicians, and allocating research funding to support health equity research. By addressing these issues, advances can be made toward fostering inclusive, equitable health care for all individuals.

Factors Influencing Career Choice of Allergy and Immunology Fellows-in-Training: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Program Directors Assembly Executive Committee.

BACKGROUND: As the burden of allergic and immunologic disease continues to increase, there is increased demand for a larger Allergy and Immunology (AI) subspecialty workforce. The field must prioritize the expansion of our workforce and the recruitment of exceptional and diverse trainees to ensure the vitality of the specialty. Although the AI fellowship match has traditionally been competitive, recent trends in fellowship applications have demonstrated fewer applicants per fellowship position. This trend has made recruitment a priority on the agenda of the national AI societies. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate key factors influencing the decision to choose the field of AI by querying fellows-in-training. METHODS: A survey was created and distributed yearly to fellows-in-training from 2017 to 2021 to identify factors influencing a career choice in AI. RESULTS: Approximately 59% of respondents rotated with AI in residency and 35% in both medical school and residency. Most respondents reported having a mentor in the field before fellowship, and many had their first exposures to AI during medical school (40%) or residency (32%). Most respondents decided to pursue AI during residency. The most common factors that influenced the decision to pursue AI were work/life balance, clinical aspects of the field, mentorship, and research opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that the decision to pursue a career in AI often occurs during residency training and is motivated primarily by work/life balance, clinical aspects of the field, and clinician mentorship. Our survey results could provide guidance to AI training programs on strategies to recruit exceptional and diverse trainees.

Methods for Cross-Cultural Communication in Clinic Encounters.

Successful cross-cultural communication is critical for adequate exchange of ideas with our patients. Our communities have become more diverse, and thus, the necessity has increased. The murder of George Floyd and other atrocities have sparked recognition of the need to address social injustice and racism and as we fight the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Allergist-immunologists are uniquely trained to explain the complex immunology of COVID-19 to patients, but they have less experience discussing issues of health equity. Here, we explore critical components of patient-provider communication: communicating with those for whom English is a second language, advising patients with limited health literacy, and understanding nonbiomedical views of health and wellness. Two barriers to communication are discussed: implicit bias and structural racism. Finally, we consider how the recent innovations in technology, the electronic health record including its patient portal and the use of telemedicine, have both impeded and improved communication. We offer suggestions as to what we could do to address these in our own local communities that would ensure better understanding and exchange of health information. This perspective grew out of an effort by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (AAAAI) Committee on the Underserved to provide training in cross-cultural communication.

Health disparities in allergic and immunologic conditions in racial and ethnic underserved populations: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Committee on the Underserved.

Health disparities are health differences linked with economic, social, and environmental disadvantage. They adversely affect groups that have systematically experienced greater social or economic obstacles to health. Renewed efforts are needed to reduced health disparities in the United States, highlighted by the disparate impact on racial minorities during the coronavirus pandemic. Institutional or systemic patterns of racism are promoted and legitimated through accepted societal standards, and organizational processes within the field of medicine, and contribute to health disparities. Herein, we review current evidence regarding health disparities in allergic rhinitis, asthma, atopic dermatitis, food allergy, drug allergy, and primary immune deficiency disease in racial and ethnic underserved populations. Best practices to address these disparities involve addressing social determinants of health and adopting policies to improve access to specialty care and treatment for the underserved through telemedicine and community partnerships, cross-cultural provider training to reduce implicit bias, inclusion of underserved patients in research, implementation of culturally competent patient education, and recruitment and training of health care providers from underserved communities. Addressing health disparities requires a multilevel approach involving patients, health providers, local agencies, professional societies, and national governmental agencies.

Disparities in Asthma and Allergy Care: What Can We Do?

The coronavirus disease pandemic and the growing movements for social and racial equality have increased awareness of disparities in American health care that exist on every level. Social determinants of health, structural racism, and implicit bias play major roles in preventing health equity. We begin with the larger picture and then focus on examples of systemic and health inequities and their solutions that have special relevance to allergy-immunology. We propose a 4-prong approach to address inequities that requires (1) racial and ethnic inclusivity in research with respect to both participants and investigators, (2) diversity in all aspects of training and practice, (3) improvement in communication between clinicians and patients, and (4) awareness of the social determinants of health. By communication we mean sensitivity to the role of language, cultural background, and health beliefs in physician-patient interactions and provision of training and equipment so that the use of telecommunication can be a resource for all patients. The social determinants of health are the social factors that affect health and the success of health care, such as adequacy of housing and access to nutritious foods. Using this 4-prong approach we can overcome health disparities.