Obesity Disparities Among Adult Single-Race and Multiracial Asian and Pacific Islander Populations.

Importance: Despite increasing numbers of multiracial individuals, they are often excluded in studies or aggregated within larger race and ethnicity groups due to small sample sizes. Objective: To examine disparities in the prevalence of obesity among single-race and multiracial Asian and Pacific Islander individuals compared with non-Hispanic White (hereafter, White) individuals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used electronic health record (EHR) data linked to social determinants of health and health behavior data for adult (age ≥18 years) members of 2 large health care systems in California and Hawai'i who had at least 1 ambulatory visit to a primary care practitioner between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from October 31, 2022, to July 31, 2023. Exposure: Self-identified race and ethnicity provided in the EHR as a single-race category (Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Native Hawaiian only, Other Pacific Islander, or White) or a multiracial category (Asian and Pacific Islander; Asian, Pacific Islander, and White; Asian and White; or Pacific Islander and White). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥30.0), based on last measured height and weight from the EHR. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between race and ethnicity and odds of obesity. Results: A total of 5229 individuals (3055 [58.4%] male; mean [SD] age, 70.73 [11.51] years) were examined, of whom 444 (8.5%) were Asian Indian; 1091 (20.9%), Chinese; 483 (9.2%), Filipino; 666 (12.7%), Japanese; 91 (1.7%), Native Hawaiian; 95 (1.8%), Other Pacific Islander; and 888 (17.0%), White. The percentages of individuals who identified as multiracial were as follows: 417 (8.0%) were Asian and Pacific Islander; 392 (7.5%), Asian, Pacific Islander, and White; 248 (4.7%), Asian and White; and 414 (7.9%), Pacific Islander and White. A total of 1333 participants (25.5%) were classified as having obesity based on standard BMI criteria. Obesity was highest among people who identified as Asian, Pacific Islander, and White (204 of 392 [52.0%]) followed by those who identified as Other Pacific Islander (47 of 95 [49.5%]), Native Hawaiian (44 of 91 [48.4%]), and Pacific Islander and White (186 of 414 [44.9%]). After accounting for demographic, socioeconomic, and health behavior factors, people who identified as Asian, Pacific Islander, and White (odds ratio [OR], 1.80; 95% CI, 1.37-2.38) or Pacific Islander and White (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.18-2.04) had increased odds of obesity compared with White individuals. All single-race Asian groups had lower odds of obesity compared with White individuals: Asian Indian (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.20-0.40), Chinese (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.17-0.29), Filipino (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35-0.62), and Japanese (OR, 0.38, 95% CI, 0.29-0.50). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, multiracial Asian and Pacific Islander individuals had an increased prevalence of obesity compared with many of their single-race counterparts. As the number of multiracial individuals increases, it will be important for clinical and public health systems to track disparities in these populations.

Opportunities to Increase Science of Diversity and Inclusion in Clinical Trials: Equity and a Lack of a Control.

The United States witnessed a nearly 4-fold increase in personal health care expenditures between 1980 and 2010. Despite innovations and obvious benefits to health, participants enrolled in clinical trials still do not accurately represent the racial and ethnic composition of patients nationally or globally. This lack of diversity in cohorts limits the generalizability and significance of results among all populations and has deep repercussions for patient equity. To advance diversity in clinical trials, robust evidence for the most effective strategies for recruitment of diverse participants is needed. A major limitation of previous literature on clinical trial diversity is the lack of control or comparator groups for different strategies. To date, interventions have focused primarily on (1) community-based interventions, (2) institutional practices, and (3) digital health systems. This review article outlines prior intervention strategies across these 3 categories and considers health policy and ethical incentives for substantiation before US Food and Drug Administration approval. There are no current studies that comprehensively compare these interventions against one another. The American Heart Association Strategically Focused Research Network on the Science of Diversity in Clinical Trials represents a multicenter, collaborative network between Stanford School of Medicine and Morehouse School of Medicine created to understand the barriers to diversity in clinical trials by contemporaneous head-to-head interventional strategies accessing digital, institutional, and community-based recruitment strategies to produce informed recruitment strategies targeted to improve underrepresented patient representation in clinical trials.

Novel Prediction Equations for Absolute Risk Assessment of Total Cardiovascular Disease Incorporating Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic (CKM) syndrome is a novel construct recently defined by the American Heart Association in response to the high prevalence of metabolic and kidney disease. Epidemiological data demonstrate higher absolute risk of both atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) and heart failure as an individual progresses from CKM stage 0 to stage 3, but optimal strategies for risk assessment need to be refined. Absolute risk assessment with the goal to match type and intensity of interventions with predicted risk and expected treatment benefit remains the cornerstone of primary prevention. Given the growing number of therapies in our armamentarium that simultaneously address all 3 CKM axes, novel risk prediction equations are needed that incorporate predictors and outcomes relevant to the CKM context. This should also include social determinants of health, which are key upstream drivers of CVD, to more equitably estimate and address risk. This scientific statement summarizes the background, rationale, and clinical implications for the newly developed sex-specific, race-free risk equations: PREVENT (AHA Predicting Risk of CVD Events). The PREVENT equations enable 10- and 30-year risk estimates for total CVD (composite of atherosclerotic CVD and heart failure), include estimated glomerular filtration rate as a predictor, and adjust for competing risk of non-CVD death among adults 30 to 79 years of age. Additional models accommodate enhanced predictive utility with the addition of CKM factors when clinically indicated for measurement (urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio and hemoglobin A1c) or social determinants of health (social deprivation index) when available. Approaches to implement risk-based prevention using PREVENT across various settings are discussed.

Disparities and Trends in Routine Adult Vaccination Rates Among Disaggregated Asian American Subgroups, National Health Interview Survey 2006-2018.

Introduction: Vaccination rates may be improved through culturally tailored messages, but little is known about them among disaggregated Asian American subgroups. We assessed the vaccination rates for key vaccines among these subgroups. Methods: Using the National Health Interview Survey, we analyzed recent vaccination rates (2015-2018, n=188,250) and trends (2006-2018) among Asians (Chinese [n=3,165], Asian Indian [n=3,525], Filipino [n=3,656], other Asian [n=5,819]) and non-Hispanic White adults (n=172,085) for 6 vaccines (the human papillomavirus, hepatitis B, pneumococcal, influenza, tetanus-diphtheria [tetanus], and shingles vaccines). We controlled demographic, socioeconomic, and health-related variables in multivariable logistic regression and predicted marginal modeling analyses. We also computed vaccination rates among Asian American subgroups on the 2015-2018 National Health Interview Survey data stratified by foreign-born and U.S.-born status. We used Joinpoint regression to analyze trends in vaccination rates. All analyses were conducted in 2021 and 2022. Results: Among Asians, shingles (29.2%; 95% CI=26.6, 32.0), tetanus (53.7%; 95% CI=51.8, 55.6), and pneumococcal (53.8%; 95% CI=50.1, 57.4) vaccination rates were lower than among non-Hispanic Whites. Influenza (47.9%; 95% CI=46.2, 49.6) and hepatitis B (40.5%; 95% CI=39.0, 42.7) vaccination rates were similar or higher than among non-Hispanic Whites (48.4%; 95% CI=47.9, 48.9 and 30.7%; 95% CI=30.1, 31.3, respectively). Among Asians, we found substantial variations in vaccination rates and trends. For example, Asian Indian women had lower human papillomavirus vaccination rates (12.9%; 95% CI=9.1, 18.0) than all other Asian subgroups (Chinese: 37.9%; 95% CI=31.1, 45.2; Filipinos: 38.7%; 95% CI=29.9, 48.3; other Asians: 30.4%; 95% CI=24.8, 36.7) and non-Hispanic Whites (36.1%; 95% CI=34.8, 37.5). Being male, having lower educational attainment and income, having no health insurance or covered by public health insurance only, and lower frequency of doctor visits were generally associated with lower vaccine uptakes. Foreign-born Asian aggregate had lower vaccination rates than U.S.-born Asian aggregate for all vaccines except for influenza. We also found subgroup-level differences in vaccination rates between foreign-born and U.S.-born Asians. We found that (1) foreign-born Chinese, Asian Indians, and other Asians had lower human papillomavirus and hepatitis B vaccination rates; (2) foreign-born Chinese and Filipinos had lower pneumococcal vaccination rates; (3) foreign-born Chinese and Asian Indians had lower influenza vaccination rates; and (4) all foreign-born Asian subgroups had lower tetanus vaccination rates. Conclusions: Vaccination rates and trends differed among Asian American subgroups. Culturally tailored messaging and interventions may improve vaccine uptakes.

Epidemiology of Diabetes and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Among Asian American Adults: Implications, Management, and Future Directions: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Asian American individuals make up the fastest growing racial and ethnic group in the United States. Despite the substantial variability that exists in type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk among the different subgroups of Asian Americans, the current literature, when available, often fails to examine these subgroups individually. The purpose of this scientific statement is to summarize the latest disaggregated data, when possible, on Asian American demographics, prevalence, biological mechanisms, genetics, health behaviors, acculturation and lifestyle interventions, pharmacological therapy, complementary alternative interventions, and their impact on type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. On the basis of available evidence to date, we noted that the prevalences of type 2 diabetes and stroke mortality are higher in all Asian American subgroups compared with non-Hispanic White adults. Data also showed that atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk is highest among South Asian and Filipino adults but lowest among Chinese, Japanese, and Korean adults. This scientific statement discusses the biological pathway of type 2 diabetes and the possible role of genetics in type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease among Asian American adults. Challenges to provide evidence-based recommendations included the limited data on Asian American adults in risk prediction models, national surveillance surveys, and clinical trials, leading to significant research disparities in this population. The large disparity within this population is a call for action to the public health and clinical health care community, for whom opportunities for the inclusion of the Asian American subgroups should be a priority. Future studies of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in Asian American adults need to be adequately powered, to incorporate multiple Asian ancestries, and to include multigenerational cohorts. With advances in epidemiology and data analysis and the availability of larger, representative cohorts, furthering refining the Pooled Cohort Equations, in addition to enhancers, would allow better risk estimation in segments of the population. Last, this scientific statement provides individual- and community-level intervention suggestions for health care professionals who interact with the Asian American population.

Assessing and Addressing Social Determinants of Cardiovascular Health: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Social determinants of health (SDOH) are the social conditions in which people are born, live, and work. SDOH offers a more inclusive view of how environment, geographic location, neighborhoods, access to health care, nutrition, socioeconomics, and so on are critical in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. SDOH will continue to increase in relevance and integration of patient management, thus, applying the information herein to clinical and health systems will become increasingly commonplace. This state-of-the-art review covers the 5 domains of SDOH, including economic stability, education, health care access and quality, social and community context, and neighborhood and built environment. Recognizing and addressing SDOH is an important step toward achieving equity in cardiovascular care. We discuss each SDOH within the context of cardiovascular disease, how they can be assessed by clinicians and within health care systems, and key strategies for clinicians and health care systems to address these SDOH. Summaries of these tools and key strategies are provided.

Risk factors and pregnancy outcomes vary among Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander individuals giving birth in California.

OBJECTIVE: To compare frequencies of risk factors and pregnancy outcomes in ethnic groups versus the combined total of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) populations. METHODS: Using linked birth and fetal death certificate and maternal hospital discharge data (California 2007-2018), we estimated frequencies of 15 clinical and sociodemographic exposures and 11 pregnancy outcomes. Variability across 15 AANHPI groups was compared using a heat map and compared to frequencies for the total group (n = 904,232). RESULTS: AANHPI groups varied significantly from each other and the combined total regarding indicators of social disadvantage (e.g., range for high school-level educational or less: 6.4% Korean-55.8% Samoan) and sociodemographic factors (e.g., maternal age <20 years: 0.2% Chinese-8.8% Guamanian) that are related to adverse pregnancy outcomes. Perinatal outcomes varied significantly (e.g., severe maternal morbidity: 1.2% Korean-1.9% Filipino). No single group consistently had risk factors or outcome prevalence at the extremes, i.e., no group was consistently better or worse off across examined factors. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variability in perinatal risk factors and outcomes exists across AANHPI groups. Aggregation into "AANHPI" is not appropriate for outcome reporting.

Knowledge Gaps, Challenges, and Opportunities in Health and Prevention Research for Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders: A Report From the 2021 National Institutes of Health Workshop.

Asian Americans (AsA), Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders (NHPI) comprise 7.7% of the U.S. population, and AsA have had the fastest growth rate since 2010. Yet the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has invested only 0.17% of its budget on AsA and NHPI research between 1992 and 2018. More than 40 ethnic subgroups are included within AsA and NHPI (with no majority subpopulation), which are highly diverse culturally, demographically, linguistically, and socioeconomically. However, data for these groups are often aggregated, masking critical health disparities and their drivers. To address these issues, in March 2021, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, in partnership with 8 other NIH institutes, convened a multidisciplinary workshop to review current research, knowledge gaps, opportunities, barriers, and approaches for prevention research for AsA and NHPI populations. The workshop covered 5 domains: 1) sociocultural, environmental, psychological health, and lifestyle dimensions; 2) metabolic disorders; 3) cardiovascular and lung diseases; 4) cancer; and 5) cognitive function and healthy aging. Two recurring themes emerged: Very limited data on the epidemiology, risk factors, and outcomes for most conditions are available, and most existing data are not disaggregated by subgroup, masking variation in risk factors, disease occurrence, and trajectories. Leveraging the vast phenotypic differences among AsA and NHPI groups was identified as a key opportunity to yield novel clues into etiologic and prognostic factors to inform prevention efforts and intervention strategies. Promising approaches for future research include developing collaborations with community partners, investing in infrastructure support for cohort studies, enhancing existing data sources to enable data disaggregation, and incorporating novel technology for objective measurement. Research on AsA and NHPI subgroups is urgently needed to eliminate disparities and promote health equity in these populations.

Disaggregating Asian American Cigarette and Alternative Tobacco Product Use: Results from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 2006-2018.

INTRODUCTION: Asian Americans suffer high rates of smoking and tobacco-related deaths, varying by ethnic group. Trends of cigarette and alternative tobacco product use among Asian Americans, specifically considering ethnic group, sex, and nativity, are infrequently reported. METHODS: Using National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data from 2006-2018 and the 2016-2018 alternative tobacco supplement (e-cigarettes, cigars, smokeless tobacco, pipes), we explored cigarette and alternative tobacco product use by Asian ethnic group (Asian Indian (n = 4373), Chinese (n = 4736), Filipino (n = 4912)) in comparison to non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs (n = 275,025)), adjusting for socioeconomic and demographic factors. RESULTS: Among 289,046 adults, 12% of Filipinos were current smokers, twice the prevalence in Asian Indians and Chinese (p < 0.001). The male-female gender difference was fivefold for Chinese (10.3% vs. 2.2%; p < 0.001), eightfold for Asian Indians (8.7% vs. 1.1%; p < 0.001), and twofold for Filipinos (16.8% vs. 9.0%). Moreover, 16.3% of US-born and 10.3% of foreign-born Filipinos were current smokers. Odds of ever using e-cigarettes, cigars, smokeless tobacco, and pipes in comparison to NHWs were lowest for Chinese (ORs 0.6, 0.5, 0.2, and 0.5). DISCUSSION: Filipinos had the highest current smoking rates of Asian ethnic groups. Though more Asian men were current smokers, the high rate of current smoking among Filipinas is concerning. More US-born Filipinos were current smokers than foreign-born, despite rates typically decreasing for US-born Asians. Investigating cultural factors contributing to less frequent use of tobacco products, such as alternative tobacco products among Chinese, may aid campaigns in curbing tobacco usage.

Achieving Equity in Asian American Healthcare: Critical Issues and Solutions.

Equity is a fundamental goal of the US health care system. Asians comprise 6% of the US population, and 60% of the world's population. Less than 1% of National Institutes of Health funding is directed toward Asian health. Asian health outcomes are often worse than non-Hispanic Whites (NHWS) in America. Increasing federal and foundation resources and funding toward Asian health research could illuminate these risks and develop precision interventions to reduce known health disparities. When disaggregated by race/ethnicity, Asian health risks are even more apparent. Here, we discuss critical health outcome differences between the six major Asian American subgroups (Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese) comprising 80% of the US Asian population, highlighting demographic, pharmacologic, disease prevalence, and mortality outcomes. We then outline seven critical issues contributing to Asian American health disparities, including aggregated Asian health data, undersampling, invalid extrapolations, underrepresentation in clinical trials, lack of funding and awareness of disparities, and the model minority myth. Building on the successes of national public health initiatives, we propose nine leverage points to improve Asian American health including the following: obtaining disaggregated Asian health data, improved Asian health research (oversampling Asians, improving clinical trial participation, and increasing research funding), stakeholder collaboration (national and with Asian nations), community engagement, providing culturally precise health care, and expansion of the Asian American research ecosystem. Achieving health equity takes deliberate practice and does not occur by accident. By addressing critical issues that perpetuate Asian health disparities, we grow closer to understanding how to effectively improve Asian health and build a nationally unified mindset toward action that emphasizes equitable care for all.

Heterogeneity of Treatment and Outcomes Among Asians With Coronary Artery Disease in the United States.

Background Prior data demonstrate significant heterogeneity regarding coronary artery disease risk factors and outcomes among Asians in the United States, but no studies have yet examined coronary artery disease treatment patterns or outcomes among disaggregated Asian American subgroups. Methods and Results From a total of 772 882 patients with known race/ethnicity and sex who received care from a mixed-payer healthcare organization in Northern California between 2006 and 2015, a retrospective analysis was conducted on 6667 adults with coronary artery disease. Logistic regression was used to examine medical and procedural therapies and outcomes by race/ethnicity, with adjustment for age, sex, income, and baseline comorbidities. Compared with non-Hispanic whites, Chinese were more likely to undergo stenting (50.9% versus 60.8%, odds ratio [OR] 1.39 [95% CI, 1.04-1.87], p=0.005), whereas Filipinos were more likely to receive bypass surgery (6.9% versus 20.5%, OR 2.65 [95% CI, 1.75-4.01], P<0.0001). After stenting, Chinese, Filipinos, and Japanese were more likely than non-Hispanic whites to be prescribed clopidogrel (86.2%, 83.0%, and 91.4% versus 74.5%, ORs 1.86 [95% CI, 1.13-3.04], 1.86 [95% CI, 1.01-3.44], and 4.37 [95% CI, 1.02-18.67], respectively, P<0.0001). Lastly, Chinese and Asian Indians were more likely than non-Hispanic whites to be diagnosed with a myocardial infarction within 1 year postangiography (15.6% and 17.4% versus 11.2%, ORs 1.49 [95% CI, 1.02-2.19] and 1.68 [95% CI, 1.21-2.34], respectively, P<0.0001). Conclusions Disaggregation of Asian Americans with coronary artery disease into individual racial/ethnic subgroups reveals significant variability in treatment patterns and outcomes. Further investigation into these differences may expose important opportunities to mitigate disparities and improve quality of care in this diverse population.

Pharmacogenomics in Asian Subpopulations and Impacts on Commonly Prescribed Medications.

Asians as a group comprise > 60% the world's population. There is an incredible amount of diversity in Asian and admixed populations that has not been addressed in a pharmacogenetic context. The known pharmacogenetic differences in Asian subgroups generally represent previously known variants that are present at much lower or higher frequencies in Asians compared with other populations. In this review we summarize the main drugs and known genes that appear to have differences in their pharmacogenetic properties in certain Asian populations. Evidence-based guidelines and summary statistics from the US Food and Drug Administration and the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium were analyzed for ethnic differences in outcomes. Implicated drugs included commonly prescribed drugs such as warfarin, clopidogrel, carbamazepine, and allopurinol. The majority of these associations are due to Asians more commonly being poor metabolizers of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 and carriers of the human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-B*15:02 allele. The relative risk increase was shown to vary between genes and drugs, but could be > 100-fold higher in Asians. Specifically, there was a 172-fold increased risk of Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis with carbamazepine use among HLA-B*15:02 carriers. The effects ranged from relatively benign reactions such as reduced drug efficacy to severe cutaneous skin reactions. These reactions are severe and prevalent enough to warrant pharmacogenetic testing and appropriate changes in dose and medication choice for at-risk populations. Further studies should be done on Asian cohorts to more fully understand pharmacogenetic variants in these populations and to clarify how such differences may influence drug response.

Unraveling Race, Socioeconomic Factors, and Geographical Context in the Heterogeneity of Lupus Mortality in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune disease disproportionately affecting women and racial/ethnic minorities. We examined SLE-related mortality over time to assess whether the impact of race is attenuated when social economic status (SES) and geographic context are also considered. METHODS: This study examined whether social environment attenuates racial disparities in SLE-related mortality using race-geographical combinations of the US population known as the "Eight Americas." This framework jointly characterizes race, SES, and geographical location in relation to health disparities in the United States. Using National Vital Statistics and US Census data, we estimated mortality parameters for each of the Eight Americas. RESULTS: We identified 24 773 SLE deaths (2003-2014). Average annual mortality rates were highest among blacks in three race-geographical contexts: average-income blacks, southern low-income blacks, and high-risk urban blacks (14 to 15 deaths per million population) and lowest among nonblacks living in average-income settings (3 to 4 deaths per million population). Age at death was lowest (~47.5 years) for blacks and Asians and highest among low-income rural whites (~64.8 years). CONCLUSION: Blacks sharing the same social and geographical contexts as whites were disproportionately more likely to die young. Although blacks inhabited three vastly different contexts, SLE-related mortality parameters did not vary among socially advantaged and disadvantaged blacks. These findings suggest that race may transcend SES and geographical parameters as a key determinant of SLE-related mortality.

Diabetes-attributable mortality in the United States from 2003 to 2016 using a multiple-cause-of-death approach.

AIMS: Deaths attributable to diabetes may be underestimated using an underlying cause of death (COD) approach in U.S. death records. This study sought to characterize the burden of diabetes deaths using a multiple-cause of death approach (underlying and contributing COD) and to identify temporal changes in co-reported causes of death among those with diabetes listed anywhere on their death records. METHODS: COD were identified using data from the National Center for Health Statistics from 2003 to 2016. We calculated age-adjusted mortality rates for diabetes as the underlying or contributing COD by race/ethnicity. We used ICD-10 codes to identify leading causes of death among those with and without diabetes on their death records. We compared temporal changes in deaths due to cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, cancer, and other causes. RESULTS: The study population included 34,313,964 decedents aged ≥25 from 2003 to 2016. Diabetes was listed as an underlying COD in approximately 3.0% (n = 1,031,000) and 6.7% (n = 2,295,510) of the death records, respectively. Decedents with diabetes listed as an underlying COD experienced a 16% decline in mortality, and the race/ethnicity-specific average annual percentage changes (AAPC) showed significant declining trends for most groups (AAPC ranged from 0.18 to -2.83%). Cardiovascular disease remained the leading underlying COD among diabetes-attributable deaths, although its proportion of deaths fell from 31 to 27% over time. Co-reported COD diversified, and were more likely to include hypertension and hypertensive renal disease among those with diabetes on their death records. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the importance of using a multiple-cause-of-death approach for more completely characterizing diabetes' contribution to mortality.

South Asian Health. From Research to Practice and Policy: An Overview.

The US South Asian population has grown tremendously, and is now over 2.5 million. South Asians often face tremendous cultural, socioeconomic, linguistic and structural obstacles to good health, and face staggering cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer risk. Coupled with this is a paucity of detailed data on the population's unique CVD and cancer risk profiles, etiologic mechanisms, and effective interventions to address South Asian health disparities. This data gap compelled an initiative to develop more targeted research and evidence-based practice and policy approaches. The South Asian Health Initiative (SAHI), a community based participatory research partnership between the Immigrant Health and Cancer Disparities Center at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer and the South Asian Council for Social Services (SACSS), and the Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute thus partnered to effect the first national South Asian translational research endeavor, South Asian Health: From Research to Practice and Policy, summarized in this paper.

Racial/ethnic differences in reporting versus rating of healthcare experiences.

Asians are reported to have poorer healthcare experience than non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs), but the sources of the differences are not understood. One explanation is Asian's reluctance to choose extreme responses in survey. We thus sought to compare NHW-Asian differences in responses to healthcare experience surveys when asked to report versus rate their experiences. Patients of an outpatient care system in 2013 to 2014 in the United States were studied. Patient experience surveys were sent after randomly selected clinic visits. Responses from 6 major Asian subgroups and NHWs were included (N = 61,115). The surveys used a combined questionnaire of Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) and Press Ganey surveys. CG-CAHPS questions are framed as "reporting" and Press Ganey questions as "rating" of experiences. We compared the proportion of favorable (or top box) responses to 2 related questions, one from CG-CAHPS and another from Press Ganey, and assessed racial/ethnic differences when using each of the 2 related questions, using a Pearson chi-squared test for independence. All Asian subgroups were less likely to select top box than NHWs for all questions. The Asian-NHW differences in 'rating" questions were larger than the difference in related "reporting" questions. Of those who chose top box to CG-CAHPS questions (e.g., "Yes" on a question asking "Waited < 15 minutes"), their responses to related Press Ganey questions varied widely: 47% to 57% of Asian subgroups versus 67% of NHWs rated wait time as "Very good." The extent of racial/ethnic differences in patient-reported experiences varies based on how questions are framed. The observed poorer experiences by Asians are in part explained by their worse rating of similar objectively measurable experiences.

Socioeconomic Differences in the Epidemiologic Transition From Heart Disease to Cancer as the Leading Cause of Death in the United States, 2003 to 2015: An Observational Study.

Background: Recent data suggest that the United States is in the midst of an epidemiologic transition in the leading cause of death. Objective: To examine county-level sociodemographic differences in the transition from heart disease to cancer as the leading cause of death in the United States. Design: Observational study. Setting: U.S. death records, 2003 to 2015. Participants: Decedents aged 25 years or older, classified by racial/ethnic group. Measurements: All-cause, heart disease, and cancer mortality stratified by quintiles of county median household income. Age- and sex-adjusted mortality rates and average annual percentage of change were calculated. Results: Heart disease was the leading cause of death in 79% of counties in 2003 and 59% in 2015. Cancer was the leading cause of death in 21% of counties in 2003 and 41% in 2015. The shift to cancer as the leading cause of death was greatest in the highest-income counties. Overall, heart disease mortality rates decreased by 28% (30% in high-income counties vs. 22% in low-income counties) from 2003 to 2015, and cancer mortality rates decreased by 16% (18% in high-income counties vs. 11% in low-income counties). In the lowest-income counties, heart disease remained the leading cause of death among all racial/ethnic groups, and improvements were smaller for both heart disease and cancer. Limitation: Use of county median household income as a proxy for socioeconomic status. Conclusion: Data show that heart disease is more likely to be the leading cause of death in low-income counties. Low-income counties have not experienced the same decrease in mortality rates as high-income counties, which suggests a later transition to cancer as the leading cause of death in low-income counties. Primary Funding Source: National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities.

Public health and health systems: implications for the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes in south Asia.

Many non-communicable chronic diseases, including type 2 diabetes, are highly prevalent, costly, and largely preventable. The prevention and management of type 2 diabetes in south Asia requires a combination of lifestyle changes and long-term health-care management. However, public health and health-care systems in south Asian countries face serious challenges, including the need to provide services to many people with inadequate resources, and substantial between-population and within-population inequalities. In this Series paper, we explore the importance and particular challenges of public health and health systems in south Asian countries (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka) with respect to the provision of culturally appropriate lifestyle modification to prevent and manage diabetes, especially in resource-poor settings. Effective primary prevention strategies are urgently needed to counter risk factors and behaviours preconception, in utero, in infancy, and during childhood and adolescence. A concerted focus on education, training, and capacity building at the community level would ensure the more widespread use of non-physician care, including community health workers. Major investment from governments and other sources will be essential to achieve substantial improvements in the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes in the region.