Pragmatic strategies to address health disparities along the continuum of care in chronic liver disease.

Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities exist in the prevalence and natural history of chronic liver disease, access to care, and clinical outcomes. Solutions to improve health equity range widely, from digital health tools to policy changes. The current review outlines the disparities along the chronic liver disease health care continuum from screening and diagnosis to the management of cirrhosis and considerations of pre-liver and post-liver transplantation. Using a health equity research and implementation science framework, we offer pragmatic strategies to address barriers to implementing high-quality equitable care for patients with chronic liver disease.

Characterization of social determinants of health of a liver transplant referral population.

Disparities exist in referral and access to the liver transplant (LT) waitlist, and social determinants of health (SDOH) are increasingly recognized as important factors driving health inequities, including in LT. The SDOH of potential transplant candidates is therefore important to characterize when designing targeted interventions to promote equity in access to LT. Yet, it is uncertain how a transplant center should approach this issue, characterize SDOH, identify disparities, and use these data to inform interventions. We performed a retrospective study of referrals for first-time, single-organ LT to our center from 2016 to 2020. Addresses were geoprocessed and mapped to the corresponding county, census tract, and census block group to assess their geospatial distribution, identify potential disparities in referrals, and characterize their communities across multiple domains of SDOH to identify potential barriers to evaluation and selection. We identified variability in referral patterns and areas with disproportionately low referrals, including counties in the highest quartile of liver disease mortality (9%) and neighborhoods in the highest quintile of socioeconomic deprivation (17%) and quartile of poverty (21%). Black individuals were also under-represented compared with expected state demographics (12% vs. 18%). Among the referral population, several potential barriers to evaluation and selection for LT were identified, including poverty, educational attainment, access to healthy food, and access to technology. This approach to the characterization of a transplant center's referral population by geographic location and associated SDOH demonstrates a model for identifying disparities in a referral population and potential barriers to evaluation that can be used to inform targeted interventions for disparities in LT access.

A scoping review of inequities in access to organ transplant in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Organ transplant is the preferred treatment for end-stage organ disease, yet the majority of patients with end-stage organ disease are never placed on the transplant waiting list. Limited access to the transplant waiting list combined with the scarcity of the organ pool result in over 100,000 deaths annually in the United States. Patients face unique barriers to referral and acceptance for organ transplant based on social determinants of health, and patients from disenfranchised groups suffer from disproportionately lower rates of transplantation. Our objective was to review the literature describing disparities in access to organ transplantation based on social determinants of health to integrate the existing knowledge and guide future research. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of the literature reporting disparities in access to heart, lung, liver, pancreas and kidney transplantation based on social determinants of health (race, income, education, geography, insurance status, health literacy and engagement). Included studies were categorized based on steps along the transplant care continuum: referral for transplant, transplant evaluation and selection, living donor identification/evaluation, and waitlist outcomes. RESULTS: Our search generated 16,643 studies, of which 227 were included in our final review. Of these, 34 focused on disparities in referral for transplantation among patients with chronic organ disease, 82 on transplant selection processes, 50 on living donors, and 61 on waitlist management. In total, 15 studies involved the thoracic organs (heart, lung), 209 involved the abdominal organs (kidney, liver, pancreas), and three involved multiple organs. Racial and ethnic minorities, women, and patients in lower socioeconomic status groups were less likely to be referred, evaluated, and added to the waiting list for organ transplant. The quality of the data describing these disparities across the transplant literature was variable and overwhelmingly focused on kidney transplant. CONCLUSIONS: This review contextualizes the quality of the data, identifies seminal work by organ, and reports gaps in the literature where future research on disparities in organ transplantation should focus. Future work should investigate the association of social determinants of health with access to the organ transplant waiting list, with a focus on prospective analyses that assess interventions to improve health equity.

Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Utilization of Telehealth in Patients with Liver Disease During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in a rapid expansion of telehealth services in hepatology. However, known racial and socioeconomic disparities in internet access potentially translate into barriers for the use of telehealth, particularly video technology. The specific aim of this study was to determine if disparities in race or socioeconomic status exist among patients utilizing telehealth visits during COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients evaluated in hepatology clinics at Duke University Health System. Visit attempts from a pre-COVID baseline period (January 1, 2020 through February 29, 2020; n = 3328) were compared to COVID period (April 1, 2020 through May 30, 2020; n = 3771). RESULTS: On multinomial regression modeling, increasing age was associated with higher odds of a phone or incomplete visit (canceled, no-show, or rescheduled after May 30,2020), and non-Hispanic Black race was associated with nearly twice the odds of completing a phone visit instead of video visit, compared to non-Hispanic White patients. Compared to private insurance, Medicaid and Medicare were associated with increased odds of completing a telephone visit, and Medicaid was associated with increased odds of incomplete visits. Being single or previously married (separated, divorced, widowed) was associated with increased odds of completing a phone compared to video visit compared to being married. CONCLUSIONS: Though liver telehealth has expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic, disparities in overall use and suboptimal use (phone versus video) remain for vulnerable populations including those that are older, non-Hispanic Black, or have Medicare/Medicaid health insurance.

COVID-19 and the Uncovering of Health Care Disparities in the United States, United Kingdom and Canada: Call to Action.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created a crisis that disproportionately affected populations already disadvantaged with respect to access to health care systems and adequate medical care and treatments. Understanding how and where health care disparities are most widespread is an important starting point for exploring opportunities to mitigate such disparities, especially within our patient population with liver disease. In a webinar in LiverLearning, we discussed the impact of the pandemic on the United States, United Kingdom and Canada, highlighting the disproportionate effects on infection rates and death for certain ethnic minorities, those socioeconomically disadvantaged and living in higher density areas, and those working in health care and other essential jobs. We set forth a "call to action" for members of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the larger community of providers of liver disease care to generate viable solutions to improve access to care and vaccination rates of our patients against COVID-19, and in general help reduce health care disparities and improve the health of disadvantaged populations within their communities. Solutions will likely involve personalized interventions and messaging for communities that honor local leaders and embrace the diverse needs and different cultural sensitivities of our unique patient populations.

Equitable Access to Liver Transplant: Bridging the Gaps in the Social Determinants of Health.

The COVID-19 pandemic and social justice movement have highlighted the impact of social determinants of health (SDOH) and structural racism in the United States on both access to care and patient outcomes. With the evaluation for liver transplantation being a highly subjective process, there are multiple ways for SDOH to place vulnerable patients at a disadvantage. This policy corner focuses on three different methods to reverse the deleterious effects of SDOH-identify and reduce implicit bias, expand and optimize telemedicine, and improve community outreach.

Multi-disciplinary approach to perioperative risk assessment and post-transplant management for liver transplantation in a patient at risk for Brugada syndrome.

Brugada syndrome, an autosomal dominant genetic disorder, is characterised by abnormal electrocardiogram findings and increased risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. Our report describes the multi-disciplinary perioperative management of a 28-year-old patient presenting to the Duke Transplant Center with a familial sodium channel gene SCN51 mutation concerning Brugada syndrome. We discuss the preparatory work-up, medication review and appropriate post-surgical follow-up for patients undergoing liver transplant surgery with cardiac monitoring.

The Hepatitis C-Alcohol Reduction Treatment (Hep ART) intervention: Study protocol of a multi-center randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Among patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, alcohol synergistically increases the risk of cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and death. Randomized controlled trials of integrated models of HCV-alcohol treatment have been recommended but only performed in patients with severe alcohol use disorders. OBJECTIVES: This pragmatic randomized controlled trial seeks to compare clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of integrated alcohol treatment compared to enhanced treatment as usual (TAU) on alcohol consumption and economic outcomes among patients ever infected with HCV. METHODS: Patients recruited from three liver centers who had current or prior chronic HCV and qualifying alcohol screener scores were randomly assigned to enhanced TAU or the Hepatitis C-Alcohol Reduction Treatment (Hep ART) intervention. All patients received enhanced TAU, consisting of a patient-administered alcohol screener and care from medical providers who were trained in Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT), including brief motivational interviewing counseling. The Hep ART intervention combined enhanced TAU with up to six months of integrated co-located individual and/or group therapy that provided motivational, cognitive, and behavioral strategies to reduce alcohol consumption. The Timeline Followback (TLFB) Method was used to evaluate alcohol use at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Primary outcomes are alcohol abstinence and fewer heavy drinking days, and for the cost-effectiveness analysis, measures included grams of alcohol consumed. DISCUSSION: This study will determine whether Hep ART, a six-month integrated alcohol treatment, compared to enhanced TAU, is both clinically effective and cost-effective in patients with a history of comorbid HCV and alcohol use.

Direct acting antivirals for the treatment of hepatitis C in ethnic minority populations.

INTRODUCTION: Direct acting antivirals (DAA's) have revolutionized the treatment of hepatitis C (HCV). However, questions persist concerning their efficacy in minority populations. AREAS COVERED: In this review, the authors review outcomes for treatment of HCV by race and ethnicity among the clinical trials that have led to the current recommended treatments for HCV. The authors highlight the efficacy and safety differences by race and ethnicity. They also highlight deficiencies within the literature including small populations of racial/ethnic minorities within HCV clinical trials. DAA's can achieve cure rates for HCV over 95% with the use of once daily medications that have minimal side effects and few significant drug-drug interactions. Regimens with high pan-genotypic efficacy have further simplified treatment paradigms. The purpose of this review is to describe the data on DAA's in treating HCV in racial/ethnic populations. EXPERT OPINION: While the overall data in racial/ethnic minority populations is sparse, DAA's appear to have high efficacy in curing HCV in diverse racial/ethnic populations. Although achieving high sustained virologic response (SVR) rates, there are also data that suggests that some disparities in SVR persist, especially when considering shorter regimens for HCV treatment in racial/ethnic populations.

Role of patient factors, preferences, and distrust in health care and access to liver transplantation and organ donation.

Despite major improvements in access to liver transplantation (LT), disparities remain. Little is known about how distrust in medical care, patient preferences, and the origins shaping those preferences contribute to differences surrounding access. We performed a single-center, cross-sectional survey of adults with end-stage liver disease and compared responses between LT listed and nonlisted patients as well as by race. Questionnaires were administered to 109 patients (72 nonlisted; 37 listed) to assess demographics, health care system distrust (HCSD), religiosity, and factors influencing LT and organ donation (OD). We found that neither HCSD nor religiosity explained differences in access to LT in our population. Listed patients attained higher education levels and were more likely to be insured privately. This was also the case for white versus black patients. All patients reported wanting LT if recommended. However, nonlisted patients were significantly less likely to have discussed LT with their physician or to be referred to a transplant center. They were also much less likely to understand the process of LT. Fewer blacks were referred (44.4% versus 69.7%; P = 0.03) or went to the transplant center if referred (44.4% versus 71.1%; P = 0.02). Fewer black patients felt that minorities had as equal access to LT as whites (29.6% versus 57.3%; P < 0.001). For OD, there were more significant differences in preferences by race than listing status. More whites indicated OD status on their driver's license, and more blacks were likely to become an organ donor if approached by someone of the same cultural or ethnic background (P < 0.01). In conclusion, our analysis demonstrates persistent barriers to LT and OD. With improved patient and provider education and communication, many of these disparities could be successfully overcome. Liver Transplantation 22 895-905 2016 AASLD.