Comparison of two propensity score-based methods for balancing covariates: the overlap weighting and fine stratification methods in real-world claims data.

BACKGROUND: Two propensity score (PS) based balancing covariate methods, the overlap weighting method (OW) and the fine stratification method (FS), produce superb covariate balance. OW has been compared with various weighting methods while FS has been compared with the traditional stratification method and various matching methods. However, no study has yet compared OW and FS. In addition, OW has not yet been evaluated in large claims data with low prevalence exposure and with low frequency outcomes, a context in which optimal use of balancing methods is critical. In the study, we aimed to compare OW and FS using real-world data and simulations with low prevalence exposure and with low frequency outcomes. METHODS: We used the Texas State Medicaid claims data on adult beneficiaries with diabetes in 2012 as an empirical example (N = 42,628). Based on its real-world research question, we estimated an average treatment effect of health center vs. non-health center attendance in the total population. We also performed simulations to evaluate their relative performance. To preserve associations between covariates, we used the plasmode approach to simulate outcomes and/or exposures with N = 4,000. We simulated both homogeneous and heterogeneous treatment effects with various outcome risks (1-30% or observed: 27.75%) and/or exposure prevalence (2.5-30% or observed:10.55%). We used a weighted generalized linear model to estimate the exposure effect and the cluster-robust standard error (SE) method to estimate its SE. RESULTS: In the empirical example, we found that OW had smaller standardized mean differences in all covariates (range: OW: 0.0-0.02 vs. FS: 0.22-3.26) and Mahalanobis balance distance (MB) (< 0.001 vs. > 0.049) than FS. In simulations, OW also achieved smaller MB (homogeneity: <0.04 vs. > 0.04; heterogeneity: 0.0-0.11 vs. 0.07-0.29), relative bias (homogeneity: 4.04-56.20 vs. 20-61.63; heterogeneity: 7.85-57.6 vs. 15.0-60.4), square root of mean squared error (homogeneity: 0.332-1.308 vs. 0.385-1.365; heterogeneity: 0.263-0.526 vs 0.313-0.620), and coverage probability (homogeneity: 0.0-80.4% vs. 0.0-69.8%; heterogeneity: 0.0-97.6% vs. 0.0-92.8%), than FS, in most cases. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that OW can yield nearly perfect covariate balance and therefore enhance the accuracy of average treatment effect estimation in the total population.

Utilization, quality, and spending for pediatric Medicaid enrollees with primary care in health centers vs non-health centers.

BACKGROUND: Limited research has explored the performance of health centers (HCs) compared to other primary care settings among children in the United States. We evaluated utilization, quality, and expenditures for pediatric Medicaid enrollees receiving care in HCs versus non-HCs. METHODS: This national cross-sectional study utilized 2012 Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) claims to examine children 0-17 years with a primary care visit, stratified by whether majority (> 50%) of primary care visits were at HCs or non-HCs. Outcome measures include utilization (primary care visits, non-primary care outpatient visits, prescription claims, Emergency Department (ED) visits, hospitalizations) and quality (well-child visits, avoidable ED visits, avoidable hospitalizations). For children enrolled in fee-for-service Medicaid, we also measured expenditures. Propensity score-based overlap weighting was used to balance covariates. RESULTS: A total of 2,383,270 Medicaid-enrolled children received the majority of their primary care at HCs, while 18,540,743 did at non-HCs. In adjusted analyses, HC patients had 20% more primary care visits, 15% less non-primary care outpatient visits, and 21% less prescription claims than non-HC patients. ED visits were similar across the two groups, while HC patients had 7% lower chance of hospitalization than non-HC. Quality of care outcomes favored HC patients in main analyses, but results were less robust when excluding managed care beneficiaries. Total expenditures among the fee-for-service subpopulation were lower by $239 (8%) for HC patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of nationwide claims data to evaluate healthcare utilization, quality, and spending among Medicaid-enrolled children who receive primary care at HCs versus non-HCs, findings suggest primary care delivery in HCs may be associated with a more cost-effective model of healthcare for children.

Integrated Interventions to Bridge Medical and Social Care for People Living with Diabetes.

Social drivers of health impact health outcomes for patients with diabetes, and are areas of interest to health systems, researchers, and policymakers. To improve population health and health outcomes, organizations are integrating medical and social care, collaborating with community partners, and seeking sustainable financing with payors. We summarize promising examples of integrated medical and social care from the Merck Foundation Bridging the Gap: Reducing Disparities in Diabetes Care initiative. The initiative funded eight organizations to implement and evaluate integrated medical and social care models, aiming to build a value case for services that are traditionally not eligible for reimbursement (e.g., community health workers, food prescriptions, patient navigation). This article summarizes promising examples and future opportunities for integrated medical and social care across three themes: (1) primary care transformation (e.g., social risk stratification) and workforce capacity (e.g., lay health worker interventions), (2) addressing individual social needs and structural changes, and (3) payment reform. Integrated medical and social care that advances health equity requires a significant paradigm shift in healthcare financing and delivery.

"Everything in One Place": Stakeholder Perceptions of Integrated Medical and Social Care for Diabetes Patients in Western Maryland.

BACKGROUND: Patients with type 2 diabetes frequently have both medical- and health-related social needs that must be addressed for optimal disease management. Growing evidence suggests that intersectoral partnerships between health systems and community-based organizations may effectively support improved health outcomes for patients with diabetes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe stakeholders' perceptions of the implementation factors associated with a diabetes management program, an intervention involving coordinated clinical and social services supports to address both medical- and health-related social needs. This intervention delivers proactive care alongside community partnerships, and leverages innovative financing mechanisms. DESIGN: Qualitative study with semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Study participants included adults (18 years or older) who were patients with diabetes and essential staff (e.g., members of a diabetes care team, health care administrators) and leaders of community-based organizations. APPROACH: We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to develop a semi-structured interview guide designed to elicit perspectives from patients and essential staff on their experiences within an outpatient center to support patients with chronic conditions (the CCR) as a part of an intervention to improve care for patients with diabetes. KEY RESULTS: Interviews illuminated three key takeaways: (1) team-based care held an important role in promoting accountability across stakeholders motivating patient engagement and positive perceptions, (2) mission-driven alignment across the health care and community sectors was needed to synergize a broad range of efforts, and (3) global payment models allowing for flexible resource allocation can invaluably support the appropriate care being directed where it is needed the most whether medical or social services. CONCLUSIONS: The views and experiences of patient and essential staff stakeholder groups reported here thematically according to CFIR domains may inform the development of other chronic disease interventions that address medical- and health-related social needs in additional settings.

Trust Dynamics of Community Health Workers in Frontier Food Banks and Pantries: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Medical mistrust has had devastating consequences during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in rural communities. Community Health Workers (CHWs) have been shown to build trust, but there is little research on trust-building by CHWs in rural communities. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to understand the strategies that CHWs use to build trust with participants of health screenings in frontier Idaho. DESIGN: This is a qualitative study based on in-person, semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed CHWs (N=6) and coordinators of food distribution sites (FDSs; e.g., food banks and pantries) where CHWs hosted a health screening (N=15). APPROACH: Interviews were conducted with CHWs and FDS coordinators during FDS-based health screenings. Interview guides were initially designed to assess facilitators and barriers to health screenings. Trust and mistrust emerged as dominant themes that determined nearly every aspect of the FDS-CHW collaboration, and thus became the focus of interviews. KEY RESULTS: CHWs encountered high levels of interpersonal trust, but low institutional and generalized trust, among the coordinators and clients of rural FDSs. When working to reach FDS clients, CHWs anticipated confronting mistrust due to their association with the healthcare system and government, especially if CHWs were perceived as "outsiders." Hosting health screenings at FDSs, which were trusted community organizations, was important for CHWs to begin building trust with FDS clients. CHWs also volunteered at FDS locations to build interpersonal trust before hosting health screenings. Interviewees agreed that trust building was a time- and resource-intensive process. CONCLUSIONS: CHWs build interpersonal trust with high-risk rural residents, and should be integral parts of trust building initiatives in rural areas. FDSs are vital partners in reaching low-trust populations, and may provide an especially promising environment to reach some rural community members. It is unclear whether trust in individual CHWs also extends to the broader healthcare system.

Improving Diabetes Care Through Population Health Innovations and Payments: Lessons from Western Maryland.

BACKGROUND: Global budgets might incentivize healthcare systems to develop population health programs to prevent costly hospitalizations. In response to Maryland's all-payer global budget financing system, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) Western Maryland developed an outpatient care management center called the Center for Clinical Resources (CCR) to support high-risk patients with chronic disease. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the impact of the CCR on patient-reported, clinical, and resource utilization outcomes for high-risk rural patients with diabetes. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred forty-one adult patients with uncontrolled diabetes (HbA1c > 7%) and one or more social needs who were enrolled between 2018 and 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Team-based interventions that provided interdisciplinary care coordination (e.g., diabetes care coordinators), social needs support (e.g., food delivery, benefits assistance), and patient education (e.g., nutritional counseling, peer support). MAIN MEASURES: Patient-reported (e.g., quality of life, self-efficacy), clinical (e.g., HbA1c), and utilization outcomes (e.g., emergency department visits, hospitalizations). KEY RESULTS: Patient-reported outcomes improved significantly at 12 months, including confidence in self-management, quality of life, and patient experience (56% response rate). No significant demographic differences were detected between patients with or without the 12-month survey response. Baseline mean HbA1c was 10.0% and decreased on average by 1.2 percentage points at 6 months, 1.4 points at 12 months, 1.5 points at 18 months, and 0.9 points at 24 and 30 months (P<0.001 at all timepoints). No significant changes were observed in blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or weight. The annual all-cause hospitalization rate decreased by 11 percentage points (34 to 23%, P=0.01) and diabetes-related emergency department visits also decreased by 11 percentage points (14 to 3%, P=0.002) at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: CCR participation was associated with improved patient-reported outcomes, glycemic control, and hospital utilization for high-risk patients with diabetes. Payment arrangements like global budgets can support the development and sustainability of innovative diabetes care models.

New Frontiers in Diabetes Care: Quality Improvement Study of a Population Health Team in Rural Critical Access Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Rural populations are older, have higher diabetes prevalence, and have less improvement in diabetes-related mortality rates compared to urban counterparts. Rural communities have limited access to diabetes education and social support services. OBJECTIVE: Determine if an innovative population health program that integrates medical and social care models improves clinical outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes in a resource-constrained, frontier area. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: Quality improvement cohort study of 1764 patients with diabetes (September 2017-December 2021) at St. Mary's Health and Clearwater Valley Health (SMHCVH), an integrated health care delivery system in frontier Idaho. The United States Department of Agriculture's Office of Rural Health defines frontier as sparsely populated areas that are geographically isolated from population centers and services. INTERVENTION: SMHCVH integrated medical and social care through a population health team (PHT), where staff assess medical, behavioral, and social needs with annual health risk assessments and provide core interventions including diabetes self-management education, chronic care management, integrated behavioral health, medical nutritional therapy, and community health worker navigation. We categorized patients with diabetes into three groups: patients with two or more PHT encounters during the study (PHT intervention), one PHT encounter (minimal PHT), and no PHT encounters (no PHT). MAIN MEASURES: HbA1c, blood pressure, and LDL over time for each study group. KEY RESULTS: Of the 1764 patients with diabetes, mean age was 68.3 years, 57% were male, 98% were white, 33% had three or more chronic conditions, and 9% had at least one unmet social need. PHT intervention patients had more chronic conditions and higher medical complexity. Mean HbA1c of PHT intervention patients significantly decreased from baseline to 12 months (7.9 to 7.6%, p < 0.01) and sustained reductions at 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, and 36 months. Minimal PHT patients decreased HbA1c from baseline to 12 months (7.7 to 7.3%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The SMHCVH PHT model was associated with improved hemoglobin A1c among less well-controlled patients with diabetes.

Eliminating Explicit and Implicit Biases in Health Care: Evidence and Research Needs.

Health care providers hold negative explicit and implicit biases against marginalized groups of people such as racial and ethnic minoritized populations. These biases permeate the health care system and affect patients via patient-clinician communication, clinical decision making, and institutionalized practices. Addressing bias remains a fundamental professional responsibility of those accountable for the health and wellness of our populations. Current interventions include instruction on the existence and harmful role of bias in perpetuating health disparities, as well as skills training for the management of bias. These interventions can raise awareness of provider bias and engage health care providers in establishing egalitarian goals for care delivery, but these changes are not sustained, and the interventions have not demonstrated change in behavior in the clinical or learning environment. Unfortunately, the efficacy of these interventions may be hampered by health care providers' work and learning environments, which are rife with discriminatory practices that sustain the very biases US health care professions are seeking to diminish. We offer a conceptual model demonstrating that provider-level implicit bias interventions should be accompanied by interventions that systemically change structures inside and outside the health care system if the country is to succeed in influencing biases and reducing health inequities.

Quality of Care for US Adults With Medicaid Insurance and Type 2 Diabetes in Federally Qualified Health Centers Compared With Other Primary Care Settings.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate indicators of diabetes quality of care for US nonelderly, adult Medicaid enrollees with type 2 diabetes and compare federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) versus non-FQHCs. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed diabetes process measures and acute health services utilization with 2012 US fee-for-service and managed care Medicaid claims in all 50 states and DC. We compared FQHC (N=121,977) to non-FQHC patients (N=700,401) using propensity scores to balance covariates and generalized estimating equation models. RESULTS: Overall, laboratory-based process measures occurred more frequently (range, 65.7%-76.6%) than measures requiring specialty referrals (retinal examinations, 33.3%; diabetes education, 3.4%). Compared with non-FQHC patients, FQHC patients had about 3 percentage point lower rates of each process measure, except for higher rates of diabetes education [relative risk=1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03-1.16]. FQHC patients had fewer overall [incident rate ratio (IRR)=0.87, 95% CI: 0.86-0.88] and diabetes-related hospitalizations (IRR=0.79, 95% CI: 0.77-0.81), but more overall (IRR=1.06, 95% CI: 1.05-1.07) and diabetes-related emergency department visits (IRR=1.10, 95% CI: 1.08-1.13). CONCLUSIONS: This national analysis identified opportunities to improve diabetes management among Medicaid enrollees with type 2 diabetes, especially for retinal examinations or diabetes education. Overall, we found slightly lower rates of most diabetes care process measures for FQHC patients versus non-FQHC patients. Despite having higher rates of emergency department visits, FQHC patients were significantly less likely to be hospitalized than non-FQHC patients. These findings emphasize the need to identify innovative, effective approaches to improve diabetes care for Medicaid enrollees, especially in FQHC settings.

Standup comedy principles and the personal monologue to explore interpersonal bias: experiential learning in a health disparities course.

BACKGROUND: Interpersonal biases between clinicians and patients contribute to disparities in health care and outcomes by race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. We used standup comedy principles and exercises to help medical students recognize how others perceive them and how they perceive others, and engage in difficult discussions around implicit biases and interpersonal racism. METHODS: 90 min Zoom workshop with 40 first-year medical students in urban medical school. Intervention consisted of three exercises: Naming icebreaker, Rant and Rave (communicate strong perspective clearly), and Personal Monologue about how others perceive you and how you perceive yourself. Discussion debriefed the personal monologue exercise. Likert scale questions on post-session survey evaluated workshop overall, whether workshop increased skills, and safety of learning environment. Open-ended questions included what trainees liked about the module, what could be improved, and what impact the module had on them? RESULTS: Seventeen (42.5%) students responded to survey. Six respondents identified as white, 4 as Asian, 1 as Black, 1 as multiracial, and 5 did not identify. Seventy-six percent rated the module as "very good" or "excellent", and 94% would recommend the module to others. Most respondents reported the workshop helped them become better listeners (75%) and more observant (82%). Eighty-three percent reported the training could help them take better care of patients with lived experiences different than their own. All respondents believed the learning environment was safe, and 94% reported that instructors created an atmosphere in which they could take risks. Thirty-six percent felt stressed. Students reported the workshop helped them recognize their own identities, others' perceptions, and bidirectional biases, and inspired them to strive for more accurate, authentic interactions with patients. CONCLUSIONS: Standup comedy principles show promise for engaging students in meaningful, safe discussions about perceptions and interpersonal biases rooted in their own personal experiences and those of their classmates.

Integration of Diabetes and Depression Care Is Associated with Glucose Control in Midwestern Federally Qualified Health Centers.

BACKGROUND: The 2016 American Diabetes Association position statement emphasized that psychosocial and medical care should be integrated and provided to all people with diabetes. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether better integration of diabetes and depression care is associated with better glycemic control. DESIGN: Cross-sectional surveys of Midwestern federally qualified health center (FQHC) leaders and primary care providers (PCPs) in 2016. Responses were linked to FQHC-level data on the percentage of patients with uncontrolled diabetes (glycated hemoglobin ≥ 9%; 75 mmol/mol). PARTICIPANTS: Midwest Clinicians' Network-affiliated FQHC leaders, and PCPs at the FQHCs. MAIN MEASURES: Multilevel models were used to determine associations between the percentage of patients with uncontrolled diabetes and FQHC and PCP characteristics; presence of diabetes and behavioral health care services; and PCPs' perception of the stage of integration between diabetes and depression care services based on the transtheoretical model (i.e., pre-contemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, or maintenance). KEY RESULTS: Response rates were 60% for the FQHC survey (N = 77) and 55% for the PCP survey (N = 538). In adjusted models, FQHCs in which PCPs perceived a higher stage of integration between diabetes and depression care had 3% fewer patients with uncontrolled diabetes per 1-level increase in integration stage (p = 0.01); on-site diabetes self-management education was associated with 7% fewer patients with uncontrolled diabetes (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: At Midwestern FQHCs, a higher stage of perceived integration of diabetes and depression care was associated with better FQHC-level glycemic control. Future studies are needed to elucidate what defines integration of diabetes and depression care services.

Population Health Innovations and Payment to Address Social Needs Among Patients and Communities With Diabetes.

Policy Points Population health efforts to improve diabetes care and outcomes should identify social needs, support social needs referrals and coordination, and partner health care organizations with community social service agencies and resources. Current payment mechanisms for health care services do not adequately support critical up-front investments in infrastructure to address medical and social needs, nor provide sufficient incentives to make addressing social needs a priority. Alternative payment models and value-based payment should provide up-front funding for personnel and infrastructure to address social needs and should incentivize care that addresses social needs and outcomes sensitive to social risk. CONTEXT: Increasingly, health care organizations are implementing interventions to improve outcomes for patients with complex health and social needs, including diabetes, through cross-sector partnerships with nonmedical organizations. However, fee-for-service and many value-based payment systems constrain options to implement models of care that address social and medical needs in an integrated fashion. We present experiences of eight grantee organizations from the Bridging the Gap: Reducing Disparities in Diabetes Care initiative to improve diabetes outcomes by transforming primary care and addressing social needs within evolving payment models. METHODS: Analysis of eight grantees through site visits, technical assistance calls, grant applications, and publicly available data from US census data (2017) and from Health Resources and Services Administration Uniform Data System Resources data (2018). Organizations represent a range of payment models, health care settings, market factors, geographies, populations, and community resources. FINDINGS: Grantees are implementing strategies to address medical and social needs through augmented staffing models to support high-risk patients with diabetes (e.g., community health workers, behavioral health specialists), information technology innovations (e.g., software for social needs referrals), and system-wide protocols to identify high-risk populations with gaps in care. Sites identify and address social needs (e.g., food insecurity, housing), invest in human capital to support social needs referrals and coordination (e.g., embedding social service employees in clinics), and work with organizations to connect to community resources. Sites encounter challenges accessing flexible up-front funding to support infrastructure for interventions. Value-based payment mechanisms usually reward clinical performance metrics rather than measures of population health or social needs interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Federal, state, and private payers should support critical infrastructure to address social needs and incentivize care that addresses social needs and outcomes sensitive to social risk. Population health strategies that address medical and social needs for populations living with diabetes will need to be tailored to a range of health care organizations, geographies, populations, community partners, and market factors. Payment models should support and incentivize these strategies for sustainability.

Cherry Blossoms, COVID-19, and the Opportunity for a Healthy Life.

To date, short-term funding and policy fixes for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have focused on saving the current health care system; policies have not maximized the population's health, prioritized the safety net, nor addressed the fundamental problems that have hindered our nation's response for our most vulnerable neighbors. We need to plan more lasting equity-specific reforms now. I explain 3 lessons that should inform reforms to the health care delivery and payment systems to reduce health disparities and maximize the public's health: (1) Proven roadmaps and processes for reducing health care disparities already exist, as do themes of successful interventions. Implement them; (2) Payment reform needs to create a business case for health care organizations to address social determinants of health and implement care interventions to reduce health disparities; (3) We as a nation need to have hard conversations about whether we truly value the opportunity for everyone to have a healthy life.

Neighborhood Disadvantage and Hospital Quality Ratings in the Medicare Hospital Compare Program.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services provide nationwide hospital ratings that may influence reimbursement. These ratings do not account for the social risk of communities and may inadvertently penalize hospitals that service disadvantaged neighborhoods. OBJECTIVE: This study examines the relationship between neighborhood social risk factors (SRFs) and hospital ratings in Medicare's Hospital Compare Program. RESEARCH DESIGN: 2017 Medicare Hospital Compare ratings were linked with block group data from the 2015 American Community Survey to assess hospital ratings as a function of neighborhood SRFs. SUBJECTS: A total of 3608 Medicare-certified hospitals in 50 US states. MEASURES: Hospital summary scores and 7 quality group scores (100 percentile scale), including effectiveness of care, efficiency of care, hospital readmission, mortality, patient experience, safety of care, and timeliness of care. RESULTS: Lower hospital summary scores were associated with caring for neighborhoods with higher social risk, including a reduction in hospital score for every 10% of residents who reported dual-eligibility for Medicare/Medicaid [-3.3%; 95% confidence interval (CI), -4.7 to -2.0], no high-school diploma (-0.8%; 95% CI, -1.5 to -0.1), unemployment (-1.2%; 95% CI, -1.9 to -0.4), black race (-1.2%; 95% CI, -1.7 to -0.8), and high travel times to work (-2.5%; 95% CI, -3.3 to -1.6). Associations between neighborhood SRFs and hospital ratings were largest in the timeliness of care, patient experience, and hospital readmission groups; and smallest in the safety, efficiency, and effectiveness of care groups. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals serving communities with higher social risk may have lower ratings because of neighborhood factors. Failing to account for neighborhood social risk in hospital rating systems may reinforce hidden disincentives to care for medically underserved areas in the United States.

Improving Shared Decision Making For Asian American Pacific Islander Sexual and Gender Minorities.

BACKGROUND: Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) sexual and gender minorities (SGM) face unique challenges in mental health and accessing high-quality health care. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators for shared decision making (SDM) between AAPI SGM and providers, especially surrounding mental health. RESEARCH DESIGN: Interviews, focus groups, and surveys. SUBJECTS: AAPI SGM interviewees in Chicago (n=20) and San Francisco (n=20). Two focus groups (n=10) in San Francisco. MEASURES: Participants were asked open-ended questions about their health care experiences and how their identities impacted these encounters. Follow-up probes explored SDM and mental health. Participants were also surveyed about attitudes towards SGM disclosure and preferences about providers. Transcripts were analyzed for themes and a conceptual model was developed. RESULTS: Our conceptual model elucidates the patient, provider, and encounter-centered factors that feed into SDM for AAPI SGM. Some participants shared the stigma of SGM identities and mental health in their AAPI families. Their AAPI and SGM identities were intertwined in affecting mental health. Some providers inappropriately controlled the visibility of the patient's identities, ignoring or overemphasizing them. Participants varied on whether they preferred a provider of the same race, and how prominently their AAPI and/or SGM identities affected SDM. CONCLUSIONS: Providers should understand identity-specific challenges for AAPI SGM to engage in SDM. Providers should self-educate about AAPI and SGM history and intracommunity heterogeneity before the encounter, create a safe environment conducive to patient disclosure of SGM identity, and ask questions about patient priorities for the visit, pronouns, and mental health.

The "Waze" of Inequity Reduction Frameworks for Organizations: a Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Different conceptual frameworks guide how an organization can change its policies and practices to make care and outcomes more equitable for patients, and how the organization itself can become more equitable. Nonetheless, healthcare organizations often struggle with implementing these frameworks. OBJECTIVE: To assess what guidance frameworks for health equity provide for organizations implementing interventions to make care and outcomes more equitable. STUDY DESIGN: Fourteen inequity frameworks from scoping literature review 2000-2017 that provided models for improving disparities in quality of care or outcomes were assessed. We analyzed how frameworks addressed key implementation factors: (1) outer and inner organizational contexts; (2) process of translating and implementing equity interventions throughout organizations; (3) organizational and patient outcomes; and (4) sustainability of change over time. PARTICIPANTS: We conducted member check interviews with framework authors to verify our assessments. KEY RESULTS: Frameworks stressed assessing the organization's outer context, such as population served, for tailoring change strategies. Inner context, such as existing organizational culture or readiness for change, was often not addressed. Most frameworks did not provide guidance on translation of equity across multiple organizational departments and levels. Recommended evaluation metrics focused mainly on patient outcomes, leaving organizational measures unassessed. Sustainability was not addressed by most frameworks. CONCLUSIONS: Existing equity intervention frameworks often lack specific guidance for implementing organizational change. Future frameworks should assess inner organizational context to guide translation of programs across different organizational departments and levels and provide specific guidelines on institutionalization and sustainability of interventions.

Healthcare Experiences of Transgender People of Color.

BACKGROUND: Transgender people and racial/ethnic minorities separately report poor healthcare experiences. However, little is known about the healthcare experiences of transgender people of color (TPOC), who are both transgender and racial/ethnic minorities. OBJECTIVE: To investigate how TPOC healthcare experiences are shaped by both race/ethnicity and gender identity. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Semi-structured, in-depth individual interviews (n = 22) and focus groups (2; n = 17 total); all taken from a sample of TPOC from the Chicago area. All participants completed a quantitative survey (n = 39). APPROACH: Interviews and focus groups covered healthcare experiences, and how these were shaped by gender identity and/or race/ethnicity. The interviews and focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and imported into HyperRESEARCH software. At least two reviewers independently coded each transcript using a codebook of themes created following grounded theory methodology. The quantitative survey data captured participants' demographics and past healthcare experiences, and were analyzed with descriptive statistics. KEY RESULTS: All participants described healthcare experiences where providers responded negatively to their race/ethnicity and/or gender identity. A majority of participants believed they would be treated better if they were cisgender or white. Participants commonly cited providers' assumptions about TPOC as a pivotal factor in negative experiences. A majority of participants sought out healthcare locations designated as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)-friendly in an effort to avoid discrimination, but feared experiencing racism there. A minority of participants expressed a preference for providers of color; but a few reported reluctance to reveal their gender identity to providers of their own race due to fear of transphobia. When describing positive healthcare experiences, participants were most likely to highlight providers' respect for their gender identity. CONCLUSIONS: TPOC have different experiences compared with white transgender or cisgender racial/ethnic minorities. Providers must improve understanding of intersectional experiences of TPOC to improve quality of care.