Climate change and global health: A call to more research and more action.

There is increasing understanding, globally, that climate change and increased pollution will have a profound and mostly harmful effect on human health. This review brings together international experts to describe both the direct (such as heat waves) and indirect (such as vector-borne disease incidence) health impacts of climate change. These impacts vary depending on vulnerability (i.e., existing diseases) and the international, economic, political, and environmental context. This unique review also expands on these issues to address a third category of potential longer-term impacts on global health: famine, population dislocation, and environmental justice and education. This scholarly resource explores these issues fully, linking them to global health in urban and rural settings in developed and developing countries. The review finishes with a practical discussion of action that health professionals around the world in our field can yet take.

Implementing a Quality Improvement Collaborative to Improve Hypertension Control and Advance Million Hearts Among Low-Income Californians, 2014-2015.

From January through December 2015, the California Department of Health Care Services, which administers Medi-Cal, the nation's largest Medicaid program, conducted a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) with 9 Medi-Cal managed care plans (MCPs) aimed at improving hypertension control consistent with the Million Hearts initiative. The QIC included quarterly webinars and links to local, state, and national resources that consisted of materials and consultations with subject matter experts. Participating MCPs demonstrated an average increase of 5.0 percentage points in their rates of controlled hypertension. Collaboratives can achieve substantial quality improvement in Medicaid managed care plans.

Restructuring a State Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Program: Implications of a Local Health Department Model for SNAP-Ed.

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: The US Department of Agriculture Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program-Education (SNAP-Ed) funds state programs to improve nutrition and physical activity in low-income populations through its Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention grants. States vary in how they manage and structure these programs. California substantially restructured its program in 2012 to universally position local health departments (LHDs) as the programmatic lead in all jurisdictions. This study sought to determine whether California's reorganization aligned with desirable attributes of decentralized public management. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study conducted 40 in person, semistructured interviews with 57 local, state, and federal SNAP-Ed stakeholders between October 2014 and March 2015. Local respondents represented 15 counties in all 7 of California's SNAP-Ed regions. We identified 3 common themes that outlined advantages or disadvantages of local public management, and we further defined subthemes within: (1) coordination and communication (within local jurisdictions, across regions, between local and state), (2) efficiency (administrative, fiscal, program), and (3) quality (innovation, skills). We conducted qualitative content analysis to evaluate how respondents characterized the California experience for each theme, identifying positive and negative experiences. RESULTS: California's LHD model offers some distinct advantages, but the model does not exhibit all the advantages of decentralized public management. Strategic planning, partnerships, subcontracting, and fiscal oversight are closer to communities than previously. However, administrative burden remains high and LHDs are limited in their ability to customize programs on the basis of community needs because of state and federal constraints. CONCLUSIONS: California's use of a universal LHD model for SNAP-Ed is novel. Recent federal SNAP-Ed changes present an opportunity for other states to consider this structure. Employing small-scale approaches initially (eg, pilot efforts) may facilitate effective transitions. For an LHD model to be effective, LHDs must be adept at managing administrative complexity and capable of succeeding within stringent federal/state requirements.

Underutilization of gene expression profiling for early-stage breast cancer in California.

PURPOSE: To describe the utilization of gene expression profiling (GEP) among California breast cancer patients, identify predictors of use of GEP, and evaluate how utilization of GEP influenced treatment of early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: All women diagnosed with hormone-receptor-positive, node-negative breast cancer reported to the California Cancer Registry between January 2008 and December 2010 were linked to Oncotype DX (ODX) assay results. RESULTS: Overall, 26.7 % of 23,789 eligible patients underwent the assay during the study period. Women age 65 or older were much less likely than women under age 50 to be tested (15.1 vs. 41.4 %, p < 0.001). Black women were slightly less likely and Asian women were slightly more likely than non-Hispanic white women to undergo GEP with the ODX assay (22.2 and 28.9 vs. 26.9 %, respectively, p < 0.001). Patients residing in low SES census tracts had the lowest use of the test (8.9 %), with the proportion increasing with higher SES category. Women with Medicaid health insurance were less likely than other women to be tested (17.7 vs. 27.5 %, p < 0.001). Receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) was associated with the ODX recurrence score, although only 63 % of patients whose recurrence scores indicated a high benefit received ACT. Of patients not tested, 15 % received ACT. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly three-fourths of eligible breast cancer patients in California during the 3-year period 2008 through 2010 did not undergo GEP. As a result, it is likely that many women unnecessarily received ACT and suffered associated morbidity. In addition, some high-risk women who would have benefited most from ACT were not identified.

Health Promotion Interventions for Low-Income Californians Through Medi-Cal Managed Care Plans, 2012.

INTRODUCTION: Prevention is the most cost-effective approach to promote population health, yet little is known about the delivery of health promotion interventions in the nation's largest Medicaid program, Medi-Cal. The purpose of this study was to inventory health promotion interventions delivered through Medi-Cal Managed Care Plans; identify attributes of the interventions that plans judged to have the greatest impact on their members; and determine the extent to which the plans refer members to community assistance programs and sponsor health-promoting community activities. METHODS: The lead health educator from each managed care plan was asked to complete a 190-item online survey in January 2013; 20 of 21 managed care plans responded. Survey data on the health promotion interventions with the greatest impact were grouped according to intervention attributes and measures of effectiveness; quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Health promotion interventions judged to have the greatest impact on Medi-Cal members were delivered in various ways; educational materials, one-on-one education, and group classes were delivered most frequently. Behavior change, knowledge gain, and improved disease management were cited most often as measures of effectiveness. Across all interventions, median educational hours were limited (2.4 h), and median Medi-Cal member participation was low (265 members per intervention). Most interventions with greatest impact (120 of 137 [88%]) focused on tertiary prevention. There were mixed results in referring members to community assistance programs and investing in community activities. CONCLUSION: Managed care plans have many opportunities to more effectively deliver health promotion interventions. Establishing measurable, evidence-based, consensus standards for such programs could facilitate improved delivery of these services.

Safety net integration: a shared strategy for becoming providers of choice.

With the expansion of coverage as a result of federal health care reform, safety net providers are confronting a challenge to care for the underserved while also competing as a provider of choice for the newly insured. Safety net institutions may be able to achieve these goals by pursuing greater delivery system integration. We interviewed safety net hospital and community health center (CHCs) leaders in five US cities to determine what strategies these organizations are employing to promote care integration in the safety net. Although there is some experimentation with payment reform and health information exchange, safety net providers identify significant policy and structural barriers to integrating service delivery. The enhanced Medicaid payments for CHCs and the federal requirement that CHCs retain independent boards discourage these organizations from integrating with other safety net providers. Current policies are not mobilizing safety net providers to pursue integration as a way to deliver more efficient and effective care. Medicaid and other policies at the federal and state level could be revised to overcome known fragmentation in the health care safety net. This includes addressing the conflicts in financing and governance arrangements that are encouraging providers to resist integration to preserve their independence.

Operating Principles From the Digital Battle Space That Could Benefit the Digital Care Space.

The promise of digital tools to dramatically improve health care remains largely unfullfilled, creating frustration for both patients and providers. Additionally, these tools are increasingly vulnerable to cyber attack and deep fakes. The digital battle space has progressed rapidly to adress similar challenges and offers valuable lessons for health care. In this article we explore how six principles from the digital battle space can be applied to the digital care space.

Achieving Equity in Organ Transplantation: Recommendations for Action Based on the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Report.

The United States organ transplantation system has recently reached a historic milestone of a cumulative 1 million transplants. Despite this considerable success in providing life-saving organ transplants to patients with end organ failure, there are ample opportunities for improvement, particularly with regard to achieving equity. Recognizing this, Congress directed the National Institutes of Health to fund the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in conducting a study on deceased donor organ procurement, allocation, and distribution, recommending ways to improve equity and accountability. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine study committee's report, Realizing the Promise of Equity in the Organ Transplantation System , reached multiple conclusions and agreed on 14 recommendations for action that can be grouped into 3 areas: (1) achieving equity, (2) improving system performance, and (3) increasing the utilization of available organs. Here, we review overarching areas for improvement, highlighting key recommendations, and suggest implementing actions.

Differences in use of Veterans Health Administration and non-Veterans Health Administration hospitals by rural and urban Veterans after access expansions.

PURPOSE: To examine changes in rural and urban Veterans' utilization of acute inpatient care in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and non-VHA hospitals following access expansion from the Veterans Choice Act, which expanded eligibility for VHA-paid community hospitalization. METHODS: Using repeated cross-sectional data of VHA enrollees' hospitalizations in 9 states (AZ, CA, CT, FL, LA, MA, NY, PA, and SC) between 2012 and 2017, we compared rural and urban Veterans' probability of admission in VHA and non-VHA hospitals by payer over time for elective and nonelective hospitalizations using multinomial logistic regression to adjust for patient-level sociodemographic features. We also used generalized linear models to compare rural and urban Veterans' travel distances to hospitals. FINDINGS: Over time, the probability of VHA-paid community hospitalization increased more for rural Veterans than urban Veterans. For elective inpatient care, rural Veterans' probability of VHA-paid admission increased from 2.9% (95% CI 2.6%-3.2%) in 2012 to 6.5% (95% CI 5.8%-7.1%) in 2017. These changes were associated with a temporal trend that preceded and continued after the implementation of the Veterans Choice Act. Overall travel distances to hospitalizations were similar over time; however, the mean distance traveled decreased from 39.2 miles (95% CI 35.1-43.3) in 2012 to 32.3 miles (95% CI 30.2-34.4) in 2017 for rural Veterans receiving elective inpatient care in VHA-paid hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Despite limited access to rural hospitals, these data demonstrate an increase in rural Veterans' use of non-VHA hospitals for acute inpatient care and a small reduction in distance traveled to elective inpatient services.

Outcomes of Veterans Treated in Veterans Affairs Hospitals vs Non-Veterans Affairs Hospitals.

Importance: Many veterans enrolled in the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system have access to non-VA care through insurance and VA-purchased community care. Prior comparisons of VA and non-VA hospital outcomes have been limited to subpopulations. Objective: To compare outcomes for 6 acute conditions in VA and non-VA hospitals for younger and older veterans using VA and all-payer discharge data. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used a repeated cross-sectional analysis of hospitalization records for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage, heart failure (HF), pneumonia, and stroke. Participants included VA enrollees from 11 states at VA and non-VA hospitals from 2012 to 2017. Analysis was conducted from July 1, 2022, to October 18, 2023. Exposures: Treatment in VA or non-VA hospital. Main Outcome and Measures: Thirty-day mortality, 30-day readmission, length of stay (LOS), and costs. Average treatment outcomes of VA hospitals were estimated using inverse probability weighted regression adjustment to account for selection into hospitals. Models were stratified by veterans' age (aged less than 65 years and aged 65 years and older). Results: There was a total of 593 578 hospitalizations and 414 861 patients with mean (SD) age 75 (12) years, 405 602 males (98%), 442 297 hospitalizations of non-Hispanic White individuals (75%) and 73 155 hospitalizations of non-Hispanic Black individuals (12%) overall. VA hospitalizations had a lower probability of 30-day mortality for HF (age ≥65 years, -0.02 [95% CI, -0.03 to -0.01]) and stroke (age <65 years, -0.03 [95% CI, -0.05 to -0.02]; age ≥65 years, -0.05 [95% CI, -0.07 to -0.03]). VA hospitalizations had a lower probability of 30-day readmission for CABG (age <65 years, -0.04 [95% CI, -0.06 to -0.01]; age ≥65 years, -0.05 [95% CI, -0.07 to -0.02]), GI hemorrhage (age <65 years, -0.04 [95% CI, -0.06 to -0.03]), HF (age <65 years, -0.05 [95% CI, -0.07 to -0.03]), pneumonia (age <65 years, -0.04 [95% CI, -0.06 to -0.03]; age ≥65 years, -0.03 [95% CI, -0.04 to -0.02]), and stroke (age <65 years, -0.11 [95% CI, -0.13 to -0.09]; age ≥65 years, -0.13 [95% CI, -0.16 to -0.10]) but higher probability of readmission for AMI (age <65 years, 0.04 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.06]). VA hospitalizations had a longer mean LOS and higher costs for all conditions, except AMI and stroke in younger patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of veterans, VA hospitalizations had lower mortality for HF and stroke and lower readmissions, longer LOS, and higher costs for most conditions compared with non-VA hospitalizations with differences by condition and age group. There were tradeoffs between better outcomes and higher resource use in VA hospitals for some conditions.

Duplicate federal payments for dual enrollees in Medicare Advantage plans and the Veterans Affairs health care system.

CONTEXT: Some veterans are eligible to enroll simultaneously in a Medicare Advantage (MA) plan and the Veterans Affairs health care system (VA). This scenario produces the potential for redundant federal spending because MA plans would receive payments to insure veterans who receive care from the VA, another taxpayer-funded health plan. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the prevalence of dual enrollment in VA and MA, the concurrent use of health services in each setting, and the estimated costs of VA care provided to MA enrollees. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of 1,245,657 veterans simultaneously enrolled in the VA and an MA plan between 2004-2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Use of health services and inflation-adjusted estimated VA health care costs. RESULTS: Among individuals who were eligible to enroll in the VA and in an MA plan, the number of persons dually enrolled increased from 485,651 in 2004 to 924,792 in 2009. In 2009, 8.3% of the MA population was enrolled in the VA and 5.0% of MA beneficiaries were VA users. The estimated VA health care costs for MA enrollees totaled $13.0 billion over 6 years, increasing from $1.3 billion in 2004 to $3.2 billion in 2009. Among dual enrollees, 10% exclusively used the VA for outpatient and acute inpatient services, 35% exclusively used the MA plan, 50% used both the VA and MA, and 4% received no services during the calendar year. The VA financed 44% of all outpatient visits (n = 21,353,841), 15% of all acute medical and surgical admissions (n = 177,663), and 18% of all acute medical and surgical inpatient days (n = 1,106,284) for this dually enrolled population. In 2009, the VA billed private insurers $52.3 million to reimburse care provided to MA enrollees and collected $9.4 million (18% of the billed amount; 0.3% of the total cost of care). CONCLUSIONS: The federal government spends a substantial and increasing amount of potentially duplicative funds in 2 separate managed care programs for the care of same individuals.

Health Care Access Expansions and Use of Veterans Affairs and Other Hospitals by Veterans.

This cohort study examines changes in the use of Veterans Affairs (VA) and non-VA hospitals by VA enrollees and mortality associated with these policies.

Urban-Rural Variations in Quality of Care Among Patients With Cancer in California.

INTRODUCTION: Previous research suggests cancer patients living in rural areas have lower quality of care, but population-based studies have yielded inconsistent results. This study examines the impact of rurality on care quality for 7 cancer types in California. METHODS: Breast, ovarian, endometrial, cervix, colon, lung, and gastric cancer patients diagnosed from 2004 to 2017 were identified in the California Cancer Registry. Multivariable logistic regression and proportional hazards models were used to assess effects of residential location on quality of care and survival. Stratified models examined the impact of treatment at National Cancer Institute designated cancer centers (NCICCs). Quality of care was evaluated using Commission on Cancer measures. Medical Service Study Areas were used to assess urban/rural status. Data were collected in 2004-2019 and analyzed in 2020. RESULTS: 989,747 cancer patients were evaluated, with 14% living in rural areas. Rural patients had lower odds of receiving radiation after breast conserving surgery compared to urban residents. Colon and gastric cancer patients had 20% and 16% lower odds, respectively, of having optimal surgery. Rural patients treated at NCICCs had greater odds of recommended surgery for most cancer types. Survival was similar among urban and rural subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Rural residence was inversely associated with receipt of recommended surgery for gastric and colon cancer patients not treated at NCICCs, and for receiving recommended radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery regardless of treatment location. Further studies investigating the impact of care location and availability of supportive services on urban-rural differences in quality of care are warranted.

Health care serial murder: a patient safety orphan.

Two recent instances of alleged health care serial murder raise questions about the priority of efforts to address this problem and the adequacy of current health care safety systems for preventing such intentionally caused adverse events.