Stakeholder Perspectives on Data-Driven Solutions to Address Cardiovascular Disease and Health Equity in New York City.

Introduction: There is growing recognition of the importance of addressing the social determinants of health in efforts to improve health equity. In dense urban environments such as New York City, disparities in chronic health conditions (e.g., cardiovascular disease) closely mimic inequities in social factors such as income, education, and housing. Although there is a wealth of data on these social factors in New York City, little is known about how to rapidly use available data sources to address health disparities. Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with key stakeholders (N=11) from across the public health landscape in New York City (health departments, healthcare delivery systems, and community-based organizations) to assess perspectives on how social determinants of health data can be used to address cardiovascular disease and health equity, what data-driven tools would be useful, and challenges to using these data sources and developing tools. A matrix analysis approach was used to analyze the interview data. Results: Stakeholders were optimistic about using social determinants of health data to address health equity by delivering holistic care, connecting people with additional resources, and increasing investments in under-resourced communities. However, interviewees noted challenges related to the quality and timeliness of social determinants of health data, interoperability between data systems, and lack of consistent metrics related to cardiovascular disease and health equity. Conclusions: Future research on this topic should focus on mitigating the barriers to using social determinants of health data, which includes incorporating social determinants of health data from other sectors. There is also a need to assess how data-driven solutions can be implemented within and across communities and organizations.

Exploring Barriers and Facilitators to Integrating a Harm Reduction Approach to Substance Use in Three Medical Settings.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that harm reduction, a public health strategy aimed at reducing the negative consequences of a risky health behavior without requiring elimination of the behavior itself, may be a promising approach for minimizing drug-related harms while engaging individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs) in care. However, philosophical clashes between the medical and harm reduction models may pose barriers to adopting harm reduction approaches within medical settings. OBJECTIVE: To identify barriers and facilitators to implementing a harm reduction approach toward care within healthcare settings. We conducted semi-structured interviews with providers and staff at three integrated harm reduction and medical care sites in New York. DESIGN: Qualitative study using in-depth and semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty staff and providers across three integrated harm reduction and medical care sites across New York state. APPROACH: Interview questions focused on how harm reduction approaches were implemented and demonstrated in practice and barriers and facilitators to implementation, as well as questions based on the five domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). KEY RESULTS: We identified three key barriers to the adoption of the harm reduction approach that surrounded resource constraints, provider burnout, and interacting with external providers that do not have a harm reduction orientation. We also identified three facilitators to implementation, which included ongoing training both within and external to the clinic, team-based and interdisciplinary care, and affiliations with a larger healthcare system. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that while multiple barriers to implementing harm reduction informed medical care existed, health system leaders can adopt practices to mitigate barriers to adoption, such as value-based reimbursement models and holistic models of care that address the full spectrum of patient needs.

Reduction of ischaemia-reperfusion injury in a rat lung transplantation model by low-concentration GV1001.

OBJECTIVES: Lung ischaemia-reperfusion (IR) injury is one of the major complications following lung transplantation. The novel peptide GV1001, which is derived from human telomerase reverse transcriptase, has been reported to possess both antitumour and anti-inflammatory effects. In this study, we focused on the anti-inflammatory effects of GV1001 to investigate the IR injury prevention effect of GV1001 in a rat lung transplantation model. METHODS: An orthotopic left lung transplantation rat model was established using the modified cuff technique. We applied 50 ml of normal saline (control), Perfadex (low-potassium standard dextran containing perfusion solution), Perfadex with 5 mg GV1001 (5-mg GV, low concentration) and Perfadex with 50 mg GV1001 (50-mg GV, high concentration) as both flushing and preservation solutions. The left lung was stored in the same solution as the flushing solution at 4°C for 3 h. After transplantation, the recipient rats were monitored for 3 h. Arterial blood gas analysis (ABGA), bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) analysis, wet/dry ratio, histological analysis, apoptotic cell analysis and cytokine [tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin 6 (IL-6)] analysis were performed to determine the reduction or prevention effect of GV1001 regarding lung IR injury. RESULTS: Compared with the control group, the neutrophil count in BAL, reperfusion oedema and cytokine (TNF-α, IL-6) levels of the transplanted lung were significantly decreased in the 5-mg GV group. Compared with the Perfadex group (16.85 ± 2.43), the neutrophil count in BAL was also significantly decreased in the 5-mg GV group (5.39 ± 0.81) (P< 0.001). In addition, the cytokine (TNF-α, IL-6) levels of the transplanted lung were also significantly decreased in the 5-mg GV group (41.99 ± 12.79, 1069.74 ± 98.48 pg/ml) compared with the Perfadex group (90.73 ± 23.87, 2051.92 ± 243.57 pg/ml) (P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively). However, the 50-mg GV group showed less effect than the 5-mg GV group. CONCLUSIONS: Adding a low concentration of GV1001 to the lung preservation solution (Perfadex) provided potential protective effects against IR injury after lung transplantation in rats. Therefore, GV1001 should be considered as a promising anti-inflammatory agent for IR injury.