Health outcomes in redlined versus non-redlined neighborhoods: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Redlining was a racialized zoning practice in the U.S. that blocked fair access to home loans during the 1930s, and recent research is illuminating health problems in the current residents of these historically redlined areas. However, this work has not yet been holistically summarized. Here, we present the first systematic review and meta-analysis comparing health outcomes in redlined versus non-redlined neighborhoods in U.S. cities. METHODS: We extracted relevant articles in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane and Science Direct databases published from January 2010 to September 2021. RESULTS: The search revealed 12 studies on preterm births (n = 3), gunshot-related injuries (n = 2), cancer (n = 1), asthma (n = 1), self-rated health (n = 1), multiple health outcomes (n = 2), heat-related outcomes (n = 1) and COVID-19 incidence and mortality (n = 1). A meta-analysis of three studies found the odds of having preterm birth was significantly higher (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.88; p = 0.02) among women living in redlined areas compared to those in non-redlined areas. Review of other outcomes revealed that gunshot-related injuries, asthma, heat-related outcomes, and multiple chronic conditions were worse in redlined areas, while associations with cancer varied by cancer type. In terms of cause-specific mortality, one study revealed no link between residential redlining and infant mortality rate, while one study on COVID-19 outcomes was inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this review presents evidence that living in historically redlined areas is associated with increased risk of multiple serious adverse health outcomes. Further research on mechanisms, remediation, and neighborhood-level interventions is needed to strengthen the understanding of the impacts of redlining on health.

Uterine Fibroids in Black Women: A Race-Stratified Subgroup Analysis of Treatment Outcomes After Laparoscopic Radiofrequency Ablation.

Background: The disease and treatment burden of uterine fibroids (UF) in Black women is substantially greater compared with other racial groups, with higher rates of complications and poorer outcomes with both hysterectomy and myomectomy. The inequities in the access Black women have to minimally invasive routes of surgery contribute to their burden of illness. Laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (LAP-RFA) is a minimally invasive, safe, and effective uterine-sparing treatment option. Methods: This subgroup analysis of the LAP-RFA Pivotal Trial stratified outcomes by race comparing White women (n = 28, 21%) versus Black women (n = 46, 34%). Results: At baseline, Black women had more fibroids on average (7.3 vs. 3.7; P ≤ 0.001), a greater symptom severity score (SSS) (P ≤ 0.001), and a lower health-related quality of life (HRQoL) score (P = 0.005) than White women. At 36 months post-treatment with LAP-RFA, the statistical differences that existed with baseline SSS and HRQoL score were eliminated between Black and White women. Menstrual blood loss (140.1 mL vs. 127.02 mL; P = 0.44) and mean fibroid volume reduction (47.5 cm3 vs. 36.0 cm3; P = 0.17) were similar between Black and White women at 12 months. Although not statistically significant, the intraoperative total blood loss and uterine blood loss was lower in Black women than White women, despite greater operative time (160 minutes vs. 137 minutes; P = 0.09). Conclusions: These results are promising in providing an alternative uterine-sparing option for Black women and may help to provide a minimally invasive option that can address some of the racial inequities in care for Black women with UF.

Reducing racial and ethnic disparities in hypertension prevention and control: what will it take to translate research into practice and policy?

INTRODUCTION: Despite available, effective therapies, racial and ethnic disparities in care and outcomes of hypertension persist. Several interventions have been tested to reduce disparities; however, their translation into practice and policy is hampered by knowledge gaps and limited collaboration among stakeholders. METHODS: We characterized factors influencing disparities in blood pressure (BP) control by levels of an ecological model. We then conducted a literature search using PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL databases to identify interventions targeted toward reducing disparities in BP control, categorized them by the levels of the model at which they were primarily targeted, and summarized the evidence regarding their effectiveness. RESULTS: We identified 39 interventions and several state and national policy initiatives targeted toward reducing racial and ethnic disparities in BP control, 5 of which are ongoing. Most had patient populations that were majority African-American. Of completed interventions, 27 demonstrated some improvement in BP control or related process measures, and 7 did not; of the 6 studies examining disparities, 3 reduced, 2 increased, and 1 had no effect on disparities. CONCLUSIONS: Several effective interventions exist to improve BP in racial and ethnic minorities; however, evidence that they reduce disparities is limited, and many groups are understudied. To strengthen the evidence and translate it into practice and policy, we recommend rigorous evaluation of pragmatic, sustainable, multilevel interventions; institutional support for training implementation researchers and creating broad partnerships among payers, patients, providers, researchers, policymakers, and community-based organizations; and balance and alignment in the priorities and incentives of each stakeholder group.