Prevalence and Correlates of VA-Purchased Community Care Use Among Post-9/11-Era Veterans With Traumatic Brain Injury.

OBJECTIVE: Post-9/11-era veterans with traumatic brain injury (TBI) have greater health-related complexity than veterans overall, and may require coordinated care from TBI specialists such as those within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. With passage of the Choice and MISSION Acts, more veterans are using VA-purchased care delivered by community providers who may lack TBI training. We explored prevalence and correlates of VA-purchased care use among post-9/11 veterans with TBI. SETTING: Nationwide VA-purchased care from 2016 through 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Post-9/11-era veterans with clinician-confirmed TBI based on VA's Comprehensive TBI Evaluation (N = 65 144). DESIGN: This was a retrospective, observational study. MAIN MEASURES: Proportions of veterans who used VA-purchased care and both VA-purchased and VA-delivered outpatient care, overall and by study year. We employed multivariable logistic regression to assess associations between veterans' sociodemographic, military history, and clinical characteristics and their likelihood of using VA-purchased care from 2016 through 2019. RESULTS: Overall, 51% of veterans with TBI used VA-purchased care during the study period. Nearly all who used VA-purchased care (99%) also used VA-delivered outpatient care. Veterans' sociodemographic, military, and clinical characteristics were associated with their likelihood of using VA-purchased care. Notably, in adjusted analyses, veterans with moderate/severe TBI (vs mild), those with higher health risk scores, and those diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, substance use disorders, or pain-related conditions had increased odds of using VA-purchased care. Additionally, those flagged as high risk for suicide also had higher odds of VA-purchased care use. CONCLUSIONS: Veterans with TBI with greater health-related complexity were more likely to use VA-purchased care than their less complex counterparts. The risks of potential care fragmentation across providers versus the benefits of increased access to care are unknown. Research is needed to examine health and functional outcomes among these veterans.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Infection on Long-Term Depression Symptoms among Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Prior research demonstrates that SARS-COV-2 infection can be associated with a broad range of mental health outcomes including depression symptoms. Veterans, in particular, may be at elevated risk of increased depression following SARS-COV-2 infection given their high rates of pre-existing mental and physical health comorbidities. However, few studies have tried to isolate SARS-COV-2 infection associations with long term, patient-reported depression symptoms from other factors (e.g., physical health comorbidities, pandemic-related stress). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between SARS-COV-2 infection and subsequent depression symptoms among United States Military Veterans. DESIGN: Survey-based non-randomized cohort study with matched comparators. PARTICIPANTS: A matched-dyadic sample from a larger, stratified random sample of participants with and without known to SARS-COV-2 infection were invited to participate in a survey evaluating mental health and wellness 18-months after their index infection date. Sampled participants were stratified by infection severity of the participant infected with SARS-COV-2 (hospitalized or not) and by month of index date. A total of 186 participants in each group agreed to participate in the survey and had sufficient data for inclusion in analyses. Those in the uninfected group who were later infected were excluded from analyses. MAIN MEASURES: Participants were administered the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 as part of a phone interview survey. Demographics, physical and mental health comorbidities were extracted from VHA administrative data. KEY RESULTS: Veterans infected with SARS-COV-2 had significantly higher depression symptoms scores compared with those uninfected. In particular, psychological symptoms (e.g., low mood, suicidal ideation) scores were elevated relative to the comparator group (MInfected = 3.16, 95%CI: 2.5, 3.8; MUninfected = 1.96, 95%CI: 1.4, 2.5). Findings were similar regardless of history of depression. CONCLUSION: SARS-COV-2 infection was associated with more depression symptoms among Veterans at 18-months post-infection. Routine evaluation of depression symptoms over time following SARS-COV-2 infection is important to facilitate adequate assessment and treatment.

Risk of Potentially Preventable Hospitalizations After SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Importance: Research demonstrates that SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with increased risk of all-cause hospitalization. However, no prior studies have assessed the association between SARS-CoV-2 and potentially preventable hospitalizations-that is, hospitalizations for conditions that can usually be effectively managed in ambulatory care settings. Objective: To examine whether SARS-CoV-2 is associated with potentially preventable hospitalization in a nationwide cohort of US veterans. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used an emulated target randomized trial design with monthly sequential trials to compare risk of a potentially preventable hospitalization among veterans with SARS-CoV-2 and matched comparators without SARS-CoV-2. A total of 189 136 US veterans enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 between March 1, 2020, and April 30, 2021, and 943 084 matched comparators were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from May 10, 2023, to January 26, 2024. Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a first potentially preventable hospitalization in VHA facilities, VHA-purchased community care, or Medicare fee-for-service care. Extended Cox models were used to examine adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) of potentially preventable hospitalization among veterans with SARS-CoV-2 and comparators during follow-up periods of 0 to 30, 0 to 90, 0 to 180, and 0 to 365 days. The start of follow-up was defined as the date of each veteran's first positive SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, with the same index date applied to their matched comparators. Results: The 1 132 220 participants were predominantly men (89.06%), with a mean (SD) age of 60.3 (16.4) years. Most veterans were of Black (23.44%) or White (69.37%) race. Veterans with SARS-CoV-2 and comparators were well-balanced (standardized mean differences, all <0.100) on observable baseline clinical and sociodemographic characteristics. Overall, 3.10% of veterans (3.81% of those with SARS-CoV-2 and 2.96% of comparators) had a potentially preventable hospitalization during 1-year follow-up. Risk of a potentially preventable hospitalization was greater among veterans with SARS-CoV-2 than comparators in 4 follow-up periods: 0- to 30-day AHR of 3.26 (95% CI, 3.06-3.46); 0- to 90-day AHR of 2.12 (95% CI, 2.03-2.21); 0- to 180-day AHR of 1.69 (95% CI, 1.63-1.75); and 0- to 365-day AHR of 1.44 (95% CI, 1.40-1.48). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, an increased risk of preventable hospitalization in veterans with SARS-CoV-2, which persisted for at least 1 year after initial infection, highlights the need for research on ways in which SARS-CoV-2 shapes postinfection care needs and engagement with the health system. Solutions are needed to mitigate preventable hospitalization after SARS-CoV-2.

Changes in Outpatient Health Care Use After COVID-19 Infection Among Veterans.

Importance: The association of COVID-19 infection with outpatient care utilization is unclear. Many studies reported population surveillance studies rather than comparing outpatient health care use between COVID-19-infected and uninfected cohorts. Objective: To compare outpatient health care use across 6 categories of care (primary care, specialty care, surgery care, mental health, emergency care, and diagnostic and/or other care) between veterans with or without COVID-19 infection. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a retrospective cohort study of Veterans Affairs primary care patients, veterans with COVID-19 infection were matched to a cohort of uninfected veterans. Data were obtained from the Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Fee-for-Service Carrier/Physician Supplier file from January 2019 through December 2022. Data analysis was performed from September 2022 to April 2023. Exposure: COVID-19 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the count of outpatient visits after COVID-19 infection. Negative binomial regression models compared outpatient use over a 1-year preinfection period, and peri-infection (0-30 days), intermediate (31-183 days), and long-term (184-365 days) postinfection periods. Results: The infected (202 803 veterans; mean [SD] age, 60.5 [16.2] years; 178 624 men [88.1%]) and uninfected (202 803 veterans; mean [SD] age, 60.4 [16.5] years; 178 624 men [88.1%]) cohorts were well matched across all covariates. Outpatient use in all categories (except surgical care) was significantly elevated during the peri-infection period for veterans with COVID-19 infection compared with the uninfected cohort, with an increase in all visits of 5.12 visits per 30 days (95% CI, 5.09-5.16 visits per 30 days), predominantly owing to primary care visits (increase of 1.86 visits per 30 days; 95% CI, 1.85-1.87 visits per 30 days). Differences in outpatient use attenuated over time but remained statistically significantly higher at 184 to 365 days after infection (increase of 0.25 visit per 30 days; 95% CI, 0.23-0.27 visit per 30 days). One-half of the increased outpatient visits were delivered via telehealth. The utilization increase was greatest for veterans aged 85 years and older (6.1 visits, 95% CI, 5.9-6.3 visits) vs those aged 20 to 44 years (4.8 visits, 95% CI, 4.7-4.8 visits) and unvaccinated veterans (4.5 visits, 95% CI, 4.3-4.6 visits) vs vaccinated veterans (3.2 visits; 95% CI, 3.4-4.8 visits). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that outpatient use increased significantly in the month after infection, then attenuated but remained greater than the uninfected cohorts' use through 12 months, which suggests that there are sustained impacts of COVID-19 infection.

Risk of Suicide-Related Outcomes After SARS-COV-2 Infection: Results from a Nationwide Observational Matched Cohort of US Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Negative mental health-related effects of SARS-COV-2 infection are increasingly evident. However, the impact on suicide-related outcomes is poorly understood, especially among populations at elevated risk. OBJECTIVE: To determine risk of suicide attempts and other self-directed violence (SDV) after SARS-COV-2 infection in a high-risk population. DESIGN: We employed an observational design supported by comprehensive electronic health records from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) to examine the association of SARS-COV-2 infection with suicide attempts and other SDV within one year of infection. Veterans with SARS-COV-2 infections were matched 1:5 with non-infected comparators each month. Three periods after index were evaluated: days 1-30, days 31-365, and days 1-365. PARTICIPANTS: VHA patients infected with SARS-COV-2 between March 1, 2020 and March 31, 2021 and matched non-infected Veteran comparators. MAIN MEASURES: Suicide attempt and other SDV events for the COVID-19 and non-infected comparator groups were analyzed using incidence rates per 100,000 person years and hazard ratios from Cox regressions modeling time from matched index date to first event. Subgroups were also examined. KEY RESULTS: 198,938 veterans with SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19 group) and 992,036 comparators were included. Unadjusted one-year incidence per 100,000 for suicide attempt and other SDV was higher among the COVID-19 group: 355 vs 250 and 327 vs 235, respectively. The COVID-19 group had higher risk than comparators for suicide attempts: days 1-30 hazard ratio (HR) = 2.54 (CI:2.05, 3.15), days 31-365 HR = 1.30 (CI:1.19, 1.43) and days 1-365 HR = 1.41 (CI:1.30, 1.54), and for other SDV: days 1-30 HR = 1.94 (CI:1.51, 2.49), days 31-365 HR = 1.32 (CI:1.20, 1.45) and days 1-365 HR = 1.38 (CI:1.26, 1.51). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients had higher risks of both suicide attempts and other forms of SDV compared to uninfected comparators, which persisted for at least one year after infection. Results support suicide risk screening of those infected with SARS-COV-2 to identify opportunities to prevent self-harm.

Understanding care coordination for Veterans with complex care needs: protocol of a multiple-methods study to build evidence for an effectiveness and implementation study.

Background: For patients with complex health and social needs, care coordination is crucial for improving their access to care, clinical outcomes, care experiences, and controlling their healthcare costs. However, evidence is inconsistent regarding the core elements of care coordination interventions, and lack of standardized processes for assessing patients' needs has made it challenging for providers to optimize care coordination based on patient needs and preferences. Further, ensuring providers have reliable and timely means of communicating about care plans, patients' full spectrum of needs, and transitions in care is important for overcoming potential care fragmentation. In the Veterans Health Administration (VA), several initiatives are underway to implement care coordination processes and services. In this paper, we describe our study underway in the VA aimed at building evidence for designing and implementing care coordination practices that enhance care integration and improve health and care outcomes for Veterans with complex care needs. Methods: In a prospective observational multiple methods study, for Aim 1 we will use existing data to identify Veterans with complex care needs who have and have not received care coordination services. We will examine the relationship between receipt of care coordination services and their health outcomes. In Aim 2, we will adapt the Patient Perceptions of Integrated Veteran Care questionnaire to survey a sample of Veterans about their experiences regarding coordination, integration, and the extent to which their care needs are being met. For Aim 3, we will interview providers and care teams about their perceptions of the innovation attributes of current care coordination needs assessment tools and processes, including their improvement over other approaches (relative advantage), fit with current practices (compatibility and innovation fit), complexity, and ability to visualize how the steps proceed to impact the right care at the right time (observability). The provider interviews will inform design and deployment of a widescale provider survey. Discussion: Taken together, our study will inform development of an enhanced care coordination intervention that seeks to improve care and outcomes for Veterans with complex care needs.

VA-Delivered or VA-Purchased Care: Important Factors for Veterans Navigating Care Decisions.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The VA MISSION Act aimed to increase Veterans' access to care by allowing eligible Veterans to use VA-paid care from non-VA providers ("VA-purchased care"). We interviewed Veterans who were eligible for both VA-delivered and VA-purchased care to examine factors they consider when making decisions about whether to use VA-delivered or VA-purchased care. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 28 Veterans across the USA who were eligible for VA-delivered and VA-purchased care, using deductive and inductive analysis to develop themes. Participants were recruited from a survey about healthcare access and decision-making. More than half of participants lived in rural areas, 21 were men, and 25 were > 50 years old. KEY RESULTS: Veteran participants identified (1) high-quality relationships with providers based on mutual trust, empathy, authenticity, and continuity of care, and (2) a positive environment or "eco-system of care" characterized by supportive interactions with staff and other Veterans, and exemplary customer service as integral to their decisions about where to receive care. These preferences influenced their engagement with VA and non-VA providers. We discovered corresponding findings related to Veterans' information needs. When making decisions around where to receive care, participants said they would like more information about VA and non-VA providers and services, and about coordination of care and referrals, including understanding processes and implications of utilizing VA-purchased care. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Current VA-purchased care eligibility determinations focus on common access metrics (e.g., wait times, distance to care). Yet, Veterans discussed other important factors for navigating care decisions, including patient-provider relationship quality and the larger healthcare environment (e.g., interactions with staff and other Veterans). Our findings point to the need for health systems to collect and provide information on these aspects of care to ensure care decisions reflect what is important to Veterans when navigating where to receive care.

Veterans Health Administration Healthcare Coverage and Medical Financial Hardship in Low-Income Veterans.

INTRODUCTION: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) provides low- to no-cost care to enrolled veterans with low incomes. This study assessed the associations between VA coverage and medical financial hardship among U.S. veterans with low incomes. METHODS: Using 2015-2018 National Health Interview Survey data, veterans aged ≥18 years with incomes <200% of the Federal Poverty Level were identified (crude n=2,468, weighted n=3,872,252). Four types of medical financial hardship were assessed: objective, and subjective material, psychologic, and behavioral medical financial hardship. Survey-weighted proportions of veterans with medical financial hardship were calculated, and adjusted probabilities of medical financial hardship that accounted for Veteran characteristics, year-fixed effects, and survey sampling design were estimated. Analyses were conducted from August through December 2022. RESULTS: Overall, 34.5% of veterans with low incomes had VA coverage. Among veterans without VA coverage, 38.7% had Medicare insurance, 18.2% had Medicaid insurance, 16.5% had private insurance, 13.5% had other public insurance, and 13.1% were uninsured. In adjusted analyses, veterans with VA coverage had lower probabilities of objective (-8.13 percentage point, p=0.008), subjective material (-6.55 percentage point, p=0.034), subjective psychologic (-10.33 percentage point, p=0.003), and subjective behavioral (-6.72 percentage point, p=0.031) medical financial hardship than veterans with Medicare and no VA coverage. CONCLUSIONS: VA coverage was associated with protection against four types of medical financial hardship among veterans with low incomes, yet many are not enrolled. Research is needed to understand reasons these veterans lack VA coverage and to identify strategies to address medical financial hardship.

Early Impact of VA MISSION Act Implementation on Primary Care Appointment Wait Time.

BACKGROUND: Through Community Care Networks (CCNs) implemented with the VA MISSION Act, VA expanded provider contracting and instituted network adequacy standards for Veterans' community care. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether early CCN implementation impacted community primary care (PC) appointment wait times overall, and by rural/urban and PC shortage area (HPSA) status. DESIGN: Using VA administrative data from February 2019 through February 2020 and a difference-in-differences approach, we compared wait times before and after CCN implementation for appointments scheduled by VA facilities that did (CCN appointments) and did not (comparison appointments) implement CCNs. We ran regression models with all appointments, and stratified by rural/urban and PC HPSA status. All models adjusted for Veteran characteristics and VA facility-level clustering. APPOINTMENTS: 13,720 CCN and 40,638 comparison appointments. MAIN MEASURES: Wait time, measured as number of days from authorization to use community PC to a Veteran's first corresponding appointment. KEY RESULTS: Overall, unadjusted wait times increased by 35.7 days ([34.4, 37.1] 95% CI) after CCN implementation. In adjusted analysis, comparison wait times increased on average 33.7 days ([26.3, 41.2] 95% CI, p < 0.001) after CCN implementation; there was no significant difference for CCN wait times (across-group mean difference: 5.4 days, [-3.8, 14.6] 95% CI, p = 0.25). In stratified analyses, comparison wait time increases ranged from 29.6 days ([20.8, 38.4] 95% CI, p < 0.001) to 42.1 days ([32.9, 51.3] 95% CI, p > 0.001) after CCN implementation, while additional differences for CCN appointments ranged from 13.4 days ([3.5, 23.4] 95% CI, p = 0.008) to -15.1 days ([-30.1, -0.1] 95% CI, p = 0.05) for urban and PC HPSA appointments, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After early CCN implementation, community PC wait times increased sharply at VA facilities that did and did not implement CCNs, regardless of rural/urban or PC HPSA status, suggesting community care demand likely overwhelmed VA resources such that CCNs had limited impact.

"The Pain Doesn't Have to Control You." A Qualitative Evaluation of Three Pain Clinics Teaching Nonopioid Pain Management Strategies.

PURPOSE: To explore factors related to effectiveness of nonpharmacological treatment for opioid-dependent patients suffering with chronic pain. APPROACH: A qualitative study incorporating individual interviews and focus group interviews. SETTING: 3 rural Oregon nonopioid pain management clinics. INTERVENTION: A 10-week nonpharmacological educational program incorporating cognitive-behavioral therapy, movement therapy, mindfulness, and other skills. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Across sites, we conducted 9 individual interviews with clinic staff and 3 focus group interviews with 34 patients who had participated in the course. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes within and across respondent groups. RESULTS: Analysis revealed 4 primary themes: program goals; program benefits; characteristics of patients who benefit from the program; coordination of clinic experiences with other care. Several primary findings can be highlighted. The clinics focused on improving patients' quality of life, while opioid use reduction was a potential secondary benefit, driven by patients. Major program benefits included enhanced pain self-management skills, patients' greater assertiveness in communications with healthcare providers, and, in numerous cases, opioid use reduction. Participants were unanimous that predisposition toward active self-management of one's pain was an essential factor for positive outcomes. Patients reported considerable variability in providers' understanding of their clinic participation. CONCLUSION: Nonpharmacological approaches for treating chronic pain can be effective for many patients. Clinics teaching these approaches should be more fully integrated into the healthcare system.

Hospital Readmissions Among Veterans Within 90 Days of Discharge Following Initial Hospitalization for COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Some patients experience ongoing sequelae after discharge, including rehospitalization; therefore, outcomes following COVID-19 hospitalization are of continued interest. We examined readmissions within 90 days of hospital discharge for veterans hospitalized with COVID-19 during the first 10 months of the pandemic in the US. METHODS: Veterans hospitalized with COVID-19 at a Veterans Health Administration (VA) hospital from March 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020 were followed for 90 days after discharge to determine readmission rates. RESULTS: Of 20,414 veterans hospitalized with COVID-19 during this time period, 13% (n = 2,643) died in the hospital. Among survivors (n = 17,771), 16% (n = 2,764) were readmitted within 90 days of discharge, with a mean time to readmission of 21.6 days (SD = 21.1). Characteristics of the initial COVID-19 hospitalization associated with readmission included length of stay, mechanical ventilator use, higher comorbidity index score, current smoking, urban residence, discharged against medical advice, and hospitalized from September through December 2020 versus March through August 2020 (all P values <.02). Veterans readmitted from September through December 2020 were more often White, lived in a rural or highly rural area, and had shorter initial hospitalizations than veterans hospitalized earlier in the year. CONCLUSION: Approximately 1 of 6 veterans discharged alive following a COVID-19 hospitalization from March 1 through December 31, 2020, were readmitted within 90 days. The longer the hospital stay, the greater the likelihood of readmission. Readmissions also were more likely when the initial admission required mechanical ventilation, or when the veteran had multiple comorbidities, smoked, or lived in an urban area. COVID-19 hospitalizations were shorter from September through December 2020, suggesting that hospital over-capacity may have resulted in earlier discharges and increased readmissions. Efforts to monitor and provide support for patients discharged in high bed-capacity situations may help avoid readmissions.

Differences in access to virtual and in-person primary care by race/ethnicity and community social vulnerability among adults diagnosed with COVID-19 in a large, multi-state health system.

BACKGROUND: Research exploring telehealth expansion during the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that groups disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 also experience worse access to telehealth. However, this research has been cross-sectional or short in duration; geographically limited; has not accounted for pre-existing access disparities; and has not examined COVID-19 patients. We examined virtual primary care use by race/ethnicity and community social vulnerability among adults diagnosed with COVID-19 in a large, multi-state health system. We also assessed use of in-person primary care to understand whether disparities in virtual access may have been offset by improved in-person access. METHODS: Using a cohort design, electronic health records, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index, we compared changes in virtual and in-person primary care use by race/ethnicity and community social vulnerability in the year before and after COVID-19 diagnosis. Our study population included 11,326 adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between March and July 2020. We estimated logistic regression models to examine likelihood of primary care use. In all regression models we computed robust standard errors; in adjusted models we controlled for demographic and health characteristics of patients. RESULTS: In a patient population of primarily Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic White individuals, and in which over half lived in socially vulnerable areas, likelihood of virtual primary care use increased from the year before to the year after COVID-19 diagnosis (3.6 to 10.3%); while in-person use remained stable (21.0 to 20.7%). In unadjusted and adjusted regression models, compared with White patients, Hispanic/Latino and other race/ethnicity patients were significantly less likely to use virtual care before and after COVID-19 diagnosis; Hispanic/Latino, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and other race/ethnicity patients, and patients living in socially vulnerable areas were also significantly less likely to use in-person care during these time periods. CONCLUSIONS: Newly expanded virtual primary care has not equitably benefited individuals from racialized groups diagnosed with COVID-19, and virtual access disparities have not been offset by improved in-person access. Health systems should employ evidence-based strategies to equitably provide care, including representative provider networks; targeted, empowering outreach; co-developed culturally and linguistically appropriate tools and technologies; and provision of enabling resources and services.

Psychiatric disorders newly diagnosed among veterans subsequent to hospitalization for COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of our study was to evaluate the development of new mental health diagnoses up to 6-months following COVID-19 hospitalization for in a large, national sample. METHOD: Data were extracted for all Veterans hospitalized at Veterans Health Administration hospitals for COVID-19 from March through August of 2020 utilizing national administrative data. After identifying the cohort, follow-up data were linked through six months post-hospitalization. Data were analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Eight percent of patients developed a new mental health diagnosis following hospitalization. The most common new mental health diagnoses involved depressive, anxiety, and adjustment disorders. Younger and rural patients were more likely to develop new mental health diagnoses. Women and those with more comorbidities were less likely to develop new diagnoses. CONCLUSION: A subpopulation of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 developed new mental health diagnoses. Unique demographics predictors indicate the potential need for additional outreach and screening to groups at elevated risk of post-hospitalization, mental health sequelae.

Differences in Outpatient Health Care Utilization 12 Months after COVID-19 Infection by Race/Ethnicity and Community Social Vulnerability.

Ensuring access to high-quality outpatient care is an important strategy to improve COVID-19 outcomes, reduce social inequities, and prevent potentially expensive complications of disease. This study assesses the equity of health care response to COVID-19 by examining outpatient care utilization by factors at the individual and community levels in the 12 months prior to and following COVID-19 diagnosis. Employing a retrospective, observational cohort design, we analyzed electronic health record data from a sample of 11,326 adults diagnosed with COVID-19 between March and July 2020. We used two-part models to estimate changes in use of primary and specialty care by race/ethnicity and community social vulnerability in the year before and after COVID-19 diagnosis. Our findings showed that while overall probability and counts of primary and specialty care visits increased following a positive COVID-19 diagnosis, disparities in care utilization by race/ethnicity and living in a socially vulnerable community persisted in the year that followed. These findings reiterate the need for strategic approaches to improve access to and utilization of care among those diagnosed with COVID-19, especially for individuals who are traditionally undeserved by the health system. Our findings also highlight the importance of systematic approaches for addressing social inequity in health care.

Determinants of Boarding of Patients with Severe Mental Illness in Hospital Emergency Departments.

BACKGROUND: Boarding of patients in hospital emergency departments (EDs) occurs routinely across the U.S. ED patients with behavioral health conditions are more likely to be boarded than other patients. However, the existing literature on ED boarding of psychiatric patients remains largely descriptive and has not empirically related mental health system capacity to psychiatric boarding. Nor does it show how the mental health system could better address the needs of populations at the highest risk of ED boarding. AIMS OF THE STUDY: We examined extent and determinants of "boarding" of patients with severe mental illness (SMI) in hospital emergency departments (ED) and tested whether greater mental health system capacity may mitigate the degree of ED boarding. METHODS: We linked Oregon's ED Information Exchange, hospital discharge, and Medicaid data to analyze encounters in Oregon hospital EDs from October 2014 through September 2015 by 7,103 persons aged 15 to 64 with SMI (N = 34,207). We additionally utilized Medicaid claims for years 2010-2015 to identify Medicaid beneficiaries with SMI. Boarding was defined as an ED stay over six hours. We estimated a recursive simultaneous-equation model to test the pathway that mental health system capacity affects ED boarding via psychiatric visits. RESULTS: Psychiatric visits were more likely to be boarded than non-psychiatric visits (30.2% vs. 7.4%). Severe psychiatric visits were 1.4 times more likely to be boarded than non-severe psychiatric visits. Thirty-four percent of psychiatric visits by children were boarded compared to 29.6% for adults. Statistical analysis found that psychiatric visit, substance abuse, younger age, black race and urban residence corresponded with an elevated risk of boarding. Discharge destinations such as psychiatric facility and acute care hospitals also corresponded with a higher probability of ED boarding. Greater supply of mental health resources in a county, both inpatient and intensive community-based, corresponded with a reduced risk of ED boarding via fewer psychiatric ED visits. DISCUSSION: Psychiatric visit, severity of psychiatric diagnosis, substance abuse, and discharge destinations are among important predictors of psychiatric ED boarding by persons with SMI. A greater capacity of inpatient and intensive community mental health systems may lead to a reduction in psychiatric ED visits by persons with SMI and thereby decrease the extent of psychiatric ED boarding. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: Continued investment in mental health system resources may reduce psychiatric ED visits and mitigate the psychiatric ED boarding problem.

Participation of Latinos in the Diabetes Self-Management Program and Programa de Manejo Personal de la Diabetes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Diabetes Self-Management Program (DSMP) and Programa de Manejo Personal de la Diabetes (PMPD) have been shown to reduce complications from poorly controlled diabetes. Only a few research studies have examined Latino individuals' participation in them. This study examines workshop completion among DSMP and PMPD participants and the effects of race/ethnicity, workshop language, workshop type, and workshop site on program completion rates by participants. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used data from the National Council on Aging's data repository of individuals who participated in DSMP or PMPD between January 2010 and March 2019. Using a pooled cross-sectional study design, we examined workshop completion among 8,321 Latino and 23,537 non-Latino white (NLW) participants. We utilized linear probability models to estimate the effects of race/ethnicity and workshop language/type among the full sample; a stratified model estimated the separate effects of workshop language, type, and delivery site among Latinos. Participant characteristics included age, sex, education, number of chronic health conditions, living arrangement, health insurance status, and geographic location of workshop. RESULTS: Compared to NLW participants in DSMP English workshops, Latinos enrolled in any workshop had a higher probability of completing at least four workshop sessions, and Latinos enrolled in PMPD Spanish workshops had a higher probability of completing six of six sessions. Among the Latino subsample, participation in PMPD Spanish or English workshops was associated with completing at least four sessions or all six sessions compared with participation in DSMP Spanish or English workshops. Among Latino participants, the effects of workshop site on completion rates were mixed. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Diabetes self-management education programs tailored for Latino participants had higher completion rates. Further research is warranted to better understand the effect of workshop site and participant characteristics on completion of DSMP and PMPD programs.