Eliciting patient past experiences of healthcare discrimination as a potential pathway to reduce health disparities: A qualitative study of primary care staff.

OBJECTIVE: To understand whether and how primary care providers and staff elicit patients' past experiences of healthcare discrimination when providing care. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Twenty qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare staff in primary care roles to inform future interventions to integrate data about past experiences of healthcare discrimination into clinical care. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Data were collected via semi-structured qualitative interviews between December 2018 and January 2019, with health care staff in primary care roles at a hospital-based clinic within an urban safety-net health system that serves a patient population with significant racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversity. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Providers did not routinely, or in a structured way, elicit information about past experiences of healthcare discrimination. Some providers believed that information about healthcare discrimination experiences could allow them to be more aware of and responsive to their patients' needs and to establish more trusting relationships. Others did not deem it appropriate or useful to elicit such information and were concerned about challenges in collecting and effectively using such data. CONCLUSIONS: While providers see value in eliciting past experiences of discrimination, directly and systematically discussing such experiences with patients during a primary care encounter is challenging for them. Collecting this information in primary care settings will likely require implementation of multilevel systematic data collection strategies. Findings presented here can help identify clinic-level opportunities to do so.

Health, Access to Care, and Financial Barriers to Care Among People Incarcerated in US Prisons.

Importance: Decades-old data indicate that people imprisoned in the US have poor access to health care despite their constitutional right to care. Most prisons impose co-payments for at least some medical visits. No recent national studies have assessed access to care or whether co-pays are associated with worse access. Objective: To determine the proportion of people who are incarcerated with health problems or pregnancy who used health services, changes in the prevalence of those conditions since 2004, and the association between their state's standard prison co-payment and care receipt in 2016. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis was conducted in October 2023 and used data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics' 2016 Survey of Prison Inmates, a nationally representative sample of adults in state or federal prisons, with some comparisons to the 2004 version of that survey. Exposures: The state's standard, per-visit co-payment amount in 2016 compared with weekly earnings at the prison's minimum wage. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported prevalence of 13 chronic physical conditions, 6 mental health conditions, and current severe psychological distress assessed using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale; proportion of respondents with such problems who did not receive any clinician visit or treatment; and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) comparing the likelihood of no clinician visit according to co-payment level. Results: Of 1 421 700 (unweighted: n = 24 848; mean [SD] age, 35.3 [0.3] years; 93.2% male individuals) prison residents in 2016, 61.7% (up from 55.9% in 2004) reported 1 or more chronic physical conditions; among them, 13.8% had received no medical visit since incarceration. A total of 40.1% of respondents reported ever having a mental health condition (up from 24.5% in 2004), of whom 33.0% had received no mental health treatment. A total of 13.3% of respondents met criteria for severe psychological distress, of whom 41.7% had not received mental health treatment in prison. Of state prison residents, 90.4% were in facilities requiring co-payments, including 63.3% in facilities with co-payments exceeding 1 week's prison wage. Co-payments, particularly when high, were associated with not receiving a needed health care visit (co-pay ≤1 week's wage: aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.10-1.86; co-pay >1 week's wage: aOR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.61-2.93). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that many people who are incarcerated with health problems received no care, particularly in facilities charging co-payments for medical visits.

Hospital Assets Before and After Private Equity Acquisition.

This study assesses changes in hospitals' capital assets after private equity acquisition.

Demand and Supply Drivers of Medicare and Non-Medicare Health Spending: An Analysis of U.S. States, 1991-2019.

For the last four decades, policymakers have attempted to control the United States's high health care costs by reducing patients' demand for care (e.g., by imposing managed-care restrictions or high costs on patients at the time of use). Yet studies based mostly on data from the public Medicare program, which covers mostly elderly Americans, suggest that supply (e.g., number of physicians or hospital beds) rather than demand drives aggregate service use and, hence, costs. Using variation between U.S. states in per enrollee Medicare spending versus per capita spending of all other (non-Medicare) individuals, we find that greater supply boosts costs for the entire population. Furthermore, we find that factors that suppress demand in the non-Medicare population do reduce non-Medicare health care spending, but simultaneously increase Medicare spending. This suggests that for a given supply of medical resources, suppressing demand for one group of patients may produce a compensatory increase in provision of care to those whose demand has not been suppressed. Health planning to assure adequate medical resources where they are needed while preventing excess supply where it is duplicative and wasteful is likely a more effective cost control strategy than the imposition of managed-care restrictions or imposing higher costs onto patients seeking care.

Health Care Access and COVID-19 Vaccination in the United States: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although federal legislation made COVID-19 vaccines free, inequities in access to medical care may affect vaccine uptake. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether health care access was associated with uptake and timeliness of COVID-19 vaccination in the United States. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. SETTING: 2021 National Health Interview Survey (Q2-Q4). SUBJECTS: In all, 21,532 adults aged≥18 were included in the study. MEASURES: Exposures included 4 metrics of health care access: health insurance, having an established place for medical care, having a physician visit within the past year, and medical care affordability. Outcomes included receipt of 1 or more COVID-19 vaccines and receipt of a first vaccine within 6 months of vaccine availability. We examined the association between each health care access metric and outcome using logistic regression, unadjusted and adjusted for demographic, geographic, and socioeconomic covariates. RESULTS: In unadjusted analyses, each metric of health care access was associated with the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination and (among those vaccinated) early vaccination. In adjusted analyses, having health coverage (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.60; 95% CI: 1.39, 1.84), a usual place of care (AOR 1.58; 95% CI: 1.42, 1.75), and a doctor visit within the past year (AOR 1.45, 95% CI: 1.31, 1.62) remained associated with higher rates of COVID-19 vaccination. Only having a usual place of care was associated with early vaccine uptake in adjusted analyses. LIMITATIONS: Receipt of COVID-19 vaccination was self-reported. CONCLUSIONS: Several metrics of health care access are associated with the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. Policies that achieve universal coverage, and facilitate long-term relationships with trusted providers, may be an important component of pandemic responses.

Hospital Capital Assets, Community Health, and the Utilization and Cost of Inpatient Care: A Population-Based Study of US Counties.

BACKGROUND: The provision of high-quality hospital care requires adequate space, buildings, and equipment, although redundant infrastructure could also drive service overprovision. OBJECTIVE: To explore the distribution of physical hospital resources-that is, capital assets-in the United States; its correlation with indicators of community health and nonhealth factors; and the association between hospital capital density and regional hospital utilization and costs. RESEARCH DESIGN: We created a dataset of n=1733 US counties by analyzing the 2019 Medicare Cost Reports; 2019 State Inpatient Database Community Inpatient Statistics; 2020-2021 Area Health Resource File; 2016-2020 American Community Survey; 2022 PLACES; and 2019 CDC WONDER. We first calculated aggregate hospital capital assets and investment at the county level. Next, we examined the correlation between community's medical need (eg, chronic disease prevalence), ability to pay (eg, insurance), and supply factors with 4 metrics of capital availability. Finally, we examined the association between capital assets and hospital utilization/costs, adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: Counties with older and sicker populations generally had less aggregate hospital capital per capita, per hospital day, and per hospital discharge, while counties with higher income or insurance coverage had more hospital capital. In linear regressions controlling for medical need and ability to pay, capital assets were associated with greater hospital utilization and costs, for example, an additional $1000 in capital assets per capita was associated with 73 additional discharges per 100,000 population (95% CI: 45-102) and $19 in spending per bed day (95% CI: 12-26). CONCLUSIONS: The level of investment in hospitals is linked to community wealth but not population health needs, and may drive use and costs.

Health Professionals Organizing for Climate Action: A Novel Community Organizing Fellowship.

PROBLEM: Climate change is a public health and health equity crisis. Health professionals are well positioned to advance solutions but may lack the training and self-efficacy needed to achieve them. APPROACH: The Center for Health Equity Education and Advocacy at Cambridge Health Alliance, a Harvard Medical School Teaching Hospital, developed a novel, longitudinal fellowship that taught health professionals about health and health equity effects of climate change, as well as community organizing practices that may help them mitigate these effects. The fellowship cohort included 40 fellows organized into 12 teams and was conducted from January to June 2022. Each team developed a project to address climate change and received coaching from an experienced community organizer coach. Effects of the fellowship on participants' knowledge, skills, and attitudes were evaluated using pre- and postfellowship surveys. OUTCOMES: Surveys were analyzed for 38 of 40 (95%) participants who consented to the evaluation and completed both surveys. Surveys used a 7-point Likert scale for item responses. McNemar's test for paired data was used to assess changes in the proportion of respondents who agreed ("somewhat agree"/"agree"/"strongly agree") with statements in pre- vs postfellowship surveys. Statistically significant improvements were found for 11 of the 17 items assessing knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Participants' views of the fellowship and its effects were assessed through additional items in the postfellowship survey. Most respondents agreed that the fellowship increased their knowledge of the connections between climate change and health equity (32/38, 84.2%) and prepared them to effectively participate in a community organizing campaign (37/38, 94.7%). Each of the 12 groups developed climate health projects by the fellowship's end. NEXT STEPS: This novel fellowship was well received and effective in teaching community organizing to health professionals concerned about climate change. Future studies are needed to assess longer-term effects of the fellowship.

Projected Health Outcomes Associated With 3 US Supreme Court Decisions in 2022 on COVID-19 Workplace Protections, Handgun-Carry Restrictions, and Abortion Rights.

Importance: Several recent US Supreme Court rulings have drawn criticism from the medical community, but their health consequences have not been quantitatively evaluated. Objective: To model health outcomes associated with 3 Supreme Court rulings in 2022 that invalidated workplace COVID-19 vaccine or mask-and-test requirements, voided state handgun-carry restrictions, and revoked the constitutional right to abortion. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytical modeling study estimated outcomes associated with 3 Supreme Court rulings in 2022: (1) National Federation of Independent Business v Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which invalidated COVID-19 workplace protections; (2) New York State Rifle and Pistol Association Inc v Bruen, Superintendent of New York State Police (Bruen), which voided state laws restricting handgun carry; and (3) Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization (Dobbs), which revoked the constitutional right to abortion. Data analysis was performed from July 1, 2022, to April 7, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: For the OSHA ruling, multiple data sources were used to calculate deaths attributable to COVID-19 among unvaccinated workers from January 4 to May 28, 2022, and the share of these deaths that would have been prevented by the voided protections. To model the Bruen decision, published estimates of the consequences of right-to-carry laws were applied to 2020 firearm-related deaths (and injuries) in 7 affected jurisdictions. For the Dobbs ruling, the model assessed unwanted pregnancy continuations, resulting from the change in distance to the closest abortion facility, and then excess deaths (and peripartum complications) from forcing these unwanted pregnancies to term. Results: The decision model projected that the OSHA decision was associated with 1402 additional COVID-19 deaths (and 22 830 hospitalizations) in early 2022. In addition, the model projected that 152 additional firearm-related deaths (and 377 nonfatal injuries) annually will result from the Bruen decision. Finally, the model projected that 30 440 fewer abortions will occur annually due to current abortion bans stemming from Dobbs, with 76 612 fewer abortions if states at high risk for such bans also were to ban the procedure; these bans will be associated with an estimated 6 to 15 additional pregnancy-related deaths each year, respectively, and hundreds of additional cases of peripartum morbidity. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that outcomes from 3 Supreme Court decisions in 2022 could lead to substantial harms to public health, including nearly 3000 excess deaths (and possibly many more) over a decade.

The Association of Childbirth with Medical Debt in the USA, 2019-2020.

BACKGROUND: Medical debt affects one in five adults in the USA and may disproportionately burden postpartum women due to pregnancy-related medical costs. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between childbirth and medical debt, and the correlates of medical debt among postpartum women, in the USA. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed female "sample adults" 18-49 years old in the 2019-2020 National Health Interview Survey, a nationally representative household survey. MAIN MEASURES: Our primary exposure was whether the subject gave birth in the past year. We had two family-level debt outcomes: problems paying medical bills and inability to pay medical bills. We examined the association between live birth and medical debt outcomes, unadjusted and adjusted for potential confounders in multivariable logistic regressions. Among postpartum women, we also examined the association between medical debt with maternal asthma, hypertension, and gestational diabetes and several sociodemographic factors. KEY RESULTS: Our sample included n = 12,163 women, n = 645 with a live birth in the past year. Postpartum women were younger, more likely to have Medicaid, and lived in larger families than those not postpartum. 19.8% of postpartum women faced difficulty with medical bills versus 15.1% who were not; in multivariable regression, postpartum women had 48% higher adjusted odds of medical debt problems (95% CI 1.13, 1.92). Results were similar when examining inability to pay medical bills, and similar differences were seen for privately insured women. Among postpartum women, those with lower incomes and with asthma or gestational diabetes, but not hypertension, had significantly higher adjusted odds of medical debt problems. CONCLUSIONS: Postpartum women experience higher levels of medical debt than other women; poorer women and those with common chronic diseases may have an even higher burden. Policies to expand and improve health coverage for this population are needed to improve maternal health and the welfare of young families.

COVID-19 Risk by Workers' Occupation and Industry in the United States, 2020‒2021.

Objectives. To assess the risk of COVID-19 by occupation and industry in the United States. Methods. Using the 2020-2021 National Health Interview Survey, we estimated the risk of having had a diagnosis of COVID-19 by workers' industry and occupation, with and without adjustment for confounders. We also examined COVID-19 period prevalence by the number of workers in a household. Results. Relative to workers in other industries and occupations, those in the industry "health care and social assistance" (adjusted prevalence ratio = 1.23; 95% confidence interval = 1.11, 1.37), or in the occupations "health practitioners and technical," "health care support," or "protective services" had elevated risks of COVID-19. However, compared with nonworkers, workers in 12 of 21 industries and 11 of 23 occupations (e.g., manufacturing, food preparation, and sales) were at elevated risk. COVID-19 prevalence rose with each additional worker in a household. Conclusions. Workers in several industries and occupations with public-facing roles and adults in households with multiple workers had elevated risk of COVID-19. Public Health Implications. Stronger workplace protections, paid sick leave, and better health care access might mitigate working families' risks from this and future pandemics. (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(6):647-656. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307249).

Chronic Illness in Children and Foregone Care Among Household Adults in the United States: A National Study.

BACKGROUND: Childhood chronic illness imposes financial burdens that may affect the entire family. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to assess whether adults living with children with 2 childhood chronic illnesses-asthma and diabetes-are more likely to forego their own medical care, and experience financial strain, relative to those living with children without these illnesses. RESEARCH DESIGN: 2009-2018 National Health Interview Survey. SUBJECTS: Adult-child dyads, consisting of one randomly sampled child and adult in each family. MEASURES: The main exposure was a diagnosis of asthma or diabetes in the child. The outcomes were delayed/foregone medical care for the adult as well as family financial strain; the authors evaluated their association with the child's illness using multivariable logistic regressions adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: The authors identified 93,264 adult-child dyads; 8499 included a child with asthma, and 179 a child with diabetes. Families with children with either illness had more medical bill problems, food insecurity, and medical expenses. Adults living with children with each illness reported more health care access problems. For instance, relative to other adults, those living with a child with asthma were more likely to forego/delay care (14.7% vs. 10.2%, adjusted odds ratio: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.16-1.39) and were more likely to forego medications, specialist, mental health, and dental care. Adults living with a child with diabetes were also more likely to forego/delay care (adjusted odds ratio: 1.76; 95% CI: 1.18-2.64). CONCLUSIONS: Adults living with children with chronic illnesses may sacrifice their own care because of cost concerns. Reducing out-of-pocket health care costs, improving health coverage, and expanding social supports for families with children with chronic conditions might mitigate such impacts.

Community Health, Health Care Access, And COVID-19 Booster Uptake In Massachusetts.

Booster vaccination offers vital protection against COVID-19, particularly for communities in which many people have chronic conditions. Although vaccination has been widely and freely available, people who have experienced barriers to care might be deterred from being vaccinated. We examined the relationship between COVID-19 booster uptake and small area-level demographics, chronic disease prevalence, and measures of health care access in 462 Massachusetts communities during the period September 2021-April 2022. Unadjusted analyses found that booster uptake was higher in older and wealthier areas, lower in areas with more Hispanic and Black residents, and lower in areas with a high prevalence of chronic conditions. In both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, uptake was lower in communities with more uninsured residents and those in which fewer residents received routine medical check-ups. Adjusted analyses found that areas with more vaccine providers and primary care physicians had higher booster uptake, but this association was not significant in unadjusted analyses. Results suggest a need for innovative outreach efforts, as well as structural changes such as expansion of health care coverage and universal access to care to mitigate the inequitable burden of COVID-19.

Trends and Disparities in the Distribution of Outpatient Physicians' Annual Face Time with Patients, 1979-2018.

BACKGROUND: Physician time is a valuable yet finite resource. Whether such time is apportioned equitably among population subgroups, and how the provision of that time has changed in recent decades, is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To investigate trends and racial/ethnic disparities in the receipt of annual face time with physicians in the USA. DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional. SETTING: National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 1979-1981, 1985, 1989-2016, 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Office-based physicians. MEASURES: Exposures included race/ethnicity (White, Black, and Hispanic); age (<18, 18-64, and 65+); and survey year. Our main outcome was patients' annual visit face time with a physician; secondary outcomes include annual visit rates and mean visit duration. RESULTS: Our sample included n=1,108,835 patient visits. From 1979 to 2018, annual outpatient physician face time per capita rose from 40.0 to 60.4 min, an increase driven by a rise in mean visit length and not in the number of visits. However, since 2005, mean annual face time with a primary care physician has fallen, a decline offset by rising time with specialists. Face time provided per physician changed little given growth in the physician workforce. A racial/ethnic gap in physician visit time present at the beginning of the study period widened over time. In 2014-2018, White individuals received 70.0 min of physician face time per year, vs. 52.4 among Black and 53.0 among Hispanic individuals. This disparity was driven by differences in visit rates, not mean visit length, and in the provision of specialist but not primary care. LIMITATION: Self-reported visit length. CONCLUSION: Americans' annual face time with office-based physicians rose for three decades after 1979, yet is still allocated inequitably, particularly by specialists; meanwhile, time spent by Americans with primary care physicians is falling. These trends and disparities may adversely affect patient outcomes. Policy change is needed to assure better allocation of this resource.

Uptake and Equity in Influenza Vaccination Among Veterans with VA Coverage, Veterans Without VA Coverage, and Non-Veterans in the USA, 2019-2020.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is a primary method of reducing the burden of influenza, yet uptake is neither optimal nor equitable. Single-tier, primary care-oriented health systems may have an advantage in the efficiency and equity of vaccination. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of Veterans' Health Administration (VA) coverage with influenza vaccine uptake and disparities. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. PARTICIPANTS: Adult respondents to the 2019-2020 National Health Interview Survey. MAIN MEASURES: We examined influenza vaccination rates, and racial/ethnic and income-based vaccination disparities, among veterans with VA coverage, veterans without VA coverage, and adult non-veterans. We performed multivariable logistic regressions adjusted for demographics and self-reported health, with interaction terms to examine differential effects by race/ethnicity and income. KEY RESULTS: Our sample included n=2,277 veterans with VA coverage, n=2,821 veterans without VA coverage, and n=46,456 non-veterans. Veterans were more often White and male; among veterans, those with VA coverage had worse health and lower incomes. Veterans with VA coverage had a higher unadjusted vaccination rate (63.0%) than veterans without VA coverage (59.1%) and non-veterans (46.5%) (p<0.05 for each comparison). In our adjusted model, non-veterans were 11.4 percentage points (95% CI -14.3, -8.5) less likely than veterans with VA coverage to be vaccinated, and veterans without VA coverage were 6.7 percentage points (95% CI -10.3, -3.0) less likely to be vaccinated than those with VA coverage. VA coverage, compared with non-veteran status, was also associated with reduced racial/ethnic and income disparities in vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: VA coverage is associated with higher and more equitable influenza vaccination rates. A single-tier health system that emphasizes primary care may improve the uptake and equity of vaccination for influenza, and possibly other pathogens, like SARS-CoV2.

Prevalence and Risk Factors for Medical Debt and Subsequent Changes in Social Determinants of Health in the US.

Importance: Cost barriers discourage many US residents from seeking medical care and many who obtain it experience financial hardship. However, little is known about the association between medical debt and social determinants of health (SDOH). Objective: To determine the prevalence of and risk factors associated with medical debt and the association of medical debt with subsequent changes in the key SDOH of food and housing security. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional analyses using multivariable logistic regression models controlled for demographic, financial, insurance, and health-related factors, and prospective cohort analyses assessing changes over time using the 2018, 2019, and 2020 Surveys of Income and Program Participation. Participants were nationally representative samples of US adults surveyed for 1 to 3 years. Exposures: Insurance-related and health-related characteristics as risk factors for medical debt; Newly incurred medical debt as a risk factor for deterioration in SDOHs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prevalence and amounts of medical debt; 4 SDOHs: inability to pay rent or mortgage or utilities; eviction or foreclosure; and food insecurity. Results: Among 51 872 adults surveyed regarding 2017, 40 784 regarding 2018 and 43 220 regarding 2019, 51.6% were female, 16.8% Hispanic, 6.0% were non-Hispanic Asian, 11.9% non-Hispanic Black, 62.6% non-Hispanic White, and 2.18% other non-Hispanic. A total of 10.8% (95% CI, 10.6-11.0) of individuals and approximately 18.1% of households carried medical debt. Persons with low and middle incomes had similar rates: 15.3%; (95% CI,14.4-16.2) of uninsured persons had debt, as did 10.5% (95% CI, 10.2-18.8) of the privately-insured. In 2018 the mean medical debt was $21 687/debtor (median $2000 [IQR, $597-$5000]). In cross-sectional analyses, hospitalization, disability, and having private high-deductible, Medicare Advantage, or no coverage were risk factors associated with medical indebtedness; residing in a Medicaid-expansion state was protective (2019 odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.70-0.83). Prospective findings were similar, eg, losing insurance coverage between 2017 and 2019 was associated with acquiring medical debt by 2019 (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.23-2.14), as was becoming newly disabled (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.95-3.00) or newly hospitalized (OR, 2.95; 95% CI, 2.40-3.62). Acquiring medical debt between 2017 and 2019 was a risk factor associated with worsening SDOHs, with ORs of 2.20 (95% CI,1.58-3.05) for becoming food insecure; 2.29 (95% CI, 1.73-3.03) for losing ability to pay rent or mortgage; 2.37 (95% CI, 1.75-3.23) for losing ability to pay utilities; and 2.95 (95% CI, 1.38-6.31) for eviction or foreclosure in 2019. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional and cohort study, medical indebtedness was common, even among insured individuals. Acquiring such debt may worsen SDOHs. Expanded and improved health coverage could ameliorate financial distress, and improve housing and food security.

Trends in Health Care Use Among Black and White Persons in the US, 1963-2019.

Importance: In the US, Black people receive less health care than White people. Data on long-term trends in these disparities, which provide historical context for interpreting contemporary inequalities, are lacking. Objective: To assess trends in Black-White disparities in health care use since 1963. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed 29 US surveys conducted between 1963 and 2019 of noninstitutionalized Black and non-Hispanic White civilians. Exposures: Self-reported race and ethnicity. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual per capita visit rates (for ambulatory, dental, and emergency department care), inpatient hospitalization rates, and total per capita medical expenditures. Results: Data from 154 859 Black and 446 944 White (non-Hispanic) individuals surveyed from 1963 to 2019 were analyzed (316 503 [52.6%] female; mean [SD] age, 37.0 [23.3] years). Disparities narrowed in the 1970s in the wake of landmark civil rights legislation and the implementation of Medicare and Medicaid but subsequently widened. For instance, the White-Black gap in ambulatory care visits decreased from 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0-1.4) visits per year in 1963 to 0.8 (95% CI, 0.6-1.0) visits per year in the 1970s and then increased, reaching 3.2 (95% CI, 3.0-3.4) visits per year in 2014 to 2019. Even among privately insured adults aged 18 to 64 years, White individuals used far more ambulatory care (2.6 [95% CI, 2.4-2.8] more visits per year) than Black individuals in 2014 to 2019. Similarly, White peoples' overall health care use, measured in dollars per capita, exceeded that of Black people in every year. After narrowing from 1.96 in the 1960s to 1.26 in the 1970s, the White-Black expenditure ratio began widening in the 1980s, reaching 1.46 in the 1990s; it remained between 1.31 and 1.39 in subsequent periods. Conclusions and Relevance: This study's findings indicate that racial inequities in care have persisted for 6 decades and widened in recent years, suggesting the persistence and even fortification of structural racism in health care access. Reform efforts should include training more Black health care professionals, investments in Black-serving health facilities, and implementing universal health coverage that eliminates cost barriers.

Readmissions performance and penalty experience of safety-net hospitals under Medicare's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.

BACKGROUND: The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP), established by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in March 2010, introduced payment-reduction penalties on acute care hospitals with higher-than-expected readmission rates for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure, and pneumonia. There is concern that hospitals serving large numbers of low-income and uninsured patients (safety-net hospitals) are at greater risk of higher readmissions and penalties, often due to factors that are likely outside the hospital's control. Using publicly reported data, we compared the readmissions performance and penalty experience among safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals. METHODS: We used nationwide hospital level data for 2009-2016 from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Compare program, CMS Final Impact Rule, and the American Hospital Association Annual Survey. We identified as safety-net hospitals the top quartile of hospitals in terms of the proportion of patients receiving income-based public benefits. Using a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences approach based on the comparison of pre- vs. post-HRRP changes in (risk-adjusted) 30-day readmission rate in safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals, we estimated the change in readmissions rate associated with HRRP. We also compared the penalty frequency among safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals. RESULTS: Our study cohort included 1915 hospitals, of which 479 were safety-net hospitals. At baseline (2009), safety-net hospitals had a slightly higher readmission rate compared to non-safety net hospitals for all three conditions: AMI, 20.3% vs. 19.8% (p value< 0.001); heart failure, 25.2% vs. 24.2% (p-value< 0.001); pneumonia, 18.7% vs. 18.1% (p-value< 0.001). Beginning in 2012, readmission rates declined similarly in both hospital groups for all three cohorts. Based on difference-in-differences analysis, HRRP was associated with similar change in the readmissions rate in safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals for AMI and heart failure. For the pneumonia cohort, we found a larger reduction (0.23%; p < 0.001) in safety-net hospitals. The frequency of readmissions penalty was higher among safety-net hospitals. The proportion of hospitals penalized during all four post-HRRP years was 72% among safety-net and 59% among non-safety-net hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Our results lend support to the concerns of disproportionately higher risk of performance-based penalty on safety-net hospitals.