Accreditation of stroke programs at the MENA + region; between aspiration and reality.

INTRODUCTION: Despite global progress in stroke care, challenges persist, especially in Low- and Middle-Income countries (LMIC). The Middle East and North Africa Stroke and Interventional Neurotherapies Organization (MENA-SINO) Stroke Program Accreditation Initiative aims to improve stroke care regionally. MATERIAL & METHOD: A 2022 survey assessed stroke unit readiness in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) + region, revealing significant regional disparities in stroke care between high-income and low-income countries. Additionally, it demonstrated interest in the accreditation procedure and suggested that regional stroke program accreditation will improve stroke care for the involved centers. CONCLUSION: An accreditation program that is specifically tailored to the regional needs in the MENA + countries might be the solution. In this brief review, we will discuss potential challenges faced by such a program and we will put forward a well-defined 5-step accreditation process, beginning with a letter of intent, through processing the request and appointment of reviewers, the actual audit, the certification decisions, and culminating in granting a MIENA-SINO tier-specific certificate with recertification every 5 years.

Inequities in Time to Treat Thyroid Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The purpose of this study was to determine socioeconomic and demographic factors which may contribute to inequities in time to treat thyroid cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used data from the National Cancer Database, 2004-2019, to conduct an analysis of thyroid cancer patients. All (434,083) patients with thyroid cancer, including papillary (395,598), follicular (23,494), medullary (7,638), and anaplastic (7,353) types were included. We compared the wait time from diagnosis to first treatment, surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy for patients based on age, race, sex, location, and socioeconomic status (SES). RESULTS: A total of 434,083 patients with thyroid cancer were included. Hispanic patients had significantly longer wait times to all treatments compared to non-Hispanic patients (first treatment 33.44 vs. 20.45 days, surgery 40.06 vs. 26.49 days, radiotherapy 114.68 vs. 96.42 days, chemotherapy 92.70 vs. 58.71 days). Uninsured patients, patients at academic facilities, and patients in metropolitan areas also had the longest wait times to treatment. CONCLUSION: This study identified multiple disparities related to SES and demographics that correspond to delays in time to treatment. It is crucial that this topic is investigated further to help mitigate these incongruities in thyroid cancer care in the future.

Racial differences in low value care among older adult Medicare patients in US health systems: retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize racial differences in receipt of low value care (services that provide little to no benefit yet have potential for harm) among older Medicare beneficiaries overall and within health systems in the United States. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study SETTING: 100% Medicare fee-for-service administrative data (2016-18). PARTICIPANTS: Black and White Medicare patients aged 65 or older as of 2016 and attributed to 595 health systems in the United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Receipt of 40 low value services among Black and White patients, with and without adjustment for patient age, sex, and previous healthcare use. Additional models included health system fixed effects to assess racial differences within health systems and separately, racial composition of the health system's population to assess the relative contributions of individual patient race and health system racial composition to low value care receipt. RESULTS: The cohort included 9 833 304 patients (6.8% Black; 57.9% female). Of 40 low value services examined, Black patients had higher adjusted receipt of nine services and lower receipt of 20 services than White patients. Specifically, Black patients were more likely to receive low value acute diagnostic tests, including imaging for uncomplicated headache (6.9% v 3.2%) and head computed tomography scans for dizziness (3.1% v 1.9%). White patients had higher rates of low value screening tests and treatments, including preoperative laboratory tests (10.3% v 6.5%), prostate specific antigen tests (31.0% v 25.7%), and antibiotics for upper respiratory infections (36.6% v 32.7%; all P<0.001). Secondary analyses showed that these differences persisted within given health systems and were not explained by Black and White patients receiving care from different systems. CONCLUSIONS: Black patients were more likely to receive low value acute diagnostic tests and White patients were more likely to receive low value screening tests and treatments. Differences were generally small and were largely due to differential care within health systems. These patterns suggest potential individual, interpersonal, and structural factors that researchers, policy makers, and health system leaders might investigate and address to improve care quality and equity.

The accuracy of race & ethnicity data in US based healthcare databases: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The availability and accuracy of data on a patient's race/ethnicity varies across databases. Discrepancies in data quality can negatively impact attempts to study health disparities. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to organize information on the accuracy of race/ethnicity data stratified by database type and by specific race/ethnicity categories. RESULTS: The review included 43 studies. Disease registries showed consistently high levels of data completeness and accuracy. EHRs frequently showed incomplete and/or inaccurate data on the race/ethnicity of patients. Databases had high levels of accurate data for White and Black patients but relatively high levels of misclassification and incomplete data for Hispanic/Latinx patients. Asians, Pacific Islanders, and AI/ANs are the most misclassified. Systems-based interventions to increase self-reported data showed improvement in data quality. CONCLUSION: Data on race/ethnicity that is collected with the purpose of research and quality improvement appears most reliable. Data accuracy can vary by race/ethnicity status and better collection standards are needed.

Exploring the complexity and spectrum of racial/ethnic disparities in colon cancer management.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality across U.S. racial/ethnic groups. Existing studies often focus on a particular race/ethnicity or single domain within the care continuum. Granular exploration of disparities among different racial/ethnic groups across the entire colon cancer care continuum is needed. We aimed to characterize differences in colon cancer outcomes by race/ethnicity across each stage of the care continuum. METHODS: We used the 2010-2017 National Cancer Database to examine differences in outcomes by race/ethnicity across six domains: clinical stage at presentation; timing of surgery; access to minimally invasive surgery; post-operative outcomes; utilization of chemotherapy; and cumulative incidence of death. Analysis was via multivariable logistic or median regression, with select demographics, hospital factors, and treatment details as covariates. RESULTS: 326,003 patients (49.6% female, 24.0% non-White, including 12.7% Black, 6.1% Hispanic/Spanish, 1.3% East Asian, 0.9% Southeast Asian, 0.4% South Asian, 0.3% AIAE, and 0.2% NHOPI) met inclusion criteria. Relative to non-Hispanic White patients: Southeast Asian (OR 1.39, p < 0.01), Hispanic/Spanish (OR 1.11 p < 0.01), and Black (OR 1.09, p < 0.01) patients had increased odds of presenting with advanced clinical stage. Southeast Asian (OR 1.37, p < 0.01), East Asian (OR 1.27, p = 0.05), Hispanic/Spanish (OR 1.05 p = 0.02), and Black (OR 1.05, p < 0.01) patients had increased odds of advanced pathologic stage. Black patients had increased odds of experiencing a surgical delay (OR 1.33, p < 0.01); receiving non-robotic surgery (OR 1.12, p < 0.01); having post-surgical complications (OR 1.29, p < 0.01); initiating chemotherapy more than 90 days post-surgery (OR 1.24, p < 0.01); and omitting chemotherapy altogether (OR 1.12, p = 0.05). Black patients had significantly higher cumulative incidence of death at every pathologic stage relative to non-Hispanic White patients when adjusting for non-modifiable patient factors (p < 0.05, all stages), but these differences were no longer statistically significant when also adjusting for modifiable factors such as insurance status and income. CONCLUSIONS: Non-White patients disproportionately experience advanced stage at presentation. Disparities for Black patients are seen across the entire colon cancer care continuum. Targeted interventions may be appropriate for some groups; however, major system-level transformation is needed to address disparities experienced by Black patients.

Actionable Solutions to Achieve Health Equity in Chronic Liver Disease.

There are well-described racial and ethnic disparities in the burden of chronic liver diseases. Hispanic persons are at highest risk for developing nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, the fastest growing cause of liver disease. Hepatitis B disproportionately affects persons of Asian or African descent. The highest rates of hepatitis C occur in American Indian and Alaskan Native populations. In addition to disparities in disease burden, there are also marked racial and ethnic disparities in access to treatments, including liver transplantation. Disparities also exist by gender and geography, especially in alcohol-related liver disease. To achieve health equity, we must address the root causes that drive these inequities. Understanding the role that social determinants of health play in the disparate health outcomes that are currently observed is critically important. We must forge and/or strengthen collaborations between patients, community members, other key stakeholders, health care providers, health care institutions, professional societies, and legislative bodies. Herein, we provide a high-level review of current disparities in chronic liver disease and describe actionable strategies that have potential to bridge gaps, improve quality, and promote equity in liver care.

Disparities in eye clinic patient encounters among patients requiring language interpreter services.

BACKGROUND: Communication barriers are a major cause of health disparities for patients with limited English proficiency (LEP). Medical interpreters play an important role in bridging this gap, however the impact of interpreters on outpatient eye center visits has not been studied. We aimed to evaluate the differences in length of eyecare visits between LEP patients self-identifying as requiring a medical interpreter and English speakers at a tertiary, safety-net hospital in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective review of patient encounter metrics collected by our electronic medical record was conducted for all visits between January 1, 2016 and March 13, 2020. Patient demographics, primary language spoken, self-identified need for interpreter and encounter characteristics including new patient status, patient time waiting for providers and time in room were collected. We compared visit times by patient's self-identification of need for an interpreter, with our main outcomes being time spent with ophthalmic technician, time spent with eyecare provider, and time waiting for eyecare provider. Interpreter services at our hospital are typically remote (via phone or video). RESULTS: A total of 87,157 patient encounters were analyzed, of which 26,443 (30.3%) involved LEP patients identifying as requiring an interpreter. After adjusting for patient age at visit, new patient status, physician status (attending or resident), and repeated patient visits, there was no difference in the length of time spent with technician or physician, or time spent waiting for physician, between English speakers and patients identifying as needing an interpreter. Patients who self-identified as requiring an interpreter were more likely to have an after-visit summary printed for them, and were also more likely to keep their appointment once it was made when compared to English speakers. CONCLUSIONS: Encounters with LEP patients who identify as requiring an interpreter were expected to be longer than those who did not indicate need for an interpreter, however we found that there was no difference in the length of time spent with technician or physician. This suggests providers may adjust their communication strategy during encounters with LEP patients identifying as needing an interpreter. Eyecare providers must be aware of this to prevent negative impacts on patient care. Equally important, healthcare systems should consider ways to prevent unreimbursed extra time from being a financial disincentive for seeing patients who request interpreter services.

Predictive Accuracy of Stroke Risk Prediction Models Across Black and White Race, Sex, and Age Groups.

Importance: Stroke is the fifth-highest cause of death in the US and a leading cause of serious long-term disability with particularly high risk in Black individuals. Quality risk prediction algorithms, free of bias, are key for comprehensive prevention strategies. Objective: To compare the performance of stroke-specific algorithms with pooled cohort equations developed for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease for the prediction of new-onset stroke across different subgroups (race, sex, and age) and to determine the added value of novel machine learning techniques. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study on combined and harmonized data from Black and White participants of the Framingham Offspring, Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC), Multi-Ethnic Study for Atherosclerosis (MESA), and Reasons for Geographical and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) studies (1983-2019) conducted in the US. The 62 482 participants included at baseline were at least 45 years of age and free of stroke or transient ischemic attack. Exposures: Published stroke-specific algorithms from Framingham and REGARDS (based on self-reported risk factors) as well as pooled cohort equations for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease plus 2 newly developed machine learning algorithms. Main Outcomes and Measures: Models were designed to estimate the 10-year risk of new-onset stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic). Discrimination concordance index (C index) and calibration ratios of expected vs observed event rates were assessed at 10 years. Analyses were conducted by race, sex, and age groups. Results: The combined study sample included 62 482 participants (median age, 61 years, 54% women, and 29% Black individuals). Discrimination C indexes were not significantly different for the 2 stroke-specific models (Framingham stroke, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.72-073; REGARDS self-report, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.72-0.74) vs the pooled cohort equations (0.72; 95% CI, 0.71-0.73): differences 0.01 or less (P values >.05) in the combined sample. Significant differences in discrimination were observed by race: the C indexes were 0.76 for all 3 models in White vs 0.69 in Black women (all P values <.001) and between 0.71 and 0.72 in White men and between 0.64 and 0.66 in Black men (all P values ≤.001). When stratified by age, model discrimination was better for younger (<60 years) vs older (≥60 years) adults for both Black and White individuals. The ratios of observed to expected 10-year stroke rates were closest to 1 for the REGARDS self-report model (1.05; 95% CI, 1.00-1.09) and indicated risk overestimation for Framingham stroke (0.86; 95% CI, 0.82-0.89) and pooled cohort equations (0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.77). Performance did not significantly improve when novel machine learning algorithms were applied. Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis of Black and White individuals without stroke or transient ischemic attack among 4 US cohorts, existing stroke-specific risk prediction models and novel machine learning techniques did not significantly improve discriminative accuracy for new-onset stroke compared with the pooled cohort equations, and the REGARDS self-report model had the best calibration. All algorithms exhibited worse discrimination in Black individuals than in White individuals, indicating the need to expand the pool of risk factors and improve modeling techniques to address observed racial disparities and improve model performance.

Effect of health care disparities on procedure selection of autologous breast reconstruction in Florida.

INTRODUCTION: Disparities in access to reconstructive surgery after breast cancer have been reported. We aim to evaluate demographic and socioeconomic factors influencing type of autologous breast reconstruction in Florida. METHODS: We queried the Florida Inpatient Discharge Dataset to evaluate disparities in type of autologous breast reconstructive surgery between January 1, 2013, and September 30, 2017. Patients 18 years of age or older were included. Women younger than 65 years old on Medicare were excluded. Patients were categorized into three groups according to type of autologous reconstruction: latissimus dorsi pedicled flap (pedicled flap), free flap, or pedicled flap with implant (combined flap). Demographic and socioeconomic variables were evaluated. 𝜒2 and Mann-Whitney tests were used to estimate statistical significance. A multivariate logistic regression was performed to find independent associations. RESULTS: Our results showed higher odds of reconstruction with free flap in Hispanic patients (odds ratio (OR), 1.66; 95% CI, 1.32-2.09; P < 0.0001) and patients with comorbidities (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.23-1.71; P < 0.0001). However, patients treated in Central and South Florida were less likely to undergo free flap than combined and pedicled flap reconstructions compared with those treated in North Florida (P < 0.05). Patients insured by Medicaid and Medicare were less likely to undergo free flap than combined or pedicled flap reconstruction compared to patients with private insurance (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified that race, region, insurance, and comorbidity are factors associated with type of autologous breast reconstruction in Florida.

Telehealth use in cystic fibrosis during COVID-19: Association with race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors.

BACKGROUND: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an uptake of telehealth in cystic fibrosis care. Previous studies show disparities in telehealth use based on socioeconomic status (SES). We aimed to: (1) understand telehealth use and perceptions and (2) identify the facilitators and barriers to telehealth use among people with CF and their families (PwCF) from diverse racial/ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of the 2020 Cystic Fibrosis State of Care surveys completed by PwCF (PFSoC), CF Care Programs (SoC1) and the CF Foundation Patient Registry (CFFPR). RESULTS: A total of 424 PwCF and 286 programs responded to the PFSoC and SoC1. Among PwCF, 90% self-identified as White, 6% as Hispanic/Latino, and 2% as Black. Racial/ethnic minorities were less likely to have had a telehealth visit (p=.015). This difference was pronounced among the Hispanic/Latino population (p<.01). Telehealth use did not differ by health insurance and was similarly offered independent of financial status. Compared to PwCF who denied financial constraints, those who reported financial difficulties found telehealth more difficult to use (p=.018) and were less likely to think that their concerns (p=.010) or issues that mattered most to them (p=.020) were addressed during telehealth. Programs perceived lack of technology, language barriers, and home conditions as barriers to telehealth in vulnerable populations. CONCLUSION: PFSoC and SoC1 identified differences in telehealth use and care perceptions by ethnicity, race, and socioeconomic characteristics. Further studies are needed to understand how telehealth can change access to CF care in diverse subpopulations.

Advancing Action on Health Equity Through a Sociolegal Model of Health.

Policy Points Health actors can use the law more strategically in the pursuit of health and equity by addressing governance challenges (e.g., fragmented and overlapping mandates between health and nonhealth institutions), employing a broader rights-based discourse in the public health policy process, and collaborating with the access to justice movement. Health justice partnerships provide a road map for implementing a sociolegal model of health to reduce health inequities by strengthening legal capacities for health among the health workforce and patients. This in turn will enable them to resolve health issues with legal solutions, to dismantle service silos, and to drive systemic policy and law reform. CONTEXT: In the field of public health, the law and legal systems remain a poorly understood and substantially underutilized tool to address unfair or unjust societal conditions underpinning health inequities. The aim of our article is to demonstrate the value of expanding from a social model of health to a sociolegal model of health and empowering health actors to use the law more strategically in the pursuit of health equity. METHODS: We propose a modified version of the framework for the social determinants of health (SDoH) equity developed by the 2008 World Health Organization Commission on the Social Determinants of Health by conceptually integrating the functions of the law as identified by the 2019 Lancet-O'Neill Institute Commission on Global Health and Law. FINDINGS: Access to justice provides a critical intersection between social models of public health and work in the justice fields. Addressing the inequities produced through the policies and institutions governing society unites the causes of those seeking to enhance access to justice and those seeking to reduce health inequities. Health justice partnerships (HJPs) are an example of a sociolegal model of health in action. Through the resolution of health issues with legal solutions at the individual level, the dismantling of service silos at the institutional level, and policy and law reform at the systemic level, HJPs demonstrate how the law can be used as a tool to reduce social and health inequities. CONCLUSIONS: Greater attention to law as a tool for health creates space for increased collaboration among legal and health scholars, practitioners, and advocates, particularly those working in the areas of the social determinants of health and access to justice, and a promising avenue for reducing health inequities.

Toward an Anti-Racist Approach to Biomedical and Neuroscience Research.

Racism is a threat to public health. Race is a sociopolitical construct that has been used for generations to create disparities in educational access, housing conditions, exposure to environmental contaminants, and access to health care. Collectively, these disparities have a negative impact on the health of non-white Americans. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) funds biomedical research, including basic neuroscience research, aimed at understanding the mechanisms and consequences of health and disease in Americans. NIH has recently acknowledged its own structural racism, the disadvantage this perpetuates in the biomedical research enterprise, and has announced its commitment to eliminating these disparities. Here, we discuss different rates of disease in U.S. citizens from different racial backgrounds. We next describe ways in which the biomedical research enterprise (1) has contributed to health disparities and (2) can contribute to the solving this problem. Based on our own scientific expertise, we use neuroscience in general and mental health/addiction disorders more specifically as examples of a broader issue. The NIH, including its neuroscience-focused Institutes, and NIH-funded scientists, including neuroscientists, should prioritize research topics that reflect the health conditions that affect all Americans, not just white Americans.

Evaluation of the association of health care system access with kidney cancer surgical outcomes for hispanic and non-hispanic white patients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of health care system access on outcomes for Hispanic and Non-Hispanic White patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed Hispanic and non-Hispanic White patients diagnosed with localized RCC between 2007 and 2020. We used Health Resources and Services Administration criteria to identify patients living in Medically Underserved Areas (MUA). Primary outcome all-cause mortality and cancer-specific survival using Log Rank test on Kaplan Meier Analysis. Secondary outcome was all-cause mortality and cancer specific survival on Cox Regression when adjusting for risk factors. RESULTS: We analyzed 774 patients, 246 (31.8%) Hispanic patients and 528 (68.2%) Non-Hispanic White patients. Hispanic ethnicity was associated with lower risk of ACM (HR 0.53, P = 0.019) and there was no difference for cancer specific survival (HR 0.57, P = 0.059). Living in a MUA was associated with worse all-cause mortality (P = 0.010) but not cancer specific survival (CSS) (P = 0.169). Comparing Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Whites, KMA revealed no difference in 5-year all-cause mortality (83.1% vs. 78.8%, P = 0.254) and 5-year CSS (85.7% vs. 85.4%, P = 0.403). CONCLUSIONS: Hispanics had lower all-cause mortality risk and no significant differences in 5-year overall survival and CSS compared to non-Hispanic Whites. Our findings indicate that tertiary referral centers may help mitigate inequalities in access to care.

Assessment of the Methods Used to Develop Vitamin D and Calcium Recommendations-A Systematic Review of Bone Health Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: There are numerous guidelines developed for bone health. Yet, it is unclear whether the differences in guideline development methods explain the variability in the recommendations for vitamin D and calcium intake. The objective of this systematic review was to collate and compare recommendations for vitamin D and calcium across bone health guidelines, assess the methods used to form the recommendations, and explore which methodological factors were associated with these guideline recommendations. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and other databases indexing guidelines to identify records in English between 2009 and 2019. Guidelines or policy statements on bone health or osteoporosis prevention for generally healthy adults aged ≥40 years were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently extracted recommendations on daily vitamin D and calcium intake, supplement use, serum 25 hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] level, and sunlight exposure; assessed guideline development methods against 25 recommended criteria in the World Health Organization (WHO) handbook for guideline development; and, identified types identified types of evidence underpinning the recommendations. RESULTS: we included 47 eligible guidelines from 733 records: 74% of the guidelines provided vitamin D (200~600-4000 IU/day) and 70% provided calcium (600-1200 mg/day) recommendations, 96% and 88% recommended vitamin D and calcium supplements, respectively, and 70% recommended a specific 25(OH)D concentration. On average, each guideline met 10 (95% CI: 9-12) of the total of 25 methodological criteria for guideline development recommended by the WHO Handbook. There was uncertainty in the association between the methodological criteria and the proportion of guidelines that provided recommendations on daily vitamin D or calcium. Various types of evidence, including previous bone guidelines, nutrient reference reports, systematic reviews, observational studies, and perspectives/editorials were used to underpin the recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variability in vitamin D and calcium recommendations and in guideline development methods in bone health guidelines. Effort is required to strengthen the methodological rigor of guideline development and utilize the best available evidence to underpin nutrition recommendations in evidence-based guidelines on bone health.