A secondary gendered analysis of interviews with Latina cisgender women indicated for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis.

HIV infections disproportionately impact Latinx populations in the United States, yet oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake is low. This study was a secondary gendered analysis of interviews with Latina cisgender women (n = 20) recruited from an urban safety net hospital inNew York City between August 2019 and October 2022. All women were indicated for PrEP by the provider. In-depth interviews were conducted with participants in English and Spanish and asked about social determinants of health, sexual partnerships and behaviors, and PrEP-specific enablers and barriers. Secondary thematic content analysis was conducted to identify gender-related factors influencing PrEP uptake. The following themes emerged from the data:structural factors (e.g., employment), partner-related factors, low sexual health knowledge, and resilience and empowerment. Partner-related factors were the most salient; partner infidelity served as reasons for initiating PrEP. Despite being constrained by low power in relationships, women made empowered choices to initiate PrEP and protect themselves. Findings indicated that the impact of gender inequity was an important factor in Latina women's PrEP decision making, pointing to a need to address partner-driven HIV risk, imbalance of power in relationships, and gender norms.

Partnerships to Improve Shared Decision Making for Patients with Hypertension - Health Equity Implications.

Shared decision making (SDM) has increasingly become appreciated as a method to enhance patient involvement in health care decisions, patient-provider communication, and patient-centered care. Compared with cancer, the literature on SDM for hypertension is more limited. This is notable because hypertension is the leading risk factor for cardiovascular disease and both conditions disproportionately affect certain subgroups of patients. However, SDM holds promise for improving health equity by better engaging patients in their health care. For example, many reasonable options exist for treating uncomplicated stage-1 hypertension. These options include medication and/or lifestyle changes such as healthy eating, physical activity, and weight management. Deciding on "the best" plan of action for hypertension management can be challenging because patients have different goals and preferences for treatment. As hypertension management may be considered a preference-sensitive decision, adherence to treatment plans may be greater if those plans are concordant with patient preferences. SDM can be implemented in a broad array of care contexts, from patient-provider dyads to interprofessional collaborations. In this article, we argue that SDM has the potential to advance health equity and improve clinical care. We also propose a process to evaluate whether SDM has occurred and suggest future directions for research.

Observational Study of the Effect of Patient Outreach on Return to Care: The Earlier the Better.

BACKGROUND: The burden of HIV remains heaviest in resource-limited settings, where problems of losses to care, silent transfers, gaps in care, and incomplete mortality ascertainment have been recognized. METHODS: Patients in care at Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare (AMPATH) clinics from 2001-2011 were included in this retrospective observational study. Patients missing an appointment were traced by trained staff; those found alive were counseled to return to care (RTC). Relative hazards of RTC were estimated among those having a true gap: missing a clinic appointment and confirmed as neither dead nor receiving care elsewhere. Sample-based multiple imputation accounted for missing vital status. RESULTS: Among 34,522 patients lost to clinic, 15,331 (44.4%) had a true gap per outreach, 2754 (8.0%) were deceased, and 837 (2.4%) had documented transfers. Of 15,600 (45.2%) remaining without active ascertainment, 8762 (56.2%) with later RTC were assumed to have a true gap. Adjusted cause-specific hazard ratios (aHRs) showed early outreach (a ≤8-day window, defined by grid-search approach) had twice the hazard for RTC vs. those without (aHR = 2.06; P < 0.001). HRs for RTC were lower the later the outreach effort after disengagement (aHR = 0.86 per unit increase in time; P < 0.001). Older age, female sex (vs. male), antiretroviral therapy use (vs. none), and HIV status disclosure (vs. none) were also associated with greater likelihood of RTC, and higher enrollment CD4 count with lower likelihood of RTC. CONCLUSION: Patient outreach efforts have a positive impact on patient RTC, regardless of when undertaken, but particularly soon after the patient misses an appointment.

Heart failure patients receiving ACEIs/ARBs were less likely to be hospitalized or to use emergency care in the following year.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) have been shown to decrease morbidity and mortality in heart failure (HF) patients in randomized-controlled trials; observational studies have confirmed this benefit among patients discharged with HF. Investigating the benefit of ACEIs or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) among general HF patients has important implications for quality-of-care measurement and quality initiatives. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of receipt of ACEIs/ARBs among patients with HF on hospitalization, emergency care, and healthcare cost during the following year. Using administrative data, we identified HF patients between 2000 and 2005 in a large health plan (n=2,396 patients). We conducted multivariate analysis to assess the impact of receipt of an ACEI/ARB on likelihood of hospitalization and emergency care, and on total healthcare cost. We found that patients who received ACEIs/ARBs were less likely to be hospitalized (odds ratio [OR]=0.82, p<.05) or use emergency care (OR=0.82, p<.05) in the following year. Receipt of ACEIs/ARBs was not associated with significantly increased cost. Incentivizing the receipt of ACEIs/ARBs in a general population with HF may be a suitable target for pay-for-performance programs, disease management programs, or newer complementary frameworks, such as value-based insurance design.

Does pay for performance improve cardiovascular care in a "real-world" setting?

The objective was to investigate the impact of a pay-for-performance program (P4P) on quality care and outcomes among cardiovascular disease (CVD) patients. Claims data were used to identify CVD patients in a commercial plan in 1999-2006. Multivariate analyses were employed to examine the impact of P4P on quality care (lipid monitoring and treatment) and quality care on outcomes (new coronary events, hospitalizations, and lipid control). Patients who were treated by physicians participating in P4P were more likely to receive quality care than patients who were not. Patients who received quality care were less likely to have new coronary events (odds ratio [OR] = 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.69-0.92), be hospitalized (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.69-0.83), or have uncontrolled lipids (OR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.61-0.73) than patients who did not. A P4P program was associated with increased lipid monitoring and treatment. Receipt of this quality care was associated with improved lipid control and reduced likelihood of new coronary events and hospitalizations.