Social justice in medical education: a student-led approach to addressing COVID-19 vaccine equity in the Hispanic/Latinx community.

The current healthcare system disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, leading to disparities in health outcomes. As a result, medical schools need to equip future physicians with the tools to identify and address healthcare disparities. The University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine implemented a Scholarly Concentration in Medical Social Justice (SCiMSJ) program to address this issue. Three medical students joined the program and pioneered a project to address the equitable vaccine distribution within the local Hispanic/Latinx community. After identifying the disparity in vaccine uptake and high levels of vaccine hesitancy, they collaborated with local organizations to address vaccine misinformation and accessibility. They organized outreach events, provided vaccine education, and hosted a vaccine clinic at a Catholic church with a high Hispanic/Latinx congregation. Through their efforts, they administered 1,456 vaccines. The estimated economic and societal impacts of their work was 879 COVID-19 cases avoided, 5 deaths avoided, 45 life years saved, and $29,286 in economic value. The project's success highlights the effectiveness of a student-led approach to promote skill development in social justice training. Leadership skills and coalition building were crucial in overcoming resource limitations and connecting organizations with the necessary volunteer force. Building trust with the Hispanic/Latinx community through outreach efforts and addressing vaccine hesitancy contributed to the well-attended vaccine clinic. The project's framework and approach can be adopted by other medical students and organizations to address health disparities and improve health outcomes in their communities.

Gaps and Disparities in Primary Prevention Statin Prescription During Outpatient Care.

The 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol recommends statin therapy for eligible patients to reduce the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). We extracted electronic health record data for patients with at least one primary care or cardiology visit between October 2018 and January 2020 at an urban, academic medical center in New York City. Clinical and demographic data were used to identify patients eligible for primary prevention statin therapy. Statin prescription status was extracted from the electronic health record, and multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the association between statin prescription and age, gender, race, ethnicity, and other clinical and demographic covariables. In 7,550 patients eligible for primary prevention statin therapy, 3,994 (52.9%) were prescribed statins on at least 1 visit. Statin prescription was highest in patients with diabetes mellitus (73.6%) and with a 10-year ASCVD risk ≥20% (60.6%) and was lowest for those with a 10-year ASCVD risk between 5% and 7.5% (18.7%). Compared with those never prescribed statins, patients prescribed statins were less likely to be women, mainly driven by lower statin prescription rates for women with diabetes. In a fully adjusted model, women remained less likely to be prescribed statin therapy (adjusted odds ratios 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.88). In conclusion, primary prevention statin therapy remains underutilized.

Accessibility of Telehealth Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Medicare Beneficiaries.

INTRODUCTION: Telehealth plays a role in the continuum of care, especially for older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our objective was to examine factors associated with the accessibility of telehealth services during the COVID-19 pandemic among older adults. METHODS: We analyzed the nationally representative Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey COVID-19 Rapid Response Supplement Questionnaire of beneficiaries aged 65 years or older. Two weighted multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine associations between usual providers who offered telehealth 1) during the COVID-19 pandemic and 2) to replace a regularly scheduled appointment. We examined factors including sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, and digital access and literacy. RESULTS: Of the beneficiaries (n = 6,172, weighted n = 32.4 million), 81.2% reported that their usual providers offered telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Among those offered telehealth services, 56.8% reported that their usual providers offered telehealth to replace a regularly scheduled appointment. Disparities in accessibility of telehealth services by sex, residing area (metropolitan vs nonmetropolitan), income level, and US Census region were observed. Beneficiaries who reported having internet access (vs no access) (OR, 1.75, P < .001) and who reported ever having participated in video, voice, or conference calls over the internet before (vs not) (OR, 2.18, P < .001) were more likely to report having access to telehealth. Non-Hispanic Black beneficiaries (versus White) (OR, 1.57, P = .007) and beneficiaries with comorbidities (vs none) (eg, 2 or 3 comorbidities, OR, 1.25, 95% P = .044) were more likely to have their usual provider offer telehealth to replace a regularly scheduled appointment. CONCLUSION: Although accessibility of telehealth has increased, inequities raise concern. Educational outreach and training, such as installing and launching an online web conferencing platform, should be considered for improving accessibility of telehealth to vulnerable populations beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

Determinants of the access to remote specialised services provided by national sarcoma reference centres.

BACKGROUND: Spatial inequalities in cancer management have been evidenced by studies reporting lower quality of care or/and lower survival for patients living in remote or socially deprived areas. NETSARC+ is a national reference network implemented to improve the outcome of sarcoma patients in France since 2010, providing remote access to specialized diagnosis and Multidisciplinary Tumour Board (MTB). The IGéAS research program aims to assess the potential of this innovative organization, with remote management of cancers including rare tumours, to go through geographical barriers usually impeding the optimal management of cancer patients. METHODS: Using the nationwide NETSARC+ databases, the individual, clinical and geographical determinants of the access to sarcoma-specialized diagnosis and MTB were analysed. The IGéAS cohort (n = 20,590) includes all patients living in France with first sarcoma diagnosis between 2011 and 2014. Early access was defined as specialised review performed before 30 days of sampling and as first sarcoma MTB discussion performed before the first surgery. RESULTS: Some clinical populations are at highest risk of initial management without access to sarcoma specialized services, such as patients with non-GIST visceral sarcoma for diagnosis [OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.78 to 2.15] and MTB discussion [OR 3.56, 95% CI 3.16 to 4.01]. Social deprivation of the municipality is not associated with early access on NETSARC+ remote services. The quintile of patients furthest away from reference centres have lower chances of early access to specialized diagnosis [OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.31] and MTB discussion [OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.40] but this influence of the distance is slight in comparison with clinical factors and previous studies on the access to cancer-specialized facilities. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of national organization driven by reference network, distance to reference centres slightly alters the early access to sarcoma specialized services and social deprivation has no impact on it. The reference networks' organization, designed to improve the access to specialized services and the quality of cancer management, can be considered as an interesting device to reduce social and spatial inequalities in cancer management. The potential of this organization must be confirmed by further studies, including survival analysis.

The association of healthcare disparities and patient-specific factors on clinical outcomes in peripheral artery disease.

BACKGROUND: PAD increases the risk of cardiovascular mortality and limb loss, and disparities in treatment and outcomes have been described. However, the association of patient-specific characteristics with variation in outcomes is less well known. METHODS: Patients with PAD from Duke University Health System (DUHS) between January 1, 2015 and March 31, 2016 were identified. PAD status was confirmed through ground truth adjudication and predictive modeling using diagnosis codes, procedure codes, and other administrative data. Symptom severity, lower extremity imaging, and ankle-brachial index (ABI) were manually abstracted from the electronic health record (EHR). Data was linked to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data to provide longitudinal follow up. Primary outcome was major adverse vascular events (MAVE), a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, lower extremity revascularization and amputation. RESULTS: Of 1,768 patients with PAD, 31.6% were asymptomatic, 41.2% had intermittent claudication (IC), and 27.3% had chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). At 1 year, patients with CLTI had higher rates of MAVE compared with asymptomatic or IC patients. CLTI and Medicaid dual eligibility were independent predictors of mortality. CLTI and Black race were associated with amputation. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of MAVE were highest in patients with CLTI, but patients with IC or asymptomatic disease also had high rates of adverse events. Black and Medicaid dual-eligible patients were disproportionately present in the CLTI subgroup and were at higher risk of amputation and mortality, respectively. Future studies must focus on early identification of high-risk patient groups to improve outcomes in patients with PAD.

GEOGRAPHIC ACCESS DISPARITIES TO CLINICAL TRIALS IN RETINOPATHY OF PREMATURITY IN THE UNITED STATES.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: To identify geographic and socioeconomic variables predictive of residential proximity to retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) clinical trial locations. METHODS: This cross-sectional epidemiological study used census tract-level data from three national public data sets and trial-level data from ClinicalTrials.gov. Socioeconomic predictors of driving distance and time to the nearest ROP clinical trial location were identified. Primary outcomes were time >60 minutes and distance >60 miles traveled to the nearest ROP clinical trial site. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis showed that residents were more likely to travel >60 minutes to the nearest ROP clinical trial site if they lived in census tracts that were rural (adjusted odds ratio 1.20, P = 0.0002), had higher percentages of the population living ≤ federal poverty level (fourth quartile vs. first quartile, adjusted odds ratio 1.19, P < 0.0001), or had less education (associate vs. bachelor's degree, adjusted odds ratio 1.01, P <0.007). By contrast, counties with higher percentages of births with birth weight <1500 g (adjusted odds ratio 0.88, P = 0.0062) were less likely to travel >60 minutes. Similar variables predicted travel distance. CONCLUSION: Although counties with higher incidences of very low-birth-weight infants were closer to ROP clinical trial sites, residents living in rural and low-income census tracts had significantly greater travel burdens.

New Horizons-Addressing Healthcare Disparities in Endocrine Disease: Bias, Science, and Patient Care.

Unacceptable healthcare disparities in endocrine disease have persisted for decades, and 2021 presents a difficult evolving environment. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the gross structural inequities that drive health disparities, and antiracism demonstrations remind us that the struggle for human rights continues. Increased public awareness and discussion of disparities present an urgent opportunity to advance health equity. However, it is more complicated to change the behavior of individuals and reform systems because societies are polarized into different factions that increasingly believe, accept, and live different realities. To reduce health disparities, clinicians must (1) truly commit to advancing health equity and intentionally act to reduce health disparities; (2) create a culture of equity by looking inwards for personal bias and outwards for the systemic biases built into their everyday work processes; (3) implement practical individual, organizational, and community interventions that address the root causes of the disparities; and (4) consider their roles in addressing social determinants of health and influencing healthcare payment policy to advance health equity. To care for diverse populations in 2021, clinicians must have self-insight and true understanding of heterogeneous patients, knowledge of evidence-based interventions, ability to adapt messaging and approaches, and facility with systems change and advocacy. Advancing health equity requires both science and art; evidence-based roadmaps and stories that guide the journey to better outcomes, judgment that informs how to change the behavior of patients, providers, communities, organizations, and policymakers, and passion and a moral mission to serve humanity.

Digital disparities: designing telemedicine systems with a health equity aim.

The use of telemedicine has grown immensely during the COVID-19 pandemic. Telemedicine provides a means to deliver clinical care while limiting patient and provider exposure to the COVID-19. As such, telemedicine is finding applications in a variety of clinical environments including primary care and the acute care setting and the array of patient populations who use telemedicine continues to grow. Yet as telehealth becomes ubiquitous, it is critical to consider its potential to exacerbate disparities in care. Challenges accessing technology and digital literacy, for example, disproportionately impact older patients and those living in poverty. When implemented with the consideration of health disparities, telemedicine provides an opportunity to address these inequities. This manuscript explores potential mechanisms by which telemedicine may play a role in exacerbating or ameliorating disparities in care. We further describe a framework and suggested strategies with which to implement telemedicine systems to improve health equity.