RÉSUMÉ
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether gentrification exposure is associated with future hypertension and diabetes control. METHODS: Linking records from an integrated health care system to census-tract characteristics, we identified adults with hypertension and/or diabetes residing in stably low-SES census tracts in 2014 (n = 69,524). We tested associations of census tract gentrification occurring between 2015 and 2019 with participants' disease control in 2019. Secondary analyses considered the role of residential moves (possible displacement), race and ethnicity, and age. RESULTS: Gentrification exposure was associated with improved odds of hypertension control (aOR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.17), especially among non-Hispanic Whites and adults >65 years. Gentrification was not associated with diabetes control overall, but control improved in the Hispanic subgroup. Disease control was similar regardless of residential moves in the overall sample, but disparate associations emerged in models stratified by race and ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Residents of newly gentrifying neighborhoods may experience modestly improved odds of hypertension and/or diabetes control, but associations may differ across population subgroups. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Gentrification may support-or at least not harm-cardiometabolic health for some residents. City leaders and health systems could partner with impacted communities to ensure that neighborhood development meets the goals and health needs of all residents and does not exacerbate health disparities.
Sujet(s)
Diabète , Hypertension artérielle , Adulte , Humains , Los Angeles/épidémiologie , , Études rétrospectives , Diabète/épidémiologie , Hypertension artérielle/épidémiologieRÉSUMÉ
Importance: Unaffordable housing is associated with adverse health-related outcomes, but little is known about the associations between moving due to unaffordable housing and health-related outcomes. Objective: To characterize the association of recent cost-driven residential moves with health-related outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study involved a weighted multivariable regression analysis of California Health Interview Survey data from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2017. A population-based sample of 52 646 adult renters and other nonhomeowners in California were included. Data were analyzed from March 2, 2021, to January 6, 2023. Exposure: Cost-driven moves in the past 3 years relative to no move and to non-cost-driven moves. Main Outcomes and Measures: Five outcomes were assessed: psychological distress (low, moderate, or severe, as categorized by the 6-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale), emergency department [ED] visits in the past year (any vs none), preventive care visits in the past year (any vs none), general health (poor or fair vs good, very good, or excellent), and walking for leisure in the past 7 days (in minutes). Results: Among 52â¯646 adult renters and other nonhomeowners, 50.3% were female, 85.2% were younger than 60 years, 45.3% were Hispanic, and 55.1% had income lower than 200% of the federal poverty level. Overall, 8.9% of renters reported making a recent cost-driven move, with higher prevalence among Hispanic (9.9%) and non-Hispanic Black (11.3%) renters compared with non-Hispanic White renters (7.2%). In multivariable models, compared with not moving, cost-driven moving was associated with a 4.2 (95% CI, 2.6-5.7) percentage point higher probability of experiencing moderate psychological distress; a 3.2 (95% CI, 1.9-4.5) percentage point higher probability of experiencing severe psychological distress; a 2.5 (95% CI, 0-4.9) percentage point higher probability of ED visits; a 5.1 (95% CI, 1.6-8.6) percentage point lower probability of having preventive care visits; a 3.7 (95% CI, 1.2-6.2) percentage point lower probability of having good, very good, or excellent general health; and 16.8 (95% CI, 6.9-26.6) fewer minutes of walking for leisure. General health, psychological distress, and walking for leisure were also worse with cost-driven moves relative to non-cost-driven moves, with a 3.2 (95% CI, 1.7-4.7) percentage point higher probability of experiencing moderate psychological distress; a 2.5 (95% CI, 1.2-3.9) percentage point higher probability of experiencing severe psychological distress; a 4.6 (95% CI, 2.1-7.2) percentage point lower probability of having good, very good, or excellent general health; and 13.0 (95% CI, 4.0-21.9) fewer minutes of walking for leisure. However, the incidence of preventive care and ED visits did not differ between those who made cost-driven vs non-cost-driven moves. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, cost-driven moves were associated with adverse health-related outcomes relative to not moving and to non-cost-driven moves. These findings suggest that policies to improve housing affordability, prevent displacement, and increase access to health care for groups vulnerable to cost-driven moves may have the potential to improve population health equity, especially during the current national housing affordability crisis.
Sujet(s)
Revenu , Pauvreté , Adulte , Humains , Femelle , Mâle , Études transversales , Logement , Californie/épidémiologieRÉSUMÉ
This article reports the outcome of a project to develop and assess a predictive model of vulnerability indicators for COVID-19 infection in Los Angeles County. Multiple data sources were used to construct four indicators for zip code tabulation areas: (1) pre-existing health condition, (2) barriers to accessing health care, (3) built environment risk, and (4) the CDC's social vulnerability. The assessment of the indicators finds that the most vulnerable neighborhoods are characterized by significant clustering of racial minorities. An overwhelming 73% of Blacks reside in the neighborhoods with the two highest levels of pre-existing health conditions. For the barriers to accessing health care indicator, 40% of Latinx reside in the highest vulnerability places. The built environment indicator finds that selected Asian ethnic groups (63%), Latinx (55%), and Blacks (53%) reside in the neighborhoods designated as high or the highest vulnerability. The social vulnerability indicator finds 42% of Blacks and Latinx and 38% of selected Asian ethnic group residing in neighborhoods of high vulnerability. The vulnerability indicators can be adopted nationally to respond to COVID-19. The metrics can be utilized in data-driven decision making of re-openings or resource distribution such as testing, vaccine distribution and other pandemic-related resources to ensure equity for the most vulnerable.
Sujet(s)
COVID-19 , Prise de décision , Humains , Pandémies , Santé publique , SARS-CoV-2RÉSUMÉ
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the net effect of living in a gentrified neighborhood on probability of having serious psychological distress. DATA SOURCES: We pooled 5 years of secondary data from the California Health Interview Survey (2011-2015) and focused on southern California residents. STUDY DESIGN: We compared adults (n = 43 815) living in low-income and gentrified, low-income and not gentrified, middle- to high-income and upscaled, and middle- to high-income and not upscaled neighborhoods. We performed a probit regression to test whether living in a gentrified neighborhood increased residents' probabilities of having serious psychological distress in the past year and stratified analyses by neighborhood tenure, homeownership status, and low-income status. Instrumental variables estimation and propensity scores were applied to reduce bias arising from residential selection and simultaneity. An endogenous treatment effects model was also applied in sensitivity analyses. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Adults who completed the survey on their own and lived in urban neighborhoods with 500 or more residents were selected for analyses. Survey respondents who scored 13 and above on the Kessler 6 were categorized as having serious psychological distress in the past year. We used eight neighborhood change measures to classify respondents' neighborhoods. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Living in a gentrified and upscaled neighborhood was associated with increased likelihood of serious psychological distress relative to living in a low-income and not gentrified neighborhood. The average treatment effect was 0.0141 (standard error = 0.007), which indicates that the prevalence of serious psychological distress would have been 1.4 percentage points less if none of the respondents lived in gentrified neighborhoods. Gentrification appears to have a negative impact on the mental health of renters, low-income residents, and long-term residents. This effect was not observed among homeowners, higher-income residents, and recent residents. CONCLUSIONS: Gentrification levies mental health costs on financially vulnerable community members and can worsen mental health inequities.
Sujet(s)
Santé mentale/statistiques et données numériques , Pauvreté/statistiques et données numériques , Caractéristiques de l'habitat/statistiques et données numériques , Stress psychologique/épidémiologie , Rénovation urbaine/statistiques et données numériques , Adolescent , Adulte , Sujet âgé , Femelle , Humains , Mâle , Adulte d'âge moyen , Facteurs socioéconomiques , Jeune adulteRÉSUMÉ
Most studies of nurse turnover focus on job turnover, which could reflect nurse advancement and thus not be detrimental to the workforce. The authors discuss findings from a study that involved 2 cohorts of graduates from registered nursing and licensed vocational nursing community college programs in California. The duration of employment in the healthcare industry, as well as with specific employers, is tracked, lending a more thorough analysis of nursing job and industry turnover than found in other studies.