Associations of U.S. hospital closure (2007-2018) with area socioeconomic disadvantage and racial/ethnic composition.

PURPOSE: To examine whether hospital closure is associated with high levels of area socioeconomic disadvantage and racial/ethnic minority composition. METHODS: Pooled cross-sectional analysis (2007-2018) of 6467 U.S. hospitals from the American Hospital Association's Annual Survey, comparing hospital population characteristics of closed hospitals to all remaining open hospitals. We used multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression models to assess closure as a function of population characteristics, including area deprivation index ([ADI], a composite measure of socioeconomic disadvantage), racial/ethnic composition, and rural classification, nesting hospitals within hospital service areas (HSAs) and hospital referral regions. Secondary analyses examined public or private hospital type. RESULTS: Overall, 326 (5.0%) of 6467 U.S. hospitals closed during the study period. In multivariable models, hospitals in HSAs with a higher burden of socioeconomic disadvantage (per 10% above median ADI ZIP codes, AOR 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09) and Black Non-Hispanic composition (highest quartile, AOR 4.03; 95% CI, 2.62-6.21) had higher odds of closure. We did not observe disparities in closure by Hispanic/Latino composition or rurality. Disparities persisted for Black Non-Hispanic communities, even among HSAs with the lowest burden of disadvantage. CONCLUSIONS: Disproportionate hospital closure in communities with higher socioeconomic disadvantage and Black racial composition raises concerns about unequal loss of healthcare resources in the U.S.

Intensity and Variation of Health Navigator Support: Addressing Medical and Social Needs of Diabetes Patients in East Oakland.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems are increasingly screening and referring patients for unmet social needs (e.g., food insecurity). Little is known about the intensity of support necessary to address unmet needs, how this support may vary by circumstance or time (duration), or the factors that may contribute to this variation. OBJECTIVE: Describe health navigator services and the effort required to support patients with complex needs at a community health center in East Oakland, CA. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of de-identified patient contact notes (e.g., progress notes). PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of patients (n = 27) enrolled in diabetes education and referred to health navigators. INTERVENTIONS: Navigators provide education on managing conditions (e.g., diabetes), initiate and track medical and social needs referrals, and navigate patients to medical and social care organizations. MAIN MEASURES: Descriptive statistics for prevalence, mean, median, and range values of patient contacts and navigation services. We described patterns and variation in navigation utilization (both contacts and navigation services) based on types of need. KEY RESULTS: We identified 811 unmet social and medical needs that occurred over 710 contacts with health navigators; 722 navigation services were used to address these needs. Patients were supported by navigators for a median of 9 months; approximately 25% of patients received support for > 1 year. We categorized patients into 3 different levels of social risk, accounting for patient complexity and resource needs. The top tertile (n = 9; 33%) accounted for the majority of resource utilization, based on health navigator contacts (68%) and navigation services (75%). CONCLUSIONS: The required intensity and support given to meet patients' medical and social needs is substantial and has significant variation. Meeting the needs of complex patients will require considerable investments in human capital, and a risk stratification system to help identify those most in need of services.

Primary Care Patients' Perspectives on Health Care Screening for Firearms in a Diverse, Urban Area: A Qualitative Study.

Importance: Firearm violence is increasingly recognized as a public health issue, but whether physicians should intervene remains politically contested. Objective: To explore self-described patient perspectives about the appropriateness and acceptability of health care screening for firearms. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study recruited 50 adult patients from a primary care clinic in Chicago, Illinois, from June 7, 2019, to January 11, 2021, to participate in 1 of 12 one-time qualitative focus groups. Focus group discussions were facilitated using an in-depth, semistructured guide, transcribed verbatim from audio recordings, and analyzed for major themes using a pragmatic approach to basic thematic analysis, which is commonly used in implementation science, between December 12, 2019, and November 29, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient perspectives of health care screening for firearms were evaluated to examine complexities of a practice change goal. Results: Participants were a median age of 60.0 (IQR, 50.5-66.5) years and predominantly female (37 [74%]; male, 11 [22%]; nonbinary, 1 [2%]; transgender, 1 [2%]) and non-Hispanic Black (42 [84%]; non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander, 2 [4%]; non-Hispanic White, 5 [10%]). Two-thirds (32 [64%]) of participants thought that health care screening for firearms was at least sometimes appropriate, recognizing clear benefits, for instance, among patients at risk for suicide. However, few (2 [4%]) had ever discussed firearms with a physician or other health care professional. Even among those who recognized benefits, several barriers to acceptability were described, especially related to bias, stigma, and increased risk for criminal legal involvement. Other major themes included insufficient time to address firearms during health care visits and doubts about a clinician's ability to intervene. Facilitators to acceptability included screening strategies that were patient centered, sensitive to racial bias, clinically efficient, and accompanied by tangible resources. Conclusions and Relevance: Incorporating these findings and emergent themes into clinical practice may guide efforts to make firearm screening more acceptable for patients from historically marginalized communities.

Preconception care utilization: Self-report versus claims-based measures among women with Medicaid.

The objective of this study is to compare self-reported preconception care utilization (PCU) among Medicaid-covered births to Medicaid claims. We identified all Medicaid-covered births to women ages 15-45 in 26 states in the year 2012 among the Pregnancy Risk Assessment and Monitoring System (PRAMS) survey and Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) claims data, and identified preconception services in the latter using diagnosis codes published by Health and Human Services' Office of Population Affairs. We fit mixed-effects logistic regression models for the probability of PCU on sociodemographic factors (age, race, and ethnicity) and clinical diagnoses (depression, diabetes, or hypertension), separately for each dataset. Among 652,929 women delivering in MAX, 28.1% received at least one claims-based preconception service while an estimated 23.6% (95% CI 22.1-25.3) of PRAMS respondents reported receiving preconception care. Adjusting for age, chronic diseases, and state, PCU rates in both MAX and PRAMS were higher for non-Hispanic Black versus non-Hispanic White women (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.49-1.54 and OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.60-2.62, respectively). Adjusting for differences in age, race and ethnicity, and state, PCU rates were higher for patients with diabetes (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.29-1.40 and OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.16-2.85) or hypertension (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.18-1.27 and OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.41-2.44). While Hispanic and Asian women were also more likely to report PCU than their non-Hispanic White counterparts (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.53-2.80 and OR 3.37, 95% CI 2.28-4.98), they were less likely to have received it (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.73-0.75 and OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.63-0.67). In conclusion, comparing self-report to claims measures of PCU, we found similar trends in the differences between non-Hispanic Black and White women, and between those with vs. without diabetes and hypertension. However, the two data sources differed in trends in other racial/ethnic groups (differences between Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic White women, and between Asian vs. non-Hispanic White women), and in those with vs. without depression. This suggests that while Medicaid claims can be a useful tool for studying preconception care, they may miss certain types of care among some sub-groups of the population or be subject to reporting differences that are hard to surmise. Both data sets have potential benefits and drawbacks as research tools.

Advancing health equity through social care interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To use evidence on addressing racism in social care intervention research to create a framework for advancing health equity for all populations with marginalized social identities (e.g., race, gender, and sexual orientation). Such groups have disproportionate social needs (e.g., food insecurity) and negative social determinants of health (SDOH; e.g., poverty). We recommend how the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) could advance health equity for marginalized populations through social care research and care delivery. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: This commentary is informed by a literature review of social care interventions that were affiliated with healthcare systems; input from health equity researchers, policymakers, and community leaders attending the AHRQ Health Equity Summit; and consensus of the authors. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We recommend that AHRQ: (1) create an ecosystem that values research on SDOH and the effectiveness and implementation of social care interventions in the healthcare sector; (2) work with other federal agencies to (a) develop position statements with actionable recommendations about racism and other systems that perpetuate marginalization based on social identity and (b) develop aligned, complementary approaches to research and care delivery that address social marginalization; (3) advance both inclusive care delivery and inclusive research teams; (4) advance understanding of racism as a social determinant of health and effective strategies to mitigate its adverse impact on health; (5) advance the creation and scaling of effective strategies for addressing SDOH in healthcare systems, particularly in co-creation with community partners; and (6) require social care intervention researchers to use methods that advance our understanding of social health equity. CONCLUSIONS: AHRQ, as a federal agency, could help advance health equity using a range of strategies, including using the agency's levers to ensure AHRQ stakeholders examine and address the unique experiences of socially marginalized populations in SDOH and social care intervention research.

The Growing Role of Technology in the Care of Older Adults With Diabetes.

The integration of technologies such as continuous glucose monitors, insulin pumps, and smart pens into diabetes management has the potential to support the transformation of health care services that provide a higher quality of diabetes care, lower costs and administrative burdens, and greater empowerment for people with diabetes and their caregivers. Among people with diabetes, older adults are a distinct subpopulation in terms of their clinical heterogeneity, care priorities, and technology integration. The scientific evidence and clinical experience with these technologies among older adults are growing but are still modest. In this review, we describe the current knowledge regarding the impact of technology in older adults with diabetes, identify major barriers to the use of existing and emerging technologies, describe areas of care that could be optimized by technology, and identify areas for future research to fulfill the potential promise of evidence-based technology integrated into care for this important population.

Cultivating Anti-Racism Allies in Academic Medicine.

Racial microaggressions, racially based remarks, or actions that negatively impact marginalized physicians of color (Black, Latino/a/x, and American Indian/Alaskan Natives) often go unaddressed. This article provides four strategies for how individuals and institutions can engage in anti-racism allyship: (1) be an upstander during microaggressions, (2) be a sponsor and advocate for physicians of color, (3) acknowledge academic titles and accomplishments, and (4) challenge the idea of a "standard fit" for academic faculty and research. Skills in academic allyship should be taught to all physicians throughout the educational continuum to mitigate feelings of isolation that racialized minority physicians frequently experience.

Telementoring With Project ECHO: A New Era in Diabetes-Related Continuing Education for Primary Care to Address Health Disparities.

Project ECHO® is a telementoring workforce development model that targets under-resourced communities lacking access to specialty care. The model builds virtual communities of practice, including specialists and community primary care professionals (PCPs) to combat clinical inertia and health disparities. While the ECHO model has gained global recognition, implementation of the model related to diabetes is lagging compared to other specialty conditions. This review highlights diabetes-endocrine (ENDO)-focused ECHOs using data reported in the ECHO Institute's centralized data repository (iECHO) and the learning collaborative for diabetes ECHOs. It also describes the implementation of diabetes ECHOs and their evaluation. Learner and patient-centered outcomes related to diabetes ECHOs are reviewed. Program implementation and evaluations have demonstrated utility of the ECHO model for diabetes programs to (1) address unmet needs of diabetes care in the primary care setting, (2) improve knowledge and confidence in managing complex diabetes and change provider prescribing habits, (3) improve patient outcomes, and (4) address diabetes quality improvement practices in primary care. More studies with broader collaboration among sites are needed to evaluate the model related to diabetes, especially applied to addressing therapeutic inertia, adoption of diabetes technology, and reducing health disparities.

"Everything in One Place": Stakeholder Perceptions of Integrated Medical and Social Care for Diabetes Patients in Western Maryland.

BACKGROUND: Patients with type 2 diabetes frequently have both medical- and health-related social needs that must be addressed for optimal disease management. Growing evidence suggests that intersectoral partnerships between health systems and community-based organizations may effectively support improved health outcomes for patients with diabetes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe stakeholders' perceptions of the implementation factors associated with a diabetes management program, an intervention involving coordinated clinical and social services supports to address both medical- and health-related social needs. This intervention delivers proactive care alongside community partnerships, and leverages innovative financing mechanisms. DESIGN: Qualitative study with semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Study participants included adults (18 years or older) who were patients with diabetes and essential staff (e.g., members of a diabetes care team, health care administrators) and leaders of community-based organizations. APPROACH: We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to develop a semi-structured interview guide designed to elicit perspectives from patients and essential staff on their experiences within an outpatient center to support patients with chronic conditions (the CCR) as a part of an intervention to improve care for patients with diabetes. KEY RESULTS: Interviews illuminated three key takeaways: (1) team-based care held an important role in promoting accountability across stakeholders motivating patient engagement and positive perceptions, (2) mission-driven alignment across the health care and community sectors was needed to synergize a broad range of efforts, and (3) global payment models allowing for flexible resource allocation can invaluably support the appropriate care being directed where it is needed the most whether medical or social services. CONCLUSIONS: The views and experiences of patient and essential staff stakeholder groups reported here thematically according to CFIR domains may inform the development of other chronic disease interventions that address medical- and health-related social needs in additional settings.

Trust Dynamics of Community Health Workers in Frontier Food Banks and Pantries: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Medical mistrust has had devastating consequences during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in rural communities. Community Health Workers (CHWs) have been shown to build trust, but there is little research on trust-building by CHWs in rural communities. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to understand the strategies that CHWs use to build trust with participants of health screenings in frontier Idaho. DESIGN: This is a qualitative study based on in-person, semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed CHWs (N=6) and coordinators of food distribution sites (FDSs; e.g., food banks and pantries) where CHWs hosted a health screening (N=15). APPROACH: Interviews were conducted with CHWs and FDS coordinators during FDS-based health screenings. Interview guides were initially designed to assess facilitators and barriers to health screenings. Trust and mistrust emerged as dominant themes that determined nearly every aspect of the FDS-CHW collaboration, and thus became the focus of interviews. KEY RESULTS: CHWs encountered high levels of interpersonal trust, but low institutional and generalized trust, among the coordinators and clients of rural FDSs. When working to reach FDS clients, CHWs anticipated confronting mistrust due to their association with the healthcare system and government, especially if CHWs were perceived as "outsiders." Hosting health screenings at FDSs, which were trusted community organizations, was important for CHWs to begin building trust with FDS clients. CHWs also volunteered at FDS locations to build interpersonal trust before hosting health screenings. Interviewees agreed that trust building was a time- and resource-intensive process. CONCLUSIONS: CHWs build interpersonal trust with high-risk rural residents, and should be integral parts of trust building initiatives in rural areas. FDSs are vital partners in reaching low-trust populations, and may provide an especially promising environment to reach some rural community members. It is unclear whether trust in individual CHWs also extends to the broader healthcare system.

Integrated Interventions to Bridge Medical and Social Care for People Living with Diabetes.

Social drivers of health impact health outcomes for patients with diabetes, and are areas of interest to health systems, researchers, and policymakers. To improve population health and health outcomes, organizations are integrating medical and social care, collaborating with community partners, and seeking sustainable financing with payors. We summarize promising examples of integrated medical and social care from the Merck Foundation Bridging the Gap: Reducing Disparities in Diabetes Care initiative. The initiative funded eight organizations to implement and evaluate integrated medical and social care models, aiming to build a value case for services that are traditionally not eligible for reimbursement (e.g., community health workers, food prescriptions, patient navigation). This article summarizes promising examples and future opportunities for integrated medical and social care across three themes: (1) primary care transformation (e.g., social risk stratification) and workforce capacity (e.g., lay health worker interventions), (2) addressing individual social needs and structural changes, and (3) payment reform. Integrated medical and social care that advances health equity requires a significant paradigm shift in healthcare financing and delivery.

A Physician's Sense of Responsibility to Address Disparities: Does It Relate to Reported Behaviors About Screening for and Addressing Social Needs?

PURPOSE: It is widely accepted that negative social determinants of health (e.g., poverty) are underlying drivers of poor health and health disparities. There is overwhelming support among physicians to screen for patient-level social needs, but only a minority of clinicians actually do so. The authors explored potential associations between physician beliefs about health disparities and behaviors to screen and address social needs among patients. METHOD: The authors used 2016 data from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile database to identify a purposeful sample of U.S. physicians (n = 1,002); data obtained in 2017 were analyzed. Chi-squared tests of proportions and binomial regression analyses were employed to investigate associations between the belief that it is a physician's responsibility to address health disparities and perceptions of physician behaviors to screen for and address social needs, accounting for physician, clinical practice, and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of 188 respondents, respondents who felt that physicians have a responsibility to address health disparities were more likely than their peers (who did not feel that physicians have such a responsibility) to report that a physician on their health care team would screen for social needs that were psychosocial (e.g., safety, social support) (45.5% vs 29.6%, P = .03) and material (e.g., food, housing) (33.0% vs 13.6%, P < .0001). They were also more likely to report that a physician on their health care team would address both psychosocial needs (48.1% vs 30.9%, P = .02) and material needs (21.4% vs 9.9%, P = .04). With the exception of screening for psychosocial needs, these associations persisted in adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: Engaging physicians to screen for and address social needs should couple efforts to expand infrastructure with educational efforts about professionalism and health disparities, especially underlying drivers such as structural racism and the social determinants of health.

Racial Health Equity and Social Needs Interventions: A Review of a Scoping Review.

Importance: Social needs interventions aim to improve health outcomes and mitigate inequities by addressing health-related social needs, such as lack of transportation or food insecurity. However, it is not clear whether these studies are reducing racial or ethnic inequities. Objective: To understand how studies of interventions addressing social needs among multiracial or multiethnic populations conceptualize and analyze differential intervention outcomes by race or ethnicity. Evidence Review: Sources included a scoping review of systematic searches of PubMed and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 1995, through November 29, 2021, expert suggestions, and hand searches of key citations. Eligible studies evaluated interventions addressing social needs; reported behavioral, health, or utilization outcomes or harms; and were conducted in multiracial or multiethnic populations. Two reviewers independently assessed titles, abstracts, and full text for inclusion. The team developed a framework to assess whether the study was "conceptually thoughtful" for understanding root causes of racial health inequities (ie, noted that race or ethnicity are markers of exposure to racism) and whether analyses were "analytically informative" for advancing racial health equity research (ie, examined differential intervention impacts by race or ethnicity). Findings: Of 152 studies conducted in multiracial or multiethnic populations, 44 studies included race or ethnicity in their analyses; of these, only 4 (9%) were conceptually thoughtful. Twenty-one studies (14%) were analytically informative. Seven of 21 analytically informative studies reported differences in outcomes by race or ethnicity, whereas 14 found no differences. Among the 7 that found differential outcomes, 4 found the interventions were associated with improved outcomes for minoritized racial or ethnic populations or reduced inequities between minoritized and White populations. No studies were powered to detect differences. Conclusions and Relevance: In this review of a scoping review, studies of social needs interventions in multiracial or multiethnic populations were rarely conceptually thoughtful for understanding root causes of racial health inequities and infrequently conducted informative analyses on intervention effectiveness by race or ethnicity. Future work should use a theoretically sound conceptualization of how race (as a proxy for racism) affects social drivers of health and use this understanding to ensure social needs interventions benefit minoritized racial and ethnic groups facing social and structural barriers to health.

Errors in Converting Principles to Protocols: Where the Bioethics of U.S. Covid-19 Vaccine Allocation Went Wrong.

For much of 2021, allocating the scarce supply of Covid-19 vaccines was the world's most pressing bioethical challenge, and similar challenges may recur for novel therapies and future vaccines. In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) identified three fundamental ethical principles to guide the process: maximize benefits, promote justice, and mitigate health inequities. We argue that critical components of the recommended protocol were internally inconsistent with these principles. Specifically, the ACIP violated its principles by recommending overly broad health care worker priority in phase 1a, using being at least seventy-five years of age as the only criterion to identify individuals at high risk of death from Covid-19 during phase 1b, failing to recommend place-based vaccine distribution, and implicitly endorsing first-come, first-served allocation. More rigorous empirical work and the development of a complete ethical framework that recognizes trade-offs between principles may have prevented these mistakes and saved lives.