Inability to get needed health care during the COVID-19 pandemic among a nationally representative, diverse population of U.S. adults with and without chronic conditions.

BACKGROUND: Delays in health care have been observed in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the prevalence of inability to get needed care and potential disparities in health care access have yet to be assessed. METHODS: We conducted a nationally representative, online survey of 5,500 American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Latino (English- and Spanish-speaking), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and multiracial adults between 12/2020-2/2021 (baseline) and 8/16/2021-9/9/2021 (6-month follow-up). Participants were asked "Since the start of the pandemic, was there any time when you did not get medical care that you needed?" Those who responded "Yes" were asked about the type of care and the reason for not receiving care. Poisson regression was used to estimate the association between sociodemographics and inability to receive needed care; all analyses were stratified by chronic condition status. Chronic conditions included: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), heart conditions, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease or on dialysis, sickle cell disease, cancer, and immunocompromised state (weakened immune system). RESULTS: Overall, 20.0% of participants at baseline and 22.7% at follow-up reported not getting needed care. The most common reasons for being unable to get needed care included fear of COVID-19 (baseline: 44.1%; follow-up: 47.2%) and doctors canceled appointment (baseline: 25.3%; follow-up: 14.1%). Routine care (baseline: 59.9%; follow-up: 62.6%) and chronic care management (baseline: 31.5%; follow-up: 30.1%) were the most often reported types of delayed care. Fair/poor self-reported physical health was significantly associated with being unable to get needed care despite chronic condition status (≥ 1 chronic condition: aPR = 1.36, 95%CI = 1.04-1.78); no chronic conditions: aPR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.28-1.80). The likelihood of inability to get needed care differed in some instances by race/ethnicity, age, and insurance status. For example, uninsured adults were more likely to not get needed care (≥ 1 chronic condition: aPR = 1.76, 95%CI = 1.17-2.66); no chronic conditions: aPR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.00-1.56). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, about one fifth of participants reported being unable to receive needed care at baseline and follow-up. Delays in receiving needed medical care may exacerbate existing conditions and perpetuate existing health disparities among vulnerable populations who were more likely to have not received needed health care during the pandemic.

Financial Hardship and Psychological Distress During the Pandemic: A Nationally Representative Survey of Major Racial-Ethnic Groups in the United States.

Introduction: While financial hardship has been consistently linked to psychological distress, little research exists on associations between financial hardship experienced during the pandemic and mental health. Methods: We conducted a nationally representative, online survey of American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Latino (English and Spanish speaking), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and multiracial adults, 12/2020-2/2021 (n=5500). Six financial hardship domains were measured (lost income, debt, unmet expenses, unmet health care expenses, housing insecurity, and food insecurity). Psychological distress measures included anxiety-depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-4), perceived stress (modified Perceived Stress Scale), and loneliness-isolation ("In the past month, how often have you felt lonely and isolated?"). Associations between financial hardship and psychological distress were estimated using multinomial logistic regression. Results: Overall, 70.3% of participants reported experiencing financial hardship (substantial hardship: 21.3%; some hardship: 27.4%; and a little hardship: 21.6%), with Spanish-speaking Latino (87.3%) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (79.2%) adults being most likely. Debt (57.6%), lost income (44.5%), and unmet expenses (33.7%) were the most common. There was a dose-response association between financial hardship and moderate/severe anxiety-depression symptoms (a little hardship: adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.12-1.80; some hardship: aOR=3.21, 95% CI=2.58-3.98; and substantial hardship: aOR=8.15, 95% CI=6.45-10.29). Similar dose-response trends were observed with perceived stress and loneliness-isolation. No racial-ethnic difference in the association between financial hardship during the pandemic and psychological distress was seen. Discussion: Financial hardship has had a major impact on psychological distress during the pandemic; moreover, while no racial-ethnic difference in the effect of financial hardship was observed, because racial-ethnic minorities experienced greater hardship, financial hardship may exacerbate psychological distress disparities.

Depression Symptoms, Perceived Stress, and Loneliness During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Diverse US Racial-Ethnic Groups.

Introduction: Studies have reported increases in psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to estimate associations between race-ethnicity and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic among nationally representative samples of all major racial-ethnic groups in the United States. Methods: We conducted a nationally representative cross-sectional survey between December 2020 and February 2021 of Asian, black/African American, Latino (English and Spanish speaking), American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, white, and multiracial adults (n=5500). Distress measures included: anxiety-depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ-4]), stress (modified Perceived Stress Scale), and loneliness-isolation (frequency felt lonely and isolated). Multinomial logistic regression models estimated associations between race-ethnicity and psychological distress, adjusting for demographic and health characteristics. Results: Overall, 23.7% reported moderate/severe anxiety-depression symptoms, 34.3% reported moderate/severe stress, and 21.3% reported feeling lonely-isolated fairly/very often. Compared with white adults and adjusting for covariates, the prevalence of moderate/severe anxiety-depression was significantly lower among Asian (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.34-0.58), black (aOR=0.49, 95% CI=0.38-0.63), English-speaking Latino (aOR=0.62, 95% CI=0.45-0.85), Spanish-speaking Latino (aOR=0.31, 95% CI=0.22-0.44), and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (aOR=0.66, 95% CI=0.49-0.90) adults. Similar trends were seen for moderate/severe stress and feeling lonely-isolated fairly/very often. Worse distress profiles of American Indian/Alaska Native and multiracial adults were attenuated after adjustment. Conclusions: Minoritized groups tended to have less distress than white adults. Collective experiences of cumulative disadvantage could engender shared resiliency/normalization among these groups.

Impact of COVID-related Discrimination on Psychological Distress and Sleep Disturbances across Race-Ethnicity.

COVID-related discrimination towards historically marginalized racial-ethnic groups in the United States has been well-documented; however, its impact on psychological distress and sleep (overall and within specific racial-ethnic groups) is largely unknown. We used data from our nationally representative, online survey of 5,500 American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Latino, White, and multiracial adults, conducted from 12/2020-2/2021. Participants were asked how often they experienced discriminatory behaviors "because they think you might have COVID-19" (modified Everyday Discrimination Scale). Psychological distress was captured as having experienced anxiety-depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionairre-4, PHQ-4), perceived stress (modified Perceived Stress Scale), or loneliness-isolation ("How often have you felt lonely and isolated?"). Sleep disturbances were measured using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System Short Form Sleep Disturbance scale (PROMIS-SF 4a). Overall, 22.1% reported COVID-related discriminatory behaviors (sometimes/always: 9.7%; rarely: 12.4%). 48.4% of participants reported anxiety-depression symptoms (moderate/severe: 23.7% mild: 24.8%), 62.4% reported feeling stressed (moderate/severe: 34.3%; mild: 28,1%), 61.0% reported feeling lonely-isolated (fairly often/very often: 21.3%; almost never/sometimes: 39.7%), and 35.4% reported sleep disturbances (moderate/severe:19.8%; mild: 15.6%). Discrimination was only associated with increased psychological distress among racial-ethnic minorities. For example, COVID-related discrimination was strongly associated with anxiety-depression among Black/African American adults (mild: aOR=2.12, 95% CI=1.43-5.17; moderate/severe: aOR=5.19, 95% CI=3.35-8.05), but no association was observed among White or multiracial adults. Mitigating pandemic-related discrimination could help alleviate mental and sleep health disparities occurring among minoritized racial-ethnic groups.

Disparities in telehealth access, not willingness to use services, likely explain rural telehealth disparities.

PURPOSE: Although telehealth access and utilization have increased during the pandemic, rural and low-income disparities persist. We sought to assess whether access or willingness to use telehealth differed between rural and non-rural and low-income and non-low-income adults and measure the prevalence of perceived barriers. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study using COVID-19's Unequal Racial Burden (CURB) online survey (December 17, 2020-February 17, 2021), which included 2 nationally representative cohorts of rural and low-income Black/African American, Latino, and White adults. Non-rural and non-low-income participants from the main, nationally representative sample were matched for rural versus non-rural and low-income versus non-low-income comparisons. We measured perceived telehealth access, willingness to use telehealth, and perceived telehealth barriers. FINDINGS: Rural (38.6% vs 44.9%) and low-income adults (42.0% vs 47.4%) were less likely to report telehealth access, compared to non-rural and non-low-income counterparts. After adjustment, rural adults were still less likely to report telehealth access (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.79-0.99); no differences were seen between low-income and non-low-income adults (aPR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.88-1.17). The majority of adults reported willingness to use telehealth (rural = 78.4%; low-income = 79.0%), with no differences between rural and non-rural (aPR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.92-1.08) or low-income versus non-low-income (aPR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.91-1.13). No racial/ethnic differences were observed in willingness to use telehealth. The prevalence of perceived telehealth barriers was low, with the majority reporting no barriers (rural = 57.4%; low-income = 56.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of access (and awareness of access) is likely a primary driver of disparities in rural telehealth use. Race/ethnicity was not associated with telehealth willingness, suggesting that equal utilization is possible once granted access.

Race/ethnicity-specific associations between breastfeeding information source and breastfeeding rates among U.S. women.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of the impact of breastfeeding information on breastfeeding rates, it is unknown if information sources and impact vary by race/ethnicity, thus this study assessed race/ethnicity-specific associations between breastfeeding information sources and breastfeeding. METHODS: We used data from the 2016-2019 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System. Race/ethnicity-stratified multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate associations between information source (e.g., family/friends) and breastfeeding rates (0 weeks/none, < 10 weeks, or ≥ 10 weeks; < 10 weeks and ≥ 10 weeks = any breastfeeding). All analyses were weighted to be nationally representative. RESULTS: Among 5,945,018 women (weighted), 88% reported initiating breastfeeding (≥ 10 weeks = 70%). Information from family/friends (< 10 weeks: aORs = 1.58-2.14; ≥ 10 weeks: aORs = 1.63-2.64) and breastfeeding support groups (< 10 weeks: aORs = 1.31-1.76; ≥ 10 weeks: aORs = 1.42-2.77) were consistently associated with breastfeeding and duration across most racial/ethnic groups; effects were consistently smaller among Alaska Native, Black, and Hispanic women (vs White women). Over half of American Indian and one-quarter of Black women reported not breastfeeding/stopping breastfeeding due to return to school/work concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Associations between breastfeeding information source and breastfeeding rates vary across race/ethnicity. Culturally tailored breastfeeding information and support from family/friends and support groups could help reduce breastfeeding disparities. Additional measures are needed to address disparities related to concerns about return to work/school.