Promoting Latinx health equity through community-engaged policy and practice reforms in North Carolina.

Introduction: The Latinx Advocacy Team & Interdisciplinary Network for COVID-19 (LATIN-19) is a unique multi-sector coalition formed early in the COVID-19 pandemic to address the multi-level health inequities faced by Latinx communities in North Carolina. Methods: We utilized the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) Research Framework to conduct a directed content analysis of 58 LATIN-19 meeting minutes from April 2020 through October 2021. Application of the NIMHD Research Framework facilitated a comprehensive assessment of complex and multidimensional barriers and interventions contributing to Latinx health while centering on community voices and perspectives. Results: Community interventions focused on reducing language barriers and increasing community-level access to social supports while policy interventions focused on increasing services to slow the spread of COVID-19. Discussion: Our study adds to the literature by identifying community-based strategies to ensure the power of communities is accounted for in policy reforms that affect Latinx health outcomes across the U.S. Multisector coalitions, such as LATIN-19, can enable the improved understanding of underlying barriers and embed community priorities into policy solutions to address health inequities.

Systemic Racism Affecting Latinx Population Health During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: Perspectives of Latinx Community Health Workers and Community-Based Organization Leaders.

Introduction: The purpose of this study is to identify forms of systemic racism experienced by Latinx communities in North Carolina during the COVID-19 pandemic as identified by Latinx community health workers (CHWs) and community-based organization (CBO) leaders. Methods: We conducted three focus groups in July 2022 (N=16). We performed qualitative analysis of data using an iterative inductive approach of the original language in Dedoose. Results: Four central themes emerged: (1) Access to resources for Latinx individuals; (2) Immediate, transitional, and future fears; (3) Benefits of CHWs; and (4) Lessons learned. Discussion: Institutional and state policies often do not involve community members, such as CHWs and CBO leaders, at the start of the development process, leading to ineffective interventions that perpetuate health disparities and systemic racism. Health Equity Implications: Community-informed policy recommendations can improve alignment of community and policy priorities to create more effective interventions to address systemic racism and promote health equity.

LATIN-19: A Grassroots Coalition to Mitigate the Effect of COVID-19 on the Latinx Community in North Carolina.

BACKGROUND: Social inequity is a primary driver of health disparities, creating multiple barriers to good health. These inequities were exacerbated during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, with Latinx communities suffering more than others. Grassroots collaborations have long existed to address disparities. OBJECTIVE: We describe the creation and work of the Latinx Advocacy Team and Interdisciplinary Network for COVID-19 (LATIN-19; http://latin19.org/), a multisector coalition in North Carolina created to address the unique challenges of COVID-19 in the Latinx community. METHODS: We discuss challenges and solutions that LATIN-19 addressed and the impact of LATIN-19 on community partners and members. RESULTS: LATIN-19 learned of challenges including, lack of awareness, need for data systems to track disparities, the need to increase access to resources, the need for policy changes, and the need to coordinate services by community organizations. CONCLUSIONS: LATIN-19 represents a grassroots organization that has had an impact on community and community organizations that spans beyond COVID-19.

[The Global Patient Safety Action Plan 2021-2030: Identifying actions for safer primary health care]. / El Plan de acción mundial para la seguridad del paciente 2021-2030: identificando acciones para una atención primaria más segura.

The 74th World Health Assembly adopted in May 2021 the "Global Patient Safety Action Plan: 2021-2030" to enhance patient safety as an essential component in the design, procedures and performance evaluation of health systems worldwide. It is a strategic plan that guides country governments, health sector entities, health organisations and the World Health Organisation secretariat on how to implement the assembly's patient safety resolution. Deployment of the plan will strengthen the quality and safety of health systems worldwide by spanning the entire continuum of people's health care from diagnosis to treatment and care, reducing the likelihood of harm in the course of care. The Declaration on Primary Health Care during the Global Conference on Primary Health Care in Astana, 2018, urged countries to strengthen their primary health care systems as an essential step towards achieving universal health coverage and providing access to safe, quality care without financial loss. The deployment of the Global Patient Safety Action Plan in primary care is therefore a high-priority health policy action. The Action Plan is structured into 6 strategic objectives with 35 strategic actions. We present an analysis of the strategic actions regarding healthcare organizations and the challenges ahead for their particular deployment in primary health care settings.

Partnerships to Care for Our Patients and Communities During COVID-19.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced not only rapid changes in how clinical care and educational programs are delivered but also challenged academic medical centers (AMCs) like never before. The pandemic made clear the need to have coordinated action based on shared data and shared resources to meet the needs of patients, learners, and communities. Family medicine departments across the country have been key partners in AMCs' responses. The Duke Department of Family Medicine and Community Health (FMCH) was involved in many aspects of Duke University's and Health System's responses, including leadership contributions in delivering employee health and student health services. The pandemic also surfaced the biological and social interactions that reveal underlying socioeconomic inequalities, for which family medicine has advocated since its inception. Key to success was the department's ability to integrate "horizontally" with the broader community, thereby accelerating the institution's response to the pandemic.

Racial, Ethnic, and Geographic Disparities in Novel Coronavirus (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2) Test Positivity in North Carolina.

BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence suggests that black and Hispanic communities in the United States are disproportionately affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A complex interplay of socioeconomic and healthcare disparities likely contribute to disproportionate COVID-19 risk. METHODS: We conducted a geospatial analysis to determine whether individual- and neighborhood-level attributes predict local odds of testing positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We analyzed 29 138 SARS-CoV-2 tests within the 6-county catchment area for Duke University Health System from March to June 2020. We used generalized additive models to analyze the spatial distribution of SARS-CoV-2 positivity. Adjusted models included individual-level age, gender, and race, as well as neighborhood-level Area Deprivation Index, population density, demographic composition, and household size. RESULTS: Our dataset included 27 099 negative and 2039 positive unique SARS-CoV-2 tests. The odds of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test were higher for males (odds ratio [OR], 1.43; 95% credible interval [CI], 1.30-1.58), blacks (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.27-1.70), and Hispanics (OR, 4.25; 955 CI, 3.55-5.12). Among neighborhood-level predictors, percentage of black population (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.25), and percentage Hispanic population (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.07-1.41) also influenced the odds of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Population density, average household size, and Area Deprivation Index were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 test results after adjusting for race. CONCLUSIONS: The odds of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 were higher for both black and Hispanic individuals, as well as within neighborhoods with a higher proportion of black or Hispanic residents-confirming that black and Hispanic communities are disproportionately affected by SARS-CoV-2.

A Checklist for Implementing Rural Pathways to Train, Develop and Support Health Workers in Low and Middle-Income Countries.

Background: There is an urgent need to scale up global action on rural workforce development. This World Health Organization-sponsored research aimed to develop a Rural Pathways Checklist. Its purpose was to guide the practical implementation of rural workforce training, development, and support strategies in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). It was intended for any LMICs, stakeholder, health worker, context, or health problem. Method: Multi-methods involved: (1) focus group concept testing; (2) a policy analysis; (3) a scoping review of LMIC literature; (4) consultation with a global Expert Reference Group and; (5) field-testing over an 18-month period. Results: The Checklist included eight actions for implementing rural pathways in LMICs: establishing community needs; policies and partners; exploring existing workers and scope; selecting health workers; education and training; working conditions for recruitment and retention; accreditation and recognition of workers; professional support/up-skilling and; monitoring and evaluation. For each action, a summary of LMICs-specific evidence and prompts was developed to stimulate reflection and learning. To support implementation, rural pathways exemplars from different WHO regions were also compiled. Field-testing showed the Checklist is fit for purpose to guide holistic planning and benchmarking of rural pathways, irrespective of LMICs, stakeholder, or health worker type. Conclusion: The Rural Pathways Checklist provides an agreed global conceptual framework for the practical implementation of "grow your own" strategies in LMICs. It can be applied to scale-up activity for rural workforce training and development in LMICs, where health workers are most limited and health needs are greatest.

What Is Population Health?

This article defines population health as the health outcomes of a group of individuals, including the distribution of such outcomes within the group. Population health includes health outcomes, patterns of health determinants, and policies and interventions that link these two. Attention to social and environmental, as well as medical, determinants of health is essential. The population health lens can be used at the individual, practice, institutional, and community levels. The need for primary care to engage in population health stems from the importance of social and environmental factors, the nature of primary care, and contextual changes.

Community and Stakeholder Engagement.

Improving population health in a sustainable way requires collaboration within the medical community and also working through partnerships among multiple community and societal stakeholders. One example of stakeholder engagement is engagement of the community whose health will be affected. Stakeholder engagement has benefits for the quality, sustainability, and impact of population health research and interventions. Several principles of engagement have been developed; common elements across these principles are power sharing, respect, humility, colearning, commitment, and a goal of making change. There is a growing pool of resources available to help clinicians enhance their skills in stakeholder engagement.

The Primary Care Spend Model: a systems approach to measuring investment in primary care.

Increased investment in primary care is associated with lower healthcare costs and improved population health. The allocation of scarce resources should be driven by robust models that adequately describe primary care activities and spending within a health system, and allow comparisons within and across health systems. However, disparate definitions result in wide variations in estimates of spending on primary care. We propose a new model that allows for a dynamic assessment of primary care spending (PC Spend) within the context of a system's total healthcare budget. The model articulates varied definitions of primary care through a tiered structure which includes overall spending on primary care services, spending on services delivered by primary care professionals and spending delivered by providers that can be characterised by the '4Cs' (first contact, continuous, comprehensive and coordinated care). This unifying framework allows a more refined description of services to be included in any estimate of primary care spend and also supports measurement of primary care spending across nations of varying economic development, accommodating data limitations and international health system differences. It provides a goal for best accounting while also offering guidance, comparability and assessments of how primary care expenditures are associated with outcomes. Such a framework facilitates comparison through the creation of standard definitions and terms, and it also has the potential to foster new areas of research that facilitate robust policy analysis at the national and international levels.

Collaborating to Achieve the Optimal Family Medicine Workforce.

When the Family Medicine for America's Health (FMAHealth) Workforce Education and Development Tactic Team (WEDTT) began its work in December 2014, one of its charges from the FMAHealth Board was to increase family physician production to achieve the diverse primary care workforce the United States needs. The WEDTT created a multilevel interfunctional team to work on this priority initiative that included a focus on student, resident, and early-career physician involvement and leadership development. One major outcome was the adoption of a shared aim, known as 25 x 2030. Through a collaboration of the WEDTT and the eight leading family medicine sponsoring organizations, the 25 x 2030 aim is to increase the percentage of US allopathic and osteopathic medical students choosing family medicine from 12% to 25% by the year 2030. The WEDTT developed a package of change ideas based on its theory of what will drive the achievement of 25 x 2030, which led to specific projects completed by the WEDTT and key collaborators. The WEDTT offered recommendations for the future based on its 3-year effort, including policy efforts to improve the social accountability of US medical schools, strategy centered around younger generations' desires rather than past experiences, active involvement by students and residents, engagement of early-career physicians as role models, focus on simultaneously building and diversifying the family medicine workforce, and security of the scope future family physicians want to practice. The 25 x 2030 initiative, carried forward by the family medicine organizations, will use collective impact to adopt a truly collaborative approach toward achieving this much needed goal for family medicine.

Addressing Family Medicine's Capacity to Improve Health Equity Through Collaboration, Accountability and Coalition-Building.

Achieving health equity requires an evaluation of social, economic, environmental, and other factors that impede optimal health for all. Family medicine has long valued an ecological perspective of health, partnering with families and communities. However, both the quantity and degree of continued health disparities requires that family medicine intentionally work toward improvement in health equity. In recognition of this, Family Medicine for America's Health (FMAHealth) formed a Health Equity Tactic Team (HETT). The team's charge was to address primary care's capacity to improve health equity by developing action-oriented approaches accessible to all family physicians. The HETT has produced a number of projects. These include the Starfield II Summit, the focus of which was "Primary Care's Role in Achieving Health Equity." Multidisciplinary thought leaders shared their work around health equity, and actionable interventions were developed. These formed the basis of subsequent work by the HETT. This includes the Health Equity Toolkit, designed for a broad interdisciplinary audience of learners to learn to improve care systems, reduce disparities, and improve patient outcomes. The HETT is also building a business case for health equity. This has focused efforts on demonstrating to the private sector an economic argument for health equity. The HETT has formed a close partnership with the American Academy of Family Physicians' (AAFP's) Center for Diversity and Health Equity (CDHE), collaborating on numerous efforts to increase awareness of health equity. The team has also focused on engaging leadership in all eight US national family medicine organizations to participate in its activities and to ensure that health equity remains a top priority in its leadership. Looking ahead, family medicine will be required to continuously engage with government and nongovernment agencies, academic centers, and the private sector to create partnerships to systematically tackle health inequities.

A Framework for Resident Participation in Population Health.

Population health experiences have become more common in medical education. Yet, most resident population health experiences are in patient panel management and fail to connect with the rapidly growing movement of cross-sector, data-driven, and community-led initiatives dedicated to improving the health of populations defined by geography rather than insurer or employer. In this Perspective, the authors present a five-stage framework for residents' participation in the work of these initiatives. The five stages of this framework are (1) organize and prepare, (2) plan and prioritize, (3) implement, (4) monitor and evaluate, and (5) sustain. In applying this approach, residents stand to acquire new population health skills and augment the value and meaning of their work, while institutions stand to improve the health of the communities they serve, including the health of their own employees. However, a paucity of experienced role models and demanding residency schedules present significant challenges to residents effectively partnering with the community. Residencies and institutions will have to be flexible and committed to being a part of these cross-sector, data-driven, and community-led partnerships over the long term.

Preparing the Next Generation of Family Physicians to Improve Population Health: A CERA Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Family medicine leaders cite population health as a key tenet in the strategic plan outlining family medicine's role in improving America's health. Yet little is known about current practice in training family physicians in this area. This study describes the current practice and teaching of community medicine and population health in family medicine residency programs to support the broader goal of preparing the next generation of family physicians to deliver comprehensive primary care while improving population health. METHODS: Questions were added to the 2013 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA) program directors (PD) survey detailing current teaching practices and identifying self-rated exemplary programs. Multivariate logistic regression models were built to predict program strength. RESULTS: A quarter of responding PDs (n=56) self-rate the strength of their community medicine curriculum; they are more likely to: have a faculty champion, have strong public health partnerships, teach community-oriented primary care well, and tend to serve densely populated regions (>500K). PDs ranked "knowledge and use of community resources" (n=142, 63%) and "teamwork" (n=127, 57%) as areas of community medicine taught best and research/evaluation (n=120, 54%) and population health (n=105, 47%) as areas not taught well. Resident/faculty time are cited as barriers to curricular success (n=144, 64% and n=134, 60%). CONCLUSIONS: Family medicine is well poised to take leadership in the teaching and practice of population health. Yet improvements are still needed and may be supported by dedicated time for faculty/residents, development of faculty champions, and targeted training in rural and suburban areas.