[Ways of governing street life during the pandemic: discourses, technologies, and practices]. / Formas de gobernar la vida en la calle durante la pandemia: discursos, tecnologías y prácticas.

Drawing on multiple sources, this article presents an analysis of a national survey implemented by Street Clinic teams in Brazil on the homeless population and the COVID-19 pandemic. Through the lens of certain ethical-political principles and methodological decisions, we focus our analysis on discourses about who lives and works on the streets during the pandemic, connecting discourse with experience. From the perspective of governmentality and biopolitics, we seek to shed light on power relations that reveal modes of government embodied at the street level - mainly related to isolation measures and social distancing - to create tensions surrounding the emergence of the notion of the homeless population in the midst of the pandemic. We conclude with a discussion of the precariousness that circumscribes life on the streets as a shared condition, and search for ways to comprehend forms of resistance and the right to exist.

El artículo presenta un análisis basado en diversas fuentes de una encuesta nacional realizada con el equipo de Consultorios en la Calle en Brasil sobre la población en situación de calle y la pandemia de Covid-19. A través de ciertos principios ético-políticos y apuestas metodológicas, dirigimos nuestra mirada al discurso sobre quién vive y trabaja en las calles durante la pandemia, entrecruzando el discurso y la experiencia. De esta manera, buscamos desvelar las relaciones de poder, desde la perspectiva de la gubernamentalidad y la biopolítica, que permiten mostrar los modos de gobierno encarnados en la calle ­principalmente a partir de las medidas de aislamiento y distanciamiento social­ para tensionar el surgimiento de la noción de población en situación de calle, en este escenario pandémico. Por último, discutimos nociones de precariedad que circunscriben la vida en la calle como condición compartida, en busca de pistas sobre formas de resistencia y el derecho a aparecer.

Formas de gobernar la vida en la calle durante la pandemia: discursos, tecnologías y prácticas / Ways of governing street life during the pandemic: discourses, technologies, and practices

RESUMEN El artículo presenta un análisis basado en diversas fuentes de una encuesta nacional realizada con el equipo de Consultorios en la Calle en Brasil sobre la población en situación de calle y la pandemia de Covid-19. A través de ciertos principios ético-políticos y apuestas metodológicas, dirigimos nuestra mirada al discurso sobre quién vive y trabaja en las calles durante la pandemia, entrecruzando el discurso y la experiencia. De esta manera, buscamos desvelar las relaciones de poder, desde la perspectiva de la gubernamentalidad y la biopolítica, que permiten mostrar los modos de gobierno encarnados en la calle -principalmente a partir de las medidas de aislamiento y distanciamiento social- para tensionar el surgimiento de la noción de población en situación de calle, en este escenario pandémico. Por último, discutimos nociones de precariedad que circunscriben la vida en la calle como condición compartida, en busca de pistas sobre formas de resistencia y el derecho a aparecer.

ABSTRACT Drawing on multiple sources, this article presents an analysis of a national survey implemented by Street Clinic teams in Brazil on the homeless population and the COVID-19 pandemic. Through the lens of certain ethical-political principles and methodological decisions, we focus our analysis on discourses about who lives and works on the streets during the pandemic, connecting discourse with experience. From the perspective of governmentality and biopolitics, we seek to shed light on power relations that reveal modes of government embodied at the street level - mainly related to isolation measures and social distancing - to create tensions surrounding the emergence of the notion of the homeless population in the midst of the pandemic. We conclude with a discussion of the precariousness that circumscribes life on the streets as a shared condition, and search for ways to comprehend forms of resistance and the right to exist.

Relationship between initiation of 340B participation and hospital safety-net engagement.

OBJECTIVE: The 340B program allows safety-net hospitals to acquire discounted outpatient drugs and charge payers full price. We examined whether 340B participation increases safety-net engagement. DATA SOURCES: 340B participation data, Medicare hospital cost reports, American Hospital Association Survey, and Schedule 990 nonprofit hospital tax returns. STUDY DESIGN: Quasi-experimental difference-in-differences design comparing 340B hospitals (the "treatment" group) before and after participating to changes over time to three alternative "control" groups: all other nonprofit and public hospitals, hospitals that are not participating during our study, and hospitals that were not-yet-participating but started after 2015. Outcome measures include a range of safety-net care measures that are alternatives to the standard uncompensated care: charity care, community benefit spending, charity care policies, and low-profit service-line provision. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted data on all nonprofit and public hospitals from 2011 to 2015. We linked 340B participation data to Medicare hospital cost reports and American Hospital Association data using Medicare hospital identifiers. 990 Data was linked on name and address. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: New 340B participation was not associated with a change in uncompensated care, but was associated with a 28.9 percent increase in charity care spending (SE = 8.8), or about $880,000 per hospital. However, total community benefit spending (including charity care) did not change. 340B was associated with an increase in the probability of offering discounted care (4.3 percentage points, SE = 1.6) from 84 to 88 percent and an increase in the income eligibility limit for discounted care (18.9 percentage points, SE = 5.6) from 294 to 313 percent. Participation was not associated with the probability of offering low-profit medical care services. CONCLUSIONS: Alternative measures show that newly participating hospitals may increase charity care, potentially through offering more patients discounted care. However, increases appear to be fully offset by reductions in other community benefit programs.

Trends in smoking documentation rates in safety net clinics.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of provider incentive policy on smoking status documentation. DATA SOURCES: Primary data were extracted from structured electronic medical records (EMRs) from 15 community health centers (CHCs). STUDY DESIGN: This was an observational study of data from 2006 to 2013, assessing changes in documentation of smoking status over time. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: We extracted structured EMR data for patients age 18 and older with at least one primary care visit. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Rates of documented smoking status rose from 30 percent in 2006 to 90 percent in 2013; the largest increase occurred from 2011 to 2012 following policy changes (21.3% [95% CI, 8.2%, 34.4%] from the overall trend). Rates varied by clinic and across patient subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Documentation of smoking status improved markedly after introduction of new federal standards. Further improvement in documentation is still needed, especially for males, nonwhite patients, those using opioids, and HIV + patients. More research is needed to study whether changes in documentation lead to improvements in counseling, cessation, and patient outcomes.

The Financial Effect of Medicare Coverage Design and Safety Net Options for Cancer Care.

BACKGROUND: National spending on specialty medications accounted for approximately $193 billion in 2016. The coverage design for Medicare Parts B and D has shifted medication costs to patients, which may prohibit patients from starting or maintaining therapy due to affordability. As a result, patients have enrolled in safety net financial options, such as patient assistance and foundation programs. Safety net options may provide savings not otherwise realized by Medicare; however, they may have a negative financial effect on health systems and pharmaceutical manufacturers. OBJECTIVES: To (a) quantify financial savings to Medicare as a result of patient enrollment in patient assistance programs and (b) quantify the financial effect of safety net options for patients, manufacturers, and the academic medical center that participated in this study. METHODS: A single-center, nonrandomized, retrospective pilot study of Medicare beneficiaries was conducted. Patients who were prescribed hematology/oncology specialty medications and enrolled in safety net options between July 2015 and June 2017 were included. Investigators collected data related to fill history, drug cost, and prescription coverage. The primary outcome was the overall cost savings to Medicare as a result of patient enrollment in patient assistance programs. Secondary outcomes included total patient out-of-pocket savings as a result of foundation copayment support, financial effect on manufacturers as a result of patient assistance programs, and health system revenue impact as a result of safety net options. Descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS: This study included 114 patients. Medicare saved $5,083,816.83 over 2 years as a result of patient assistance programs. Eight foundations provided $240,350.04 in patient insurance copayments. Nine manufacturers provided 2,243 free drug doses, valued at $3,379,032.34. The participating medical center missed the opportunity for $6,481,543.55 in revenue due to patient assistance programs. CONCLUSIONS: The participating medical center's efforts to improve access to oncology care took considerable time and resources. These activities, as well as unreimbursed infusion services, were costs to the medical center that may not be recognized by Medicare. Manufacturers also supported patient access through their sponsored patient assistance programs. The use of these services and safety net options resulted in cost savings to Medicare and their beneficiaries. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors have nothing to disclose. Findings from this study were part of a podium research presentation at the Great Lakes Pharmacy Residency Conference; April 25, 2018; West Lafayette, IN.

Prenatal Care for Undocumented Immigrants: Professional Norms, Ethical Tensions, and Practical Workarounds.

This paper examines the practice implications of various state policies that provide publicly funded prenatal care to undocumented immigrants for health care workers who see undocumented patients. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with purposively sampled health care workers at safety net clinics in California, Maryland, Nebraska, and New York. Health care workers were asked about the process through which undocumented patients receive prenatal care in their health center and the ethical tensions and frustrations they encounter when providing or facilitating this care under policy restrictions. Respondents discussed several professional practice norms as well as the ethical tensions they encountered when policy or institutional constraints prevented them from living up to professional norms. Using Nancy Berlinger's "workarounds" framework, this paper examines health care workers' responses to the misalignment of their professional norms and the policy restrictions in their state. These findings suggest that the prenatal policies in each state raise ethical and professional challenges for the health care workers who implement them.

How Have 30-Day Readmission Penalties Affected Racial Disparities in Readmissions?: an Analysis from 2007 to 2014 in Five US States.

BACKGROUND: Thirty-day readmission penalties implemented with the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) place a larger burden on safety-net hospitals which treat a disproportionate share of racial minorities, leading to concerns that already large racial disparities in readmissions could widen. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether there were changes in Black-White disparities in 30-day readmissions for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), congestive heart failure (CHF), or pneumonia following the passage and implementation of HRRP, and to compare disparities across safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals. DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional analysis, stratified by safety-net status. SUBJECTS: 1,745,686 Medicare patients over 65 discharged alive from hospitals in 5 US states: NY, FL, NE, WA, and AR. MAIN MEASURES: Odds ratios comparing 30-day readmission rates following an index admission for AMI, CHF, or pneumonia for Black and White patients between 2007 and 2014. KEY RESULTS: Prior to the passage of HRRP in 2010, Black and White readmission rates and disparities in readmissions were decreasing. These reductions were largest at safety-net hospitals. In 2007, Blacks had 13% higher odds of readmission if treated in safety-net hospitals, compared with 5% higher odds in 2010 (P < 0.05). These trends continued following the passage of HRRP. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to HRRP, there were large reductions in Black-White disparities in readmissions at safety-net hospitals. Although HRRP tends to assess higher penalties for safety-net hospitals, improvements in readmissions have not reversed following the implementation of HRRP. In contrast, disparities continue to persist at non-safety-net hospitals which face much lower penalties.

Stratified citizenship, stratified health: Examining latinx legal status in the U.S. healthcare safety net.

Our paper explores how legal status stratification shapes the health and health care of low-income patients with chronic illnesses in the U.S. healthcare safety net. Drawing on data from over two years of ethnographic fieldwork at urban safety-net clinics, we examine efforts by Complex Care Management (CCM) teams to stabilize patients with uncontrolled chronic illnesses through primary care-integrated support. We show that stratified citizenship and geographic variability correspond to different possibilities for health care. We suggest an approach to immigration as a structural determinant of health that accounts for the complex, stratified, and changing nature of citizenship status. We also highlight how geographical differences and interactions among local, state, and federal policies support the notion that citizenship is stratified across multiple tiers with distinctive possibilities and constraints for health. While county-based health plans at each of the study sites include residents with varying legal status, lack of formal legal status remains a substantial obstacle to care. Many immigrants are unable to take full advantage of primary and specialty care, resulting in unnecessary morbidity and mortality. In some cases, patients have returned to their country of origin to die. While CCM teams provide an impressive level of support to assist immigrant patients in navigating healthcare and immigration bureaucracies, legal and geographic stratification limit their ability to address broader aspects of these patients' social context.

The Affordable Care Act Decreased the Proportion of Uninsured Patients in a Safety Net Orthopaedic Clinic.

BACKGROUND: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was approved in 2010, substantially altering the economics of providing and receiving healthcare services in the United States. One of the primary goals of this legislation was to expand insurance coverage for under- and uninsured residents. Our objective was to examine the effect of the ACA on the insurance status of patients at a safety net clinic. Our institution houses a safety net clinic that provides the dominant majority of orthopaedic care for uninsured patients in our state. Therefore, our study allows us to accurately examine the magnitude of the effect on insurance status in safety net orthopaedic clinics. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Did the ACA result in a decrease in the number of uninsured patients at a safety net orthopaedic clinic that provides the dominant majority of orthopaedic care for the uninsured in the state? (2) Did the proportion of patients insured after passage of the ACA differ across age or demographic groups in one state? METHODS: We retrospectively examined our longitudinally maintained adult orthopaedic surgery clinic database from January 2009 to March 2015 and collected visit and demographic data, including zip code income quartile. Based on the data published by the Rhode Island Department of Health, our clinic provides the dominant majority of orthopaedic care for uninsured patients in our state. Therefore, examination of the changes in the proportion of insurance status in our clinic allows us to assess the effect of the ACA on the state level. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to determine the relationship between demographic variables and insurance status. Adjusted odds ratios and 95% CIs were calculated for the proportion of uninsured visits. The proportion of uninsured visits before and after implementation of the ACA was evaluated with an interrupted time-series analysis. The reduction in the proportion of patients without insurance between demographic groups (ie, race, gender, language spoken, and income level) also was compared using an interrupted time-series design. RESULTS: There was a 36% absolute reduction (95% CI, 35%-38%; p < 0.001) in uninsured visits (73% relative reduction; 95% CI, 71%-75%; p < 0.001). There was an immediate 28% absolute reduction (95% CI, 21%-34%; p < 0.001) at the time of ACA implementation, which continued to decline thereafter. After controlling for potential confounding variables such as gender, race, age, and income level, we found that patients who were white, men, younger than 65 years, and seen after January 2014 were more likely to have insurance than patients of other races, women, older patients, and patients treated before January 2014. CONCLUSIONS: After the ACA was implemented, the proportion of patients with health insurance at our safety net adult orthopaedic surgery clinic increased substantially. The reduction in uninsured patients was not equal across genders, races, ages, and incomes. Future studies may benefit from identifying barriers to insurance acquisition in these subpopulations. The results of this study could affect orthopaedic practices in the United States by guiding policy decisions regarding health care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Comparing the Affordable Care Act's Financial Impact on Safety-Net Hospitals in States That Expanded Medicaid and Those That Did Not.

Issue: Safety-net hospitals play a vital role in delivering health care to Medicaid enrollees, the uninsured, and other vulnerable patients. By reducing the number of uninsured Americans, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was also expected to lower these hospitals' significant uncompensated care costs and shore up their financial stability. Goal: To examine how the ACA's Medicaid expansion affected the financial status of safety-net hospitals in states that expanded Medicaid and in states that did not. Methods: Using Medicare hospital cost reports for federal fiscal years 2012 and 2015, the authors compared changes in Medicaid inpatient days as a percentage of total inpatient days, Medicaid revenues as a percentage of total net patient revenues, uncompensated care costs as a percentage of total operating costs, and hospital operating margins. Findings and Conclusions: Medicaid expansion had a significant, favorable financial impact on safety-net hospitals. From 2012 to 2015, safety-net hospitals in expansion states, compared to those in nonexpansion states, experienced larger increases in Medicaid inpatient days and Medicaid revenues as well as reduced uncompensated care costs. These changes improved operating margins for safety-net hospitals in expansion states. Margins for safety-net hospitals in nonexpansion states, meanwhile, declined.

Opinions on the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program: results of a national survey of hospital leaders.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the opinions of US hospital leadership on the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP), a national mandatory penalty-for-performance program. STUDY DESIGN: We developed a survey about federal readmission policies. We used a stratified sampling design to oversample hospitals in the highest and lowest quintile of performance on readmissions, and hospitals serving a high proportion of minority patients. METHODS: We surveyed leadership at 1600 US acute care hospitals that were subject to the HRRP, and achieved a 62% response rate. Results were stratified by the size of the HRRP penalty that hospitals received in 2013, and adjusted for nonresponse and sampling strategy. RESULTS: Compared with 36.1% for public reporting of readmission rates and 23.7% for public reporting of discharge processes, 65.8% of respondents reported that the HRRP had a "great impact" on efforts to reduce readmissions. The most common critique of the HRRP penalty was that it did not adequately account for differences in socioeconomic status between hospitals (75.8% "agree" or "agree strongly"); other concerns included that the penalties were "much too large" (67.7%), and hospitals' inability to impact patient adherence (64.1%). These sentiments were each more common in leaders of hospitals with higher HRRP penalties. CONCLUSIONS: The HRRP has had a major impact on hospital leaders' efforts to reduce readmission rates, which has implications for the design of future quality improvement programs. However, leaders are concerned about the size of the penalties, lack of adjustment for socioeconomic and clinical factors, and hospitals' inability to impact patient adherence and postacute care. These concerns may have implications as policy makers consider changes to the HRRP, as well as to other Medicare value-based payment programs that contain similar readmission metrics.

Vulnerable Hospitals and Cancer Surgery Readmissions: Insights into the Unintended Consequences of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

BACKGROUND: Penalties from the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program can push financially strained, vulnerable patient-serving hospitals into additional hardship. In this study, we quantified the association between vulnerable hospitals and readmissions and examined the respective contributions of patient- and hospital-related factors. METHODS: A total of 110,857 patients who underwent major cancer operations were identified from the 2004-2011 State Inpatient Database of California. Vulnerable hospitals were defined as either self-identified safety net hospitals (SNHs) or hospitals with a high percentage of Medicaid patients (high Medicaid hospitals [HMHs]). We used multivariable logistic regression to determine the association between vulnerable hospitals and readmission. Patient and hospital contributions to the elevation in odds of readmission were assessed by comparing estimates from models with different subsets of predictors. RESULTS: Of the 355 hospitals, 13 were SNHs and 31 were HMHs. After adjusting for Hospital Readmission Reduction Program variables, SNHs had higher 30-day (odds ratio [OR] = 1.32; 95% CI, 1.18-1.47), 90-day (OR = 1.28; 95% CI, 1.18-1.38), and repeated readmissions (OR = 1.33; 95% CI, 1.18-1.49); HMHs also had higher 30-day (OR = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32), 90-day (OR = 1.28; 95% CI, 1.16-1.42), and repeated readmissions (OR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.01-1.54). Compared with patient characteristics, hospital factors accounted for a larger proportion of the increase in odds of readmission among SNHs (60% to 93% vs 24% to 39%), but a smaller proportion among HMHs (9% to 15% vs 60% to 115%). CONCLUSIONS: Vulnerable status of hospitals is associated with higher readmission rates after major cancer surgery. These findings reinforce the call to account for socioeconomic variables in risk adjustments for hospitals who serve a disproportionate share of disadvantaged patients.