Reminders, but not monetary incentives, increase COVID-19 booster uptake.

Despite substantially decreasing the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19, COVID-19 booster vaccination rates remain low around the world. A key question for public health agencies is how to increase booster vaccination rates, particularly among high-risk groups. We conducted a large preregistered randomized controlled trial (with 57,893 study subjects) in a county health system in northern California to test the impact of personal reminder messages and small financial incentives of $25 on booster vaccination rates. We found that reminders increased booster vaccination rates within 2 wk by 0.86 percentage points (P = 0.000) or nearly 33% off the control mean of 2.65%. Monetary incentives had no additional impact on vaccination rates. The results highlight the potential of low-cost targeted messages, but not small financial incentives, to increase booster vaccination rates.

Extent of Follow-Up on Abnormal Cancer Screening in Multiple California Public Hospital Systems: A Retrospective Review.

BACKGROUND: Inequitable follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests may contribute to racial/ethnic disparities in colon and breast cancer outcomes. However, few multi-site studies have examined follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests and it is unknown if racial/ethnic disparities exist. OBJECTIVE: This report describes patterns of performance on follow-up of abnormal colon and breast cancer screening tests and explores the extent to which racial/ethnic disparities exist in public hospital systems. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from five California public hospital systems. We used multivariable robust Poisson regression analyses to examine whether patient-level factors or site predicted receipt of follow-up test. MAIN MEASURES: Using data from five public hospital systems between July 2015 and June 2017, we assessed follow-up of two screening results: (1) colonoscopy after positive fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and (2) tissue biopsy within 21 days after a BIRADS 4/5 mammogram. KEY RESULTS: Of 4132 abnormal FITs, 1736 (42%) received a follow-up colonoscopy. Older age, Medicaid insurance, lack of insurance, English language, and site were negatively associated with follow-up colonoscopy, while Hispanic ethnicity and Asian race were positively associated with follow-up colonoscopy. Of 1702 BIRADS 4/5 mammograms, 1082 (64%) received a timely biopsy; only site was associated with timely follow-up biopsy. CONCLUSION: Despite the vulnerabilities of public-hospital-system patients, follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests occurs at rates similar to that of patients in other healthcare settings, with colon cancer screening test follow-up occurring at lower rates than follow-up of breast cancer screening tests. Site-level factors have larger, more consistent impact on follow-up rates than patient sociodemographic traits. Resources are needed to identify health system-level factors, such as test follow-up processes or data infrastructure, that improve abnormal cancer screening test follow-up so that effective health system-level interventions can be evaluated and disseminated.

Warfarin Monitoring in Safety-Net Health Systems: Analysis by Race/Ethnicity and Language Preference.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic disparities in anticoagulation management are well established. Differences in warfarin monitoring can contribute to these disparities and should be measured. OBJECTIVE: We assessed for differences in international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring by race/ethnicity and language preference across safety-net care systems serving predominantly low-income, ethnically diverse populations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of process and safety data shared from the Safety Promotion Action Research and Knowledge Network (SPARK-Net) initiative, a consortium of five California safety-net hospital systems. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients were at least 18 years old, received warfarin for at least 56 days during the measurement period from July 2015 to June 2017, and had INR testing in an ambulatory care setting at a participating healthcare system. MAIN MEASURES: We conducted a scaled Poisson regression for adjusted rate ratio of having at least one INR checked per 56-day time period for which a patient had a warfarin prescription. Adjusting for age, sex, healthcare system, and insurance status/type, we assessed for racial/ethnic and language disparities in INR monitoring. KEY RESULTS: Of 8129 patients, 3615 (44%) were female; 1470 (18%), Black/African American; 3354 (41%), Hispanic/Latinx; 1210 (15%), Asian; 1643 (20%), White; and 452 (6%), other. Three thousand five hundred forty-nine (45%) were non-English preferring. We did not observe statistically significant disparities in the rate of appropriate INR monitoring by race/ethnicity or language; the primary source of variation was by healthcare network. Older age, female gender, and uninsured patients had a slightly higher rate of appropriate INR monitoring, but differences were not clinically significant. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find a race/ethnicity nor language disparity in INR monitoring; safety-net site was the main source of variation.

Differences in Hypertension Medication Prescribing for Black Americans and Their Association with Hypertension Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines recommend different pharmacologic management of hypertension (HTN) without comorbidities for Black/African Americans (BAA) compared with non-BAA. We sought to 1) identify if these recommendations have influenced prescription patterns in BAA and 2) identify the differences in uncontrolled HTN in BAA on different antihypertensive medications. METHODS: We constructed a linked retrospective observational cohort using 2 years of electronic health records data, comprising of patients aged 18 to 85 with HTN on 1- or 2-drug regimens, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), thiazide diuretics, or calcium channel blockers (CCB). We examined prescribing differences and HTN control in BAA versus non-BAA. RESULTS: Among 10,875 patients identified, 20.6% were identified as BAA. 46.4% of BAA had uncontrolled HTN (≥140/90 mmHg) compared with 39.0% of non-BAA (P < .001). 61.8% of BAA were treated with 1-drug compared with 68.4% of non-BAA. Of BAA on monotherapy: 41.3% were on thiazide, 40.1% on CCB, and 18.6% on ACE/ARB. Of non-BAA on monotherapy, 27.7% were on thiazide, 30.1% were on CCB, and 42.3% were on ACE/ARB. Of BAA patients on 1 drug, 45.2% had uncontrolled HTN compared with 38.0% of non-BAA (P < .001). Of BAA on 2 drugs, 48.2% had uncontrolled HTN compared with 41.1% non-BAA (P < .001). For each drug regimen, there was more variation in HTN control within each group than between BAA and non-BAA. CONCLUSIONS: Providers seem to be following race-based guidelines for HTN, yet HTN control for BAA remains worse than non-BAA. An individualized approach to HTN therapy for all patients may be more important than race-based guidelines.

Can financial incentives and other nudges increase COVID-19 vaccinations among the vaccine hesitant? A randomized trial.

Despite rapid initial uptake, COVID-19 vaccinations in the United States stalled within a few months of widespread rollout in 2021. In response, many state and local governments, employers and health systems used public health messaging, financial incentives and creative scheduling tools to increase vaccine uptake. Although these approaches drew on evidence from influenza and other vaccination efforts, they were largely untested in the context of SARS-CoV-2. In mid-2021, months after vaccines were widely available, we evaluated vaccination intentions and vaccine uptake using a randomized control trial. To do this, we recruited unvaccinated members of a Medicaid managed care plan in California (n = 2,701) and randomly assigned them to different public health messages, $10 or $50 financial incentives for vaccination, a simple vaccination appointment scheduler, or control. While messages increased vaccination intentions, none of the interventions increased vaccination rates. Estimates for financial incentives rule out even relatively small increases in vaccination rates. Small financial incentives and other behavioral nudges do not meaningfully increase COVID-19 vaccination rates amongst the vaccine hesitant.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in SARS-CoV-2 Testing and COVID-19 Outcomes in a Medicaid Managed Care Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Socioeconomic differences may confound racial and ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 testing and COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of racial/ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 testing and positive tests and COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths among adults impaneled at a Northern California regional medical center and enrolled in the county Medicaid managed care plan (N=84,346) as of March 1, 2020. Logistic regressions adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and neighborhood characteristics. RESULTS: Nearly 30% of enrollees were ever tested for SARS-CoV-2, and 4% tested positive. A total of 19.7 per 10,000 were hospitalized for and 9.4 per 10,000 died of COVID-19. Those identified as Asian, Black, or of other/unknown race had lower testing rates, whereas those identified as Latino had higher testing rates than Whites. Enrollees of Asian or other/unknown race had slightly higher odds of a positive test, and Latinos had much higher odds of a positive test (OR=3.77, 95% CI=3.41, 4.17) than Whites. The odds of hospitalization (OR=2.85, 95% CI=1.85, 4.40) and death (OR=4.75, 95% CI=2.23, 10.12) were higher for Latino than for White patients, even after adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and neighborhood characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: In a Medicaid managed care population, where socioeconomic differences may be reduced, the odds of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, COVID-19 hospitalization, and COVID-19 death were higher for Latino but not Black patients than for White patients. Racial/ethnic disparities depend on local context. The substantially higher risk facing Latinos should be a key consideration in California's strategies to mitigate disease transmission and harm.

Disparities in Hypertension Control Across and Within Three Health Systems Participating in a Data-Sharing Collaborative.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to standardize data collection from 3 health systems (HS1, HS2, HS3) participating in the San Francisco Bay Collaborative Research Network, and compare rates and predictors of uncontrolled blood pressure among hypertensive adults to identify opportunities for regional collaboration in quality improvement. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using deidentified electronic health record data from all primary care patients with at least 1 visit in a 2-year period, using standard data definitions in a common data repository. Primary outcome was uncontrolled blood pressure at the most recent primary care visit. RESULTS: Of 169,793 adults aged 18 to 85 years, 53,133 (31.3%) had a diagnosis of hypertension. Of these, 18,751 (35%) had uncontrolled blood pressure at their last visit, with the proportion varying by system (29%, HS1; 31%, HS2; and 44%, HS3) and by clinical site within each system. In multivariate analyses, differences between health systems persisted, with HS2 and HS3 patients having a 1.15 times (95% CI, 1.11 to 1.19) and 1.46 times (95% CI, 1.42 to 1.50) greater relative risk of uncontrolled blood pressure compared with HS1. Across health systems, hypertensive patients were more likely to have uncontrolled blood pressure if they were uninsured, African Americans, current smokers, obese, or had fewer than 2 primary care visits during the 2-year measurement period. CONCLUSIONS: After controlling for standard individual predictors of hypertension control, significant and substantial differences in hypertension control persisted between health systems, possibly due to local quality improvement programs among other factors. There may be opportunities to share best practices and address common disparities across health systems.