Association of race and ethnicity with initial surgical hemodialysis access type in a safety net system.

OBJECTIVES: Prior studies have found lower arteriovenous fistula (AVF) creation rates in Black and Hispanic patients. Whether this is due to health care disparities or other differences is unclear. Our objective was to evaluate the racial/ethnic differences in initial surgical access type within a high-volume, safety net system with predominantly Black and Hispanic populations. METHODS: A retrospective review of initial hemodialysis (HD) access in consecutive cases between 2014 and 2019 was conducted from all five safety net hospitals in a health care system that primarily treats underserved patients. Patient data collected included race, ethnicity, sex, comorbidities, and initial arteriovenous (AV) access type (AV fistula [AVF] vs AV graft [AVG]). The rates of cephalic vein-based AVF (CAVF; radiocephalic, brachiocephalic) were compared with basilic and brachial vein AVF (BAVF), because the latter are performed as two stages. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models were adjusted for demographic and clinical variables to evaluate the relationship between race/ethnicity, surgical access type, and comorbid conditions. RESULTS: We included 1334 patients (74% Hispanic, 9% Black, 7% Asian, 2% White, 8% other) who underwent first-time surgical HD access creation. The majority were male (818 [63%]). Medical comorbidities were equal among groups, except for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and stroke, which were higher in Black patients (P < .005 and P = .005, respectively). Overall, 1303 patients (98%) underwent AVF creation and 31 AVG creation (2%), with no difference between race/ethnicity in AVF vs AVG creation. Of the AVF cohort, 991 (76%) had a CAVF and 312 (24%) had a BAVF. Males were more likely than females to get a CAVF (65% vs 35%; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Within our safety net health system, where most patients are under-represented minorities, nearly all patients undergoing HD access had an AVF as their initial surgery with no difference in race/ethnicity. AVF type received differed by race, with Black patients twice as likely to undergo BAVF, which required two stages. Further studies are needed to identify the reasons for these differences.

Unique Breast Cancer Screening Disparities in a Safety-Net Health System.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer screening (BCS) disparities leave historically underserved groups more vulnerable to adverse outcomes. This study explores granular associations between BCS and patient sociodemographic factors in a large urban safety-net health system. METHODS: A retrospective review among female patients ages 50-74 within an urban safety-net health system was conducted in 2019. All patients had a primary care visit in the past 2 years. Multiple patient health and sociodemographic characteristics were reviewed, as well as provider gender and specialty. Bivariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression were performed in 2022. RESULTS: The BCS rate among 11,962 women was 69.7%. Over half of patients were non-White (63.6%) and had public insurance (72.3%). Patients with limited English proficiency made up 44.3% of the cohort. Compared to their sociodemographic counterparts, patients with White race, English proficiency, and Medicare insurance had the lowest rates of BCS. Serious mental illness and substance use disorder were associated with lower odds of BCS. In multivariable analysis, when using White race and English speakers as a reference, most other races (Black, Hispanic, and Other) and languages (Spanish, Portuguese, and Other) had significantly higher odds of screening ranging from 8% to 63% higher, except Asian race and Haitian Creole language. Female (versus male) and internal medicine-trained providers were associated with higher screening odds. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple unique variables contribute to BCS disparities, influenced by patient and health system factors. Defining and understanding the interplay of these variables can guide policymaking and identify avenues to improve BCS for vulnerable or traditionally under-resourced populations.

Organizational Health Literacy as a Tool for Health Equity: Application in a High-Risk Infant Follow-Up Program.

BACKGROUND: Healthy People 2030 emphasizes personal health literacy (individual skills) and organizational health literacy-the degree to which organizations equitably enable individuals to find, understand, and use information and services to inform health-related decisions and actions for themselves and others. However, research on the latter is in the early stages. METHODS: This study describes an organizational health literacy assessment in a U.S. urban academic children's hospital. A variety of evidence-based health literacy assessments were used to assess patient information materials and the environment, including institutional practices, navigation, culture and language, and communication. Trained interviewers and analysts reached consensus for all assessments. RESULTS: Information Items: SMOG scores (n = 9) ranged from 7th- to 14th-grade reading level (average = 11.3). PEMAT-P scores (n = 9) ranged from 43.8% to 93.8% understandability and 0% to 80% actionability. CDC CCI scores (literacy demand) (n = 6) ranged from 18.2% to 58.8% (≥90% = excellent). SAM scores (suitability) (n = 6) fell in the "adequate" range (43.2-58.3%). The PMOSE/IKIRSCH scores (complexity) (n = 3) noted low-moderate difficulty. Apter's Hierarchy (n = 4) revealed three numeracy domains (50% = descriptive purposes and decision-making, 100% = interpreting information). Organization-level: Walking interviews highlighted organizational facilitators and barriers related to the pre-visit and visit environments. HLE2 domain scores ranged from 52% to 68%. CONCLUSIONS: Organizational health literacy demands far outweigh the average literacy skills of adults in the U.S. (patients and staff). Findings can be used to hone quality improvement and other processes to focus on structural solutions to increase health equity.