Patients and community together. A family medicine community-oriented primary care project in an urban private practice

Peer support for self-management of diabetes improved outcomes in international settings

Self-management of diabetes is essential to reducing the risks of associated disabilities. But effective self-management is often short-lived. Peers can provide the kind of ongoing support that is needed for sustained self-management of diabetes. In this context, peers are nonprofessionals who have diabetes or close familiarity with its management. Key functions of effective peer support include assistance in daily management, social and emotional support, linkage to clinical care, and ongoing availability of support. Using these four functions as a template of peer support, project teams in Cameroon, South Africa, Thailand, and Uganda developed and then evaluated peer support interventions for adults with diabetes. Our initial assessment found improvements in symptom management, diet, blood pressure, body mass index, and blood sugar levels for many of those taking part in the programs. For policy makers, the broader message is that by emphasizing the four key peer support functions, diabetes management programs can be successfully introduced across varied cultural settings and within diverse health systems.

Behavior matters

Behavior has a broad and central role in health. Behavioral interventions can be effectively used to prevent disease, improve management of existing disease, increase quality of life, and reduce healthcare costs. A summary is presented of evidence for these conclusions in cardiovascular disease/diabetes, cancer, and HIV/AIDS as well as with key risk factors: tobacco use, poor diet, physical inactivity, and excessive alcohol consumption. For each, documentation is made of (1) moderation of genetic and other fundamental biological influences by behaviors and social-environmental factors; (2) impacts of behaviors on health; (3) success of behavioral interventions in prevention; (4) disease management; (5) quality of life, and (6) improvements in the health of populations through behavioral health promotion programs. Evidence indicates the cost effectiveness and value of behavioral interventions, especially relative to other common health services as well as the value they add in terms of quality of life. Pertinent to clinicians and their patients as well as to health policy and population health, the benefits of behavioral interventions extend beyond impacts on a particular disease or risk factor. Rather, they include broad effects and benefits on prevention, disease management, and well-being across the life span. Among priorities for dissemination research, the application of behavioral approaches is challenged by diverse barriers, including socioeconomic barriers linked to health disparities. However, behavioral approaches including those emphasizing community and social influences appear to be useful in addressing such challenges. In sum, behavioral approaches should have a central place in prevention and health care of the 21st century.

Using Community-Partnered Participatory Research to Address Health Disparities in a Latino Community

Working in collaborative partnership with communities experiencing health disparities has been identified as a successful strategy to address population health disparities. This article illustrates a collaborative outreach program designed to address health disparities in a poor Latino community in Los Angeles County, California, by training community members to function as lay health advisors (LHAs) to provide health education to members of their own community. The study consisted of three phases, each accomplished in a collaborative partnership among researchers, community residents, community-based organizations, and health officials. In Phase 1, a community needs assessment was conducted to identify a community with demonstrated health disparities and agencies within that community willing to become partners in providing health education. In Phase 2, community members were recruited and trained to function as LHAs. Phase 3 consisted of implementation of community outreach and education activities by the LHAs in their community. This article describes how the study changed over time through responding to challenges that arose in the process of conducting the project, the participatory or collaborative methods used, and feedback received. Strategies for successful research using community partners are presented and implications discussed for future research efforts using community-partnered participatory methods for reducing health disparities.

Health disparities based on socioeconomic inequities: implications for urban health care

Health is unevenly distributed across socioeconomic status. Persons of lower income, education, or occupational status experience worse health and die earlier than do their better-off counterparts. This article discusses these disparities in the context of urban medical practice. The article begins with a discussion of the complex relationship among socioeconomic status, race, and health in the United States. It highlights the effects of institutional, individual, and internalized racism on the health of African Americans, including the insidious consequences of residential segregation and concentrated poverty. Next, the article reviews health disparities based on socioeconomic status across the life cycle, beginning in fetal health and ending with disparities among the elderly. Potential explanations for these socioeconomic-based disparities are addressed, including reverse causality (e.g., being poor causes lower socioeconomic status) and confounding by genetic factors. The article underscores social causation as the primary explanation for health disparities and highlights the cumulative effects of social disadvantage across stages of the life cycle and across environments (e.g., fetal, family, educational, occupational, and neighborhood). The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of health disparities for the practice of urban medicine, including the role that concentration of disadvantage plays among patients and practice sites and the need for quality improvement to mitigate these disparities.

Effect of patient socioeconomic status on physician profiles for prevention, disease management, and diagnostic testing costs

BACKGROUND

Previous research shows patient socioeconomic status (SES) affects physician profiles for health status and satisfaction, but effects on other aspects of care are not known.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of patient SES on physician profiles for preventive care, disease management, and diagnostic testing costs.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis of a managed care claims data.

SUBJECTS

Five hundred sixty-eight physicians and 600,618 patients.

MEASURES

Patient age, gender, case-mix, and SES based on zip code, likelihood of having a Papanicolaou smear, mammogram, for diabetics having had a glycosylated hemoglobin, diabetic eye exam, and diagnostic testing costs.

RESULTS

For each performance indicator, except glycosylated hemoglobin, there was a statistically significant effect of adjusting for patient SES. For diabetic eye checks, mammograms and Papanicolaou tests respectively, 5%, 16%, and 21% of physicians who were outliers (in the top or bottom 5% of rankings) were no longer outliers after socioeconomic adjustment. For all performance measures the change in physician ranking was strongly correlated with the mean practice SES.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient SES, as measured by zip code, appreciably affects physician profiles for preventive care and diabetes management. Monitoring patient SES using patient zip codes could be used to target resources to improve outcomes for higher risk patients.