The Pandemic of Health Care Inequity

The Impact of COVID-19 on Hypertension and Hypertension Medication Adherence Among Underrepresented Racial and Ethnic Groups: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To conduct a scoping review of articles which examined the impact of COVID-19 on HTN and HTN medication adherence among underrepresented racial/ethnic minorities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Seven studies were included in this review and impact of COVID-19 was examined at 4 levels: patient, provider, health system and society. The results indicated that patient level factors, such as high unemployment and inequitable access to telemedicine due to society factors- lack of access to high-speed Internet and variation in the offering of telehealth by health systems, were most impactful on adherence. Additionally, provider level clinical inertia may have further impacted adherence to HTN medication. Our review showed that the COVID-19 pandemic did not introduce new barriers but exacerbated preexisting barriers. Ongoing efforts are needed to change policies at the state and local levels to dismantle inequities in underrepresented communities to ensure access to health care with telemedicine to promote health equity.

Sociodemographic disparities in the use of cardiovascular ambulatory care and telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated adoption of telemedicine in cardiology clinics. Early in the pandemic, there were sociodemographic disparities in telemedicine use. It is unknown if these disparities persisted and whether they were associated with changes in the population of patients accessing care.

METHODS

We examined all adult cardiology visits at an academic and an affiliated community practice in Northern California from March 2019 to February 2020 (pre-COVID) and March 2020 to February 2021 (COVID). We compared patient sociodemographic characteristics between these periods. We used logistic regression to assess the association of patient/visit characteristics with visit modality (in-person vs telemedicine and video- vs phone-based telemedicine) during the COVID period.

RESULTS

There were 54,948 pre-COVID and 58,940 COVID visits. Telemedicine use increased from <1% to 70.7% of visits (49.7% video, 21.0% phone) during the COVID period. Patient sociodemographic characteristics were similar during both periods. In adjusted analyses, visits for patients from some sociodemographic groups were less likely to be delivered by telemedicine, and when delivered by telemedicine, were less likely to be delivered by video versus phone. The observed disparities in the use of video-based telemedicine were greatest for patients aged ≥80 years (vs age <60, OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.21, 0.28), Black patients (vs non-Hispanic White, OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.56, 0.74), patients with limited English proficiency (vs English proficient, OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.46-0.59), and those on Medicaid (vs privately insured, OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.41-0.54).

CONCLUSIONS

During the first year of the pandemic, the sociodemographic characteristics of patients receiving cardiovascular care remained stable, but the modality of care diverged across groups. There were differences in the use of telemedicine vs in-person care and most notably in the use of video- vs phone-based telemedicine. Future studies should examine barriers and outcomes in digital healthcare access across diverse patient groups.

Continuous glucose monitors and virtual care in high-risk, racial and ethnic minority populations: Toward promoting health equity

Continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) have become an important tool to aid self-management of blood glucose for many patients with diabetes in the U.S., and the benefits of CGM use are well-documented. However, disparities in CGM use exist, with lower use in certain marginalized racial and ethnic groups. CGM may be an important and underutilized tool to help reduce inequities. Evidence supporting the use of CGMs as a part of virtual care is discussed, with an emphasis on designing virtual diabetes care programs to promote health equity. Recommendations for clinical practice and research are presented. In clinical practice, CGM should be an option for all people with diabetes who qualify based on clinical practice guidelines, regardless of race, ethnicity, or other individual characteristics. Future research should characterize the use of, benefit from, and preferences for CGM among individuals from racial and ethnic groups to guide interventions at the health system, clinic, provider, and patient levels to promote equitable, evidence-based, and guideline-directed CGM use in marginalized racial and ethnic groups with diabetes.

Desperately Seeking Intersectionality in Digital Health Disparity Research: Narrative Review to Inform a Richer Theorization of Multiple Disadvantage

BACKGROUND

Digital consultations between patients and clinicians increased markedly during the COVID-19 pandemic, raising questions about equity.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to review the literature on how multiple disadvantage-specifically, older age, lower socioeconomic status, and limited English proficiency-has been conceptualized, theorized, and studied empirically in relation to digital consultations. We focused mainly on video consultations as they have wider disparities than telephone consultations and relevant data on e-consultations are sparse.

METHODS

Using keyword and snowball searching, we identified relevant papers published between 2012 and 2022 using Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed. The first search was completed in July 2022. Papers meeting the inclusion criteria were analyzed thematically and summarized, and their key findings were tabulated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research criteria. Explanations for digital disparities were critically examined, and a search was undertaken in October 2022 to identify theoretical lenses on multiple disadvantage.

RESULTS

Of 663 articles from the initial search, 27 (4.1%) met our inclusion criteria. In total, 37% (10/27) were commentaries, and 63% (17/27) were peer-reviewed empirical studies (11/27, 41% quantitative; 5/27, 19% qualitative; 1/27, 4% mixed methods; 1/27, 4% systematic reviews; and 1/27, 4% narrative reviews). Empirical studies were mostly small, rapidly conducted, and briefly reported. Most studies (25/27, 93%) identified marked digital disparities but lacked a strong theoretical lens. Proposed solutions focused on identifying and removing barriers, but the authors generally overlooked the pervasive impact of multiple layers of disadvantage. The data set included no theoretically informed studies that examined how different dimensions of disadvantage combined to affect digital health disparities. In our subsequent search, we identified 3 theoretical approaches that might help account for these digital disparities. Fundamental cause theory by Link and Phelan addresses why the association between socioeconomic status and health is pervasive and persists over time. Digital capital theory by Ragnedda and Ruiu explains how people mobilize resources to participate in digitally mediated activities and services. Intersectionality theory by Crenshaw states that systems of oppression are inherently bound together, creating singular social experiences for people who bear the force of multiple adverse social structures.

CONCLUSIONS

A limitation of our initial sample was the sparse and undertheorized nature of the primary literature. The lack of attention to how digital health disparities emerge and play out both within and across categories of disadvantage means that solutions proposed to date may be oversimplistic and insufficient. Theories of multiple disadvantage have bearing on digital health, and there may be others of relevance besides those discussed in this paper. We call for greater interdisciplinary dialogue between theoretical research on multiple disadvantage and empirical studies on digital health disparities.

Assessing the potential for virtualizable care in the pediatric emergency department

INTRODUCTION

There is increasing interest for patient-to-provider telemedicine in pediatric acute care. The suitability of telemedicine (virtualizability) for visits in this setting has not been formally assessed. We estimated the proportion of in-person pediatric emergency department (PED) visits that were potentially virtualizable, and identified factors associated with virtualizable care.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of in-person visits at the PED of a Canadian tertiary pediatric hospital (02/2018-12/2019). Three definitions of virtualizable care were developed: (1) a definition based on "resource use" classifying visits as virtualizable if they resulted in a home discharge, no diagnostic testing, and no return visit within 72 h; (2) a "diagnostic definition" based on primary ED diagnosis; and (3) a stringent "combined definition" by which visits were classified as virtualizable if they met both the resource use and diagnostic definitions. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with telemedicine suitability.

RESULTS

There were 130,535 eligible visits from 80,727 individual patients during the study period. Using the most stringent combined definition of telemedicine suitability, 37.9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 37.6%-38.2%) of in-person visits were virtualizable. Overnight visits (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.16-1.37), non-Canadian citizenship (aOR 1.10-1.18), ethnocultural vulnerability (aOR 1.14-1.22), and a consultation for head trauma (aOR 3.50-4.60) were associated with higher telemedicine suitability across definitions.

DISCUSSION

There is a high potential for patient-to-provider telemedicine in the PED setting. Local patient and visit-level characteristics must be considered in the design of safe and inclusive telemedicine models for pediatric acute care.

Increased Revenue From Averted Missed Appointments Following Telemedicine Adoption at a Large Federally Qualified Health Center

This study examined savings from averted missed appointments following telemedicine adoption. Data were obtained from a large Federally Qualified Health Center in Texas during the early pandemic months. Patient encounters fell into one of three categories: (1) in-person visit, (2) telemedicine alone with no support team engagement, and (3) telemedicine with previsit support team engagement for device and connectivity testing. Our findings revealed that in-person visits had a 21% missed appointment rate compared to 19% for telemedicine alone and 15% for telemedicine with previsit support. Translating the reductions following both telemedicine encounters into net reimbursement, telemedicine alone saved the Federally Qualified Health Center $16 444 per month, while telemedicine + support team reduced missed appointments and saved the clinic an additional $29 134. The revenue from averted missed appointments totaled $45 578 per month. In conclusion, telemedicine reduced missed appointments, and these averted missed appointments translated into cost-savings. Savings were more pronounced with the implementation of a support team that conducted previsit device and connectivity testing.

Michigan Plan for Appropriate Tailored Healthcare in Pregnancy Prenatal Care Recommendations: A Practical Guide for Maternity Care Clinicians

Prenatal care is an important preventive service designed to improve the health of pregnant patients and their infants. Prenatal care delivery recommendations have remained unchanged since 1930, when the 12-14 in-person visit schedule was first established to detect preeclampsia. In 2020, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, in collaboration with the University of Michigan, convened a panel of maternity care experts to determine new prenatal care delivery recommendations. The panel recognized the need to include emerging evidence and experience, including significant changes in prenatal care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic, pre-existing knowledge of the importance of individualized care plans, the promise of telemedicine, and the significant influence of social and structural determinants of health (SSDoH) on pregnancy outcomes. Recommendations were derived using the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method, a rigorous e-Delphi method, and are designed to extend beyond the acute public health crisis. The resulting Michigan Plan for Appropriate Tailored Healthcare in pregnancy (MiPATH) includes recommendations for key aspects of prenatal care delivery: (1) the recommended number of prenatal visits, (2) the frequency of prenatal visits, (3) the role of monitoring routine pregnancy parameters (blood pressure, fetal heart tones, weight, and fundal height), (4) integration of telemedicine into routine care, and (5) inclusion of (SSDoH). Resulting recommendations demonstrate a new approach to prenatal care delivery that incorporates medical, SSDoH, and patient preferences, to develop individualized prenatal care delivery plans. The purpose of this document is to outline the new MiPATH recommendations and to provide practical guidance on implementing them in routine practice.

Do Patients Continue to Use Video Visits? Factors Related to Continued Video Visit Use

Many studies have assessed the factors associated with overall video visit use during the COVID-19 pandemic, but little is known about who is most likely to continue to use video visits and why. The authors combined a survey with electronic health record data to identify factors affecting the continued use of video visit. In August 2020, a stratified random sample of 20,000 active patients from a large health care system were invited to complete an email survey on health care seeking preferences during the COVID. Weighted logistic regression models were applied, adjusting for sampling frame and response bias, to identify factors associated with video visit experience, and separately for preference of continued use of video visits. Actual video visit utilization was also estimated within 12 months after the survey. Three thousand three hundred fifty-one (17.2%) patients completed the survey. Of these, 1208 (36%) reported having at least 1 video visit in the past, lowest for African American (33%) and highest for Hispanic (41%). Of these, 38% would prefer a video visit in the future. The strongest predictors of future video visit use were comfort using video interactions (odds ratio [OR] = 5.30, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 3.57-7.85) and satisfaction with the overall quality (OR = 3.94, 95% CI: 2.66-5.86). Interestingly, despite a significantly higher satisfaction for Hispanic (40%-55%) and African American (40%-50%) compared with Asian (29%-39%), Hispanic (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.12-0.88) and African American (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.16-0.90) were less likely to prefer a future video visit. Disparity exists in the use of video visit. The association between patient satisfaction and continued video visit varies by race/ethnicity, which may change the future long-term video visit use among race/ethnicity groups.

Clinical Use of an Electronic Pre-Visit Questionnaire Soliciting Patient Visit Goals and Interim History: A Retrospective Comparison Between Safety-net and Non-Safety-net Clinics

Introduction/Objectives

We examined an initial step towards co-generation of clinic notes by inviting patients to complete a pre-visit questionnaire that could be inserted into clinic notes by providers and describe the experience in a safety-net and non-safety-net clinic.

Methods

We sent an electronic pre-visit questionnaire on visit goals and interim history to patients at a safety-net clinic and a non-safety-net clinic before clinic visits. We compared questionnaire utilization between clinics during a one-year period and performed a chart review of a sample of patients to examine demographics, content and usage of patient responses to the questionnaire.

Results

While use was low in both clinics, it was lower in the safety-net clinic (3%) compared to the non-safety-net clinic (10%). We reviewed a sample of respondents and found they were more likely to be White compared to the overall clinic populations ( p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in patient-typed notes (word count and number of visit goals) between the safety-net and non-safety-net samples however, patients at the safety-net clinic were less likely to have all of their goals addressed within the PCP documentation, compared to the non-safety-net clinic.

Conclusions

Given potential benefits of this questionnaire as a communication tool, addressing barriers to use of technology among vulnerable patients is needed, including access to devices and internet, and support from caregivers or culturally concordant peer navigators.

The Waiting Room Assessment to Virtual Emergency Department pathway: Initiating video-based telemedicine in the pediatric emergency department

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented pediatric emergency departments with unique challenges, resulting in a heightened demand for adapted clinical pathways. In response to this need, the Montreal Children's Hospital pediatric emergency department introduced the WAVE (Waiting Room Assessment to Virtual Emergency Department) pathway, a video-based telemedicine pathway for selected non-critical patients, aiming to reduce safety issues related to emergency department overcrowding, while providing timely care to all children presenting and registering at our emergency department. The objective of the WAVE pilot phase was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of telemedicine in our pediatric emergency department, which was previously unfamiliar with this mode of care delivery. During the six-week, three-evening per week deployment, we conducted 18 five-hour telemedicine shifts. In total, 27 patients participated in the WAVE pathway. Results from this pilot phase met four of five a priori feasibility and acceptability criteria. Overall, participating families were satisfied with this novel care pathway and reported no disruptive technological barriers.

Cancer screening in the U.S. through the COVID-19 pandemic, recovery, and beyond

COVID-19 has proved enormously disruptive to the provision of cancer screening, which does not just represent an initial test but an entire process, including risk detection, diagnostic follow-up, and treatment. Successful delivery of services at all points in the process has been negatively affected by the pandemic. There is a void in empirical high-quality evidence to support a specific strategy for administering cancer screening during a pandemic and its resolution phase, but several pragmatic considerations can help guide prioritization efforts. Targeting guideline-eligible people who have never been screened, or those who are significantly out of date with screening, has the potential to maximize benefits now and into the future. Disruptions to care due to the pandemic could represent an unparalleled opportunity to reassess early detection programs towards an explicit, thoughtful, and just prioritization of populations historically experiencing cancer disparities. By focusing screening services on populations that have the most to gain, and by careful and deliberate planning for the period following the pandemic, we can positively affect cancer outcomes for all.

Breast cancer survivorship care during the COVID-19 pandemic within an urban New York Hospital System

Purpose

To examine clinicodemographic determinants associated with breast cancer survivorship follow-up during COVID-19.

Methods

We performed a retrospective, population-based cohort study including early stage (Stage I-II) breast cancer patients who underwent resection between 2006 and 2018 in a New York City hospital system. The primary outcome was oncologic follow-up prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Secondary analyses compared differences in follow-up by COVID-19 case rates stratified by ZIP code.

Results

A total of 2942 patients with early-stage breast cancer were available for analysis. 1588 (54%) of patients had attended follow-up in the year prior to the COVID-19 period but failed to continue to follow-up during the pandemic, either in-person or via telemedicine. 1242 (42%) patients attended a follow-up appointment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Compared with patients who did not present for follow-up during COVID-19, patients who continued their oncologic follow-up during the pandemic were younger (p = 0.049) more likely to have received adjuvant radiation therapy (p = 0.025), and have lower household income (p = 0.031) on multivariate modeling. When patients who live in Bronx, New York, were stratified by ZIP code, there was a modest negative association (r = −0.56) between COVID-19 cases and proportion of patients who continued to follow-up during the COVID-19 period.

Conclusion

We observed a dramatic disruption in routine breast cancer follow-up during the COVID-19 pandemic. Providers and health systems should emphasize reintegrating patients who missed appointments during COVID-19 back into regular surveillance programs to avoid significant morbidity and mortality from missed breast cancer recurrences.

•

A dramatic disruption in routine oncologic follow-up was observed during the COVID-19 period.

•

Over half of patients with breast cancer at our center did not attend routine oncologic follow-up during COVID-19.

•

Patients who were younger, had lower SES, and who received radiotherapy were more likely to follow-up during the pandemic.

•

A modest negative association was observed between local ZIP code COVID-19 infection rates and follow-up attendance rate.

Improving practice through collaboration: Early experiences from the multi-site Spinal Cord Injury Implementation and Evaluation Quality Care Consortium

CONTEXT

Dedicated implementation efforts are critical to bridging the gaps between current practices and best practices. A quality improvement collaborative (QIC), the Spinal Cord Injury Implementation and Evaluation Quality Care Consortium (SCI IEQCC), was established to meet this need, bringing together a network of clinicians and administrators to systematically improve the quality and equity of tertiary spinal cord injury or disease (SCI/D) rehabilitation care in Ontario, Canada.

METHODS

Clinicians and leaders from five tertiary SCI/D rehabilitation centers and two not-for-profit SCI/D advocacy groups comprised a network dedicated to supporting implementation of the SCI-High quality indicators in prioritized domains of SCI rehabilitation and related best practices by: (1) building capacity through implementation science education of frontline clinicians; (2) providing resources and support to empower frontline clinicians to lead quality improvement efforts within their institutions; (3) promoting wider learning through a network for sharing ideas, efforts, and experiences; and (4) collecting indicator data to facilitate provincial evaluation of goal attainment.

RESULTS

Network members and sites collaborated to implement best practices within six priority domains; in 18 months, significant progress has been made in emotional wellbeing, sexual health, walking, and wheeled mobility despite disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. These efforts encompass heterogeneous challenges and strategies, ranging from developing clinical skills programs, to streamlining processes, to manipulating physical space.

CONCLUSION

A QIC targeting SCI/D rehabilitation demonstrates promise for advancing the implementation of best practices, building implementation science capacity across multiple sites, and for promoting collaboration amongst SCI/D rehabilitation centers and organizational partners.

Growth of Ambulatory Virtual Visits and Differential Use by Patient Sociodemographics at One Urban Academic Medical Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Analysis

Background

Despite widespread interest in the use of virtual (ie, telephone and video) visits for ambulatory patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic, studies examining their adoption during the pandemic by race, sex, age, or insurance are lacking. Moreover, there have been limited evaluations to date of the impact of these sociodemographic factors on the use of telephone versus video visits. Such assessments are crucial to identify, understand, and address differences in care delivery across patient populations, particularly those that could affect access to or quality of care.

Objective

The aim of this study was to examine changes in ambulatory visit volume and type (ie, in-person vs virtual and telephone vs video visits) by patient sociodemographics during the COVID-19 pandemic at one urban academic medical center.

Methods

We compared volumes and patient sociodemographics (age, sex, race, insurance) for visits during the first 11 weeks following the COVID-19 national emergency declaration (March 15 to May 31, 2020) to visits in the corresponding weeks in 2019. Additionally, for visits during the COVID-19 study period, we examined differences in visit type (ie, in-person versus virtual, and telephone versus video visits) by sociodemographics using multivariate logistic regression.

Results

Total visit volumes in the COVID-19 study period comprised 51.4% of the corresponding weeks in 2019 (n=80,081 vs n=155,884 visits). Although patient sociodemographics between the COVID-19 study period in 2020 and the corresponding weeks in 2019 were similar, 60.5% (n=48,475) of the visits were virtual, compared to 0% in 2019. Of the virtual visits, 61.2% (n=29,661) were video based, and 38.8% (n=18,814) were telephone based. In the COVID-19 study period, virtual (vs in-person) visits were more likely among patients with race categorized as other (vs White) and patients with Medicare (vs commercial) insurance and less likely for men, patients aged 0-17 years, 65-74 years, or ≥75 years (compared to patients aged 18-45 years), and patients with Medicaid insurance or insurance categorized as other. Among virtual visits, compared to telephone visits, video visits were more likely to be adopted by patients aged 0-17 years (vs 18-45 years), but less likely for all other age groups, men, Black (vs White) patients, and patients with Medicare or Medicaid (vs commercial) insurance.

Conclusions

Virtual visits comprised the majority of ambulatory visits during the COVID-19 study period, of which a majority were by video. Sociodemographic differences existed in the use of virtual versus in-person and video versus telephone visits. To ensure equitable care delivery, we present five policy recommendations to inform the further development of virtual visit programs and their reimbursement.