Healthcare fragmentation and cardiovascular risk control among older cancer survivors in the Reasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study

Barriers for access and utilization of dementia care services in Europe: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Dementia is a group of chronic diseases characterised by cognitive impairment that progressively disrupts daily functioning and requires increasing levels of healthcare, social support, and long-term care. Support for people with dementia can be provided by formal support systems although most of the care process relies upon informal care givers. Despite the availability of formal support systems and healthcare workers, the utilization of dementia care services remains suboptimal. Factors such as non-compliance, lack of awareness, and poor care coordination contribute to this issue. Understanding these barriers is crucial for improving service utilization and alleviating the economic burden on families and national health systems.

METHODS

This systematic review analysed the literature, published from 2013 to 2023, on barriers in Alzheimer and other dementia healthcare system, conducted on people living with a dementia, their caregivers, or healthcare workers in dementia care settings in Europe, following PRISMA guidelines. Searches in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Health Technology Assessment Database, and Web of Science used terms related to Alzheimer's, dementia, and access barriers. Rayyan AI supported full-text review, with quality assessed via the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

RESULTS

Over 1298 articles, 29 studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies highlighted several barriers to dementia care, categorised into information, organizational, cultural, stigma-related, financial, and logistical challenges. Informational and educational barriers included a lack of awareness and knowledge among caregivers. Organizational barriers involved poor care coordination and unclear access procedures. Cultural and stigma-related barriers were linked to societal attitudes towards dementia. Financial barriers were associated with the high costs of care, and logistical barriers included limited availability and accessibility of support services.

CONCLUSIONS

To enhance the quality of life for individuals living with dementia, it is crucial to address these identified barriers through tailored interventions and management programs. Improving care coordination, communication, and training for healthcare professionals, alongside reducing systemic delays, are essential steps toward more effective dementia care. Easing the burden of care with tailored interventions and management programmes is mandatory to improve the quality of life of persons living with dementia and their families.

Predict Health Care Accessibility for Texas Medicaid Gap

Medicaid is a unique approach in ensuring the below poverty population obtains free insurance coverage under federal and state provisions in the United States. Twelve states without expanded Medicaid caused two million people who were under the poverty line into health insecurity. Principal Component-based logistical regression (PCA-LA) is used to consider health status (HS) as a dependent variable and fourteen social-economic indexes as independent variables. Four composite components incorporated health conditions (i.e., “no regular source of care” (NRC), “last check-up more than a year ago” (LCT)), demographic impacts (i.e., four categorized adults (AS)), education (ED), and marital status (MS). Compared to the unadjusted LA, direct adjusted LA, and PCA-unadjusted LA three methods, the PCA-LA approach exhibited objective and reasonable outcomes in presenting an odd ratio (OR). They included that health condition is positively significant to HS due to beyond one OR, and negatively significant to ED, AS, and MS. This paper provided quantitative evidence for the Medicaid gap in Texas to extend Medicaid, exposed healthcare geographical inequity, offered a sight for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to improve the Medicaid program and make political justice for the Medicaid gap.

Social determinants of health and cancer mortality in the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) cohort study

BACKGROUND

Social determinants of health (SDOHs) cluster together and can have deleterious impacts on health outcomes. Individually, SDOHs increase the risk of cancer mortality, but their cumulative burden is not well understood. The authors sought to determine the combined effect of SDOH on cancer mortality.

METHODS

Using the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) cohort, the authors studied 29,766 participants aged 45+ years and followed them 10+ years. Eight potential SDOHs were considered, and retained SDOHs that were associated with cancer mortality (P < .10) were retained to create a count (0, 1, 2, 3+). Cox proportional hazard models estimated associations between the SDOH count and cancer mortality through December 31, 2017, adjusting for confounders. Models were age-stratified (45-64 vs 65+ years).

RESULTS

Participants were followed for a median of 10.6 years (interquartile range [IQR], 6.5, 12.7 years). Low education, low income, zip code poverty, poor public health infrastructure, lack of health insurance, and social isolation were significantly associated with cancer mortality. In adjusted models, among those <65 years, compared to no SDOHs, having 1 SDOH (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.11-1.75), 2 SDOHs (aHR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.26-2.07), and 3+ SDOHs (aHR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.58-2.75) were associated with cancer mortality (P for trend <.0001). Among individuals 65+ years, compared to no SDOH, having 1 SDOH (aHR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.00-1.35) and 3+ SDOHs (aHR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.04-1.52) was associated with cancer mortality (P for trend = .032).

CONCLUSIONS

A greater number of SDOHs were significantly associated with an increased risk of cancer mortality, which persisted after adjustment for confounders.

Thirty-Day Post-Discharge Outcomes Following COVID-19 Infection

BACKGROUND

The clinical course of COVID-19 includes multiple disease phases. Data describing post-hospital discharge outcomes may provide insight into disease course. Studies describing post-hospitalization outcomes of adults following COVID-19 infection are limited to electronic medical record review, which may underestimate the incidence of outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine 30-day post-hospitalization outcomes following COVID-19 infection.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study SETTING: Quaternary referral hospital and community hospital in New York City.

PARTICIPANTS

COVID-19 infected patients discharged alive from the emergency department (ED) or hospital between March 3 and May 15, 2020.

MEASUREMENT

Outcomes included return to an ED, re-hospitalization, and mortality within 30 days of hospital discharge.

RESULTS

Thirty-day follow-up data were successfully collected on 94.6% of eligible patients. Among 1344 patients, 16.5% returned to an ED, 9.8% were re-hospitalized, and 2.4% died. Among patients who returned to the ED, 50.0% (108/216) went to a different hospital from the hospital of the index presentation, and 61.1% (132/216) of those who returned were re-hospitalized. In Cox models adjusted for variables selected using the lasso method, age (HR 1.01 per year [95% CI 1.00-1.02]), diabetes (1.54 [1.06-2.23]), and the need for inpatient dialysis (3.78 [2.23-6.43]) during the index presentation were independently associated with a higher re-hospitalization rate. Older age (HR 1.08 [1.05-1.11]) and Asian race (2.89 [1.27-6.61]) were significantly associated with mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients discharged alive following their index presentation for COVID-19, risk for returning to a hospital within 30 days of discharge was substantial. These patients merit close post-discharge follow-up to optimize outcomes.

Fragmentation of Care Among Black Women With Breast Cancer and Comorbidities: The Role of Health Systems

PURPOSE

Black women are disproportionately burdened by comorbidities and breast cancer. The complexities of coordinating care for multiple health conditions can lead to adverse consequences. Care coordination may be exacerbated when care is received outside the same health system, defined as care fragmentation. We examine types of practice setting for primary and breast cancer care to assess care fragmentation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed data from a prospective cohort of Black women diagnosed with breast cancer in New Jersey who also had a prior diagnosis of diabetes and/or hypertension (N = 228). Following breast cancer diagnosis, we examined types of practice setting for first primary care visit and primary breast surgery, through medical chart abstraction, and identified whether care was used within or outside the same health system. We used multivariable logistic regression to explore sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with care fragmentation.

RESULTS

Diverse primary care settings were used: medical groups (32.0%), health systems (29.4%), solo practices (23.7%), Federally Qualified Health Centers (8.3%), and independent hospitals (6.1%). Surgical care predominately occurred in health systems (79.8%), with most hospitals being Commission on Cancer-accredited. Care fragmentation was experienced by 78.5% of Black women, and individual-level factors (age, health insurance, cancer stage, and comorbidity count) were not associated with care fragmentation (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

The majority of Black breast cancer survivors with comorbidities received primary care and surgical care in different health systems, illustrating care fragmentation. Strategies for care coordination and health care delivery across health systems and practice settings are needed for health equity.