Community Health Worker Intervention in Subsidized Housing: New York City, 2016-2017

Preventative behavioural interventions that reduce health inequities: a systematic review using the theoretical domains framework

BACKGROUND

Wider determinants of health, such as the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age influence health and well-being, often contributing to health inequities. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify preventative behavioural interventions that reduce health inequities or inequalities and to analyse which theoretical domains have been used in the intervention design and implementation.

METHODS

Behavioural interventions that reduced health inequities and inequalities were identified with use of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Interventions that were aimed at individuals within the axes of inequality and used the TDF in the design and implementation met our inclusion criteria. Periodicals indexed in EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library databases were selected to undertake this review. Grey literature was sought from UK local government organisations, as the sector with significant influence over these determinants. A minimum of two independent reviewers used standardised methods to search, screen, critically appraise and synthesise included studies.

RESULTS

This systematic review identified a total of 41 articles which includes n = 33 primary studies and n = 8 local government reports of behavioural interventions that reduce inequalities for populations within the axes of inequality. Most of the evidence demonstrated that behavioural interventions significantly improved health outcomes and contributed towards positive behavioural changes in health and well-being. A large proportion of the evidence base consist of interventions focusing on diet and exercise uptake (n = 15) specifically aimed at ethnic minorities and those of immigrants and refugee status.

CONCLUSION

Most of the included studies incorporated elements from contemporary behavioural theory. Most health interventions identified in this review included a component to raise awareness and educate their target audience. However, whilst there was often an evidenced based rationale for use of a preventative behavioural intervention, specific frameworks were rarely used to align problems with solutions in a theoretically defined manner.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42024553898.

Understanding the Public Health Role, Motivations, and Perceptions of Community Health Workers Deployed to Low-Income Housing in Richmond, Virginia

BACKGROUND

For the US health indicators to improve to the level of other developed countries, the use of Community Health Workers (CHWs) in vulnerable populations has been indicated as a possible long-term intervention. There are few models of long-term deployment of CHWs as part of the district level public health system in the US.

METHOD

In this study we interviewed CHWs who served as neighborhood-integrated health district staff assigned to low-income housing in Richmond, Virginia for 10 years. Qualitative analyses of their taped and transcribed interviews resulted in 5 themes from the interviews. The themes were Activities, Satisfaction, Strengths, Facilitation/Resources and Challenges. We highlighted quotes from the CHWs interviews for themes and summarized the findings from each theme.

RESULTS

CHWs carried out a variety of activities daily and these were described. The CHWs were generally satisfied with their job because it enabled them to assist others. The strength of their communities was resilience, and the resources they needed more included physical resources, human resources, political support, and more comprehensive programming. Their client's challenges include transportation, mental health, and physical safety and the CHWs challenge to effectively carrying out their work with clients was trust by community members.

CONCLUSION

The information garnered from the CHWs would be useful in designing CHW programs at other health districts.

Effectiveness of a Community Health Worker-Driven Intervention in Improving the Quality of Life of Caregivers of Children With Disability in Rural Karnataka, India

Purpose To assess the effectiveness of a community-health-worker (CHW)-driven intervention in improving the quality of life (QOL) of caregivers of children with disability in rural Karnataka, India. Methodology A community-based quasi-experimental study with cluster randomization on the village level was done. CHWs provided structured health education and training for the intervention arm. Pre- and post-intervention, the QOL and Zarit burden scores were compared between and within the two arms. Results From baseline, the physical domain score improved from 49.66 to 53.88 (p < 0.001). The Zarit burden scores decreased from 33.27 to 28.89 (p < 0.001). On comparing the post-test QOL scores between the two arms, the physical domain scores increased from 51.68 to 56.08 (p = 0.025). The Zarit burden scores also significantly decreased from 31.50 to 26.28. Conclusion The intervention by the CHWs on the caregivers has significant improvements in the physical domain of QOL and a reduction in caregiver burden.

Racial Health Equity and Social Needs Interventions: A Review of a Scoping Review

Importance

Social needs interventions aim to improve health outcomes and mitigate inequities by addressing health-related social needs, such as lack of transportation or food insecurity. However, it is not clear whether these studies are reducing racial or ethnic inequities.

Objective

To understand how studies of interventions addressing social needs among multiracial or multiethnic populations conceptualize and analyze differential intervention outcomes by race or ethnicity.

Evidence Review

Sources included a scoping review of systematic searches of PubMed and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 1995, through November 29, 2021, expert suggestions, and hand searches of key citations. Eligible studies evaluated interventions addressing social needs; reported behavioral, health, or utilization outcomes or harms; and were conducted in multiracial or multiethnic populations. Two reviewers independently assessed titles, abstracts, and full text for inclusion. The team developed a framework to assess whether the study was "conceptually thoughtful" for understanding root causes of racial health inequities (ie, noted that race or ethnicity are markers of exposure to racism) and whether analyses were "analytically informative" for advancing racial health equity research (ie, examined differential intervention impacts by race or ethnicity).

Findings

Of 152 studies conducted in multiracial or multiethnic populations, 44 studies included race or ethnicity in their analyses; of these, only 4 (9%) were conceptually thoughtful. Twenty-one studies (14%) were analytically informative. Seven of 21 analytically informative studies reported differences in outcomes by race or ethnicity, whereas 14 found no differences. Among the 7 that found differential outcomes, 4 found the interventions were associated with improved outcomes for minoritized racial or ethnic populations or reduced inequities between minoritized and White populations. No studies were powered to detect differences.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this review of a scoping review, studies of social needs interventions in multiracial or multiethnic populations were rarely conceptually thoughtful for understanding root causes of racial health inequities and infrequently conducted informative analyses on intervention effectiveness by race or ethnicity. Future work should use a theoretically sound conceptualization of how race (as a proxy for racism) affects social drivers of health and use this understanding to ensure social needs interventions benefit minoritized racial and ethnic groups facing social and structural barriers to health.

The Role of Community Health Workers in Developing Multidimensional Organizational Relationships

Effective care coordination relies on organizations working collaboratively to meet medically and socially complex participants' needs. This study examines community health workers' (CHWs') roles in developing the organizational relationships on which care coordination efforts depend. Semistructured interviews (n = 13) were conducted with CHWs, CHWs' supervisors, and executive staff at organizations participating in a Washington State care coordination program. Interviewees described how CHWs developed and furthered multidimensional relationships in service of participants between and within participating organizations, as well as external organizations. Relationship-building challenges included COVID-19, geographic context, and staffing. The study concludes with considerations for care coordination efforts to support CHWs.

A Case Study of a Community Health Worker Program Located in Low-Income Housing in Richmond, Virginia

We reviewed data from the electronic health data system used by Community Health Workers (CHWs) in the Richmond/Henrico Health District of the Virginia Department of Health from January 1^st 2013 to December 31st 2020, to map the Community Health Workers’ impact on Social Determinants of Health. We also interviewed the CHWs to obtain demographic information and information about the challenges their communities face. Most referrals were for Healthcare Access (48.7%) and Economic Stability (38.3%), while Neighborhood and Built Environment (0.09%) was the least used referral in the Social Determinants of Health during the time under review. Community Health Workers also carried out 1367 and 565 Blood Pressure and Blood Sugar measurements respectively during the period. The Community Health workers were all women and their education ranged from High School graduate to Master’s degree graduate and they served as Community Health Workers for time ranging from 1 to 8 years. We found their answers to the questions on the issue plaguing the community they serve to indicate empathy and understanding of the issues of low-income communities. Having CHWs working as part of the public health system to deliver health promotion and provide referrals for social determinants of health could serve as a model for improving health access and impacting Social Determinants of Health positively for low-income populations across the country.

Screening and Interventions for Social Risk Factors: Technical Brief to Support the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Evidence-based guidance is limited on how clinicians should screen for social risk factors and which interventions related to these risk factors improve health outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To describe research on screening and interventions for social risk factors to inform US Preventive Services Task Force considerations of the implications for its portfolio of recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Sociological Abstracts, and Social Services Abstracts (through 2018); Social Interventions Research and Evaluation Network evidence library (January 2019 through May 2021); surveillance through May 21, 2021; interviews with 17 key informants.

STUDY SELECTION

Individual-level and health care system-level interventions with a link to the health care system that addressed at least 1 of 7 social risk domains: housing instability, food insecurity, transportation difficulties, utility needs, interpersonal safety, education, and financial strain.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

One investigator abstracted data from studies and a second investigator evaluated data abstractions for completeness and accuracy; key informant interviews were recorded, transcribed, summarized, and integrated with evidence from the literature; narrative synthesis with supporting tables and figures.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Validity of multidomain social risk screening tools; all outcomes reported for social risk-related interventions; challenges or unintended consequences of screening and interventions.

RESULTS

Many multidomain social risk screening tools have been developed, but they vary widely in their assessment of social risk and few have been validated. This technical brief identified 106 social risk intervention studies (N = 5 978 596). Of the interventions studied, 73 (69%; n = 127 598) addressed multiple social risk domains. The most frequently addressed domains were food insecurity (67/106 studies [63%], n = 141 797), financial strain (52/106 studies [49%], n = 111 962), and housing instability (63/106 studies [59%], n = 5 881 222). Food insecurity, housing instability, and transportation difficulties were identified by key informants as the most important social risk factors to identify in health care. Thirty-eight studies (36%, n = 5 850 669) used an observational design with no comparator, and 19 studies (18%, n = 15 205) were randomized clinical trials. Health care utilization measures were the most commonly reported outcomes in the 68 studies with a comparator (38 studies [56%], n = 111 102). The literature and key informants described many perceived or potential challenges to implementation of social risk screening and interventions in health care.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Many interventions to address food insecurity, financial strain, and housing instability have been studied, but more randomized clinical trials that report health outcomes from social risk screening and intervention are needed to guide widespread implementation in health care.

Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-Up Study in Vulnerable Populations: 1-Month Feasibility Results

Purpose/Aim: In the United States, high rates of vision impairment and eye disease disproportionately impact those who lack access to eye care, specifically vulnerable populations. The objective of our study was to test instruments, implement protocols, and collect preliminary data for a larger 5-year study, which aims to improve detection of eye diseases and follow-up eye care in vulnerable populations using community health workers (CHW) and patient navigators. In the study, trained CHWs conducted vision screening and patient navigators scheduled on-site eye exams and arranged appointments for those referred to ophthalmology to improve adherence to follow-up eye care.Materials and Methods: Eligible individuals age 40-and-older were recruited from the Riverstone Senior Center in Upper Manhattan, New York City. Participants underwent on-site vision screening (visual acuity with correction, intraocular pressure measurements, and fundus photography). Individuals who failed the vision screening were scheduled with an on-site optometrist for an eye exam; those with ocular pathologies were referred to an ophthalmologist. Participants were also administered the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-8 (NEI-VFQ-8) and Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths, and Injuries (STEADI) test by community health workers.Results:Participants (n = 42) were predominantly older adults, with a mean age of 70.0 ± 9.8, female (61.9%), and Hispanic (78.6%). Most individuals (78.6%, n = 33) failed vision screening. Of those who failed, 84.8% (n = 28) attended the on-site eye exam with the optometrist. Ocular diagnoses: refractive error 13/28 (46.4%), glaucoma/glaucoma suspect 9/28 (32.1%), cataract 7/28 (25.0%), retina abnormalities 6/28 (21.4%); 13 people required eyeglasses.Conclusion: This study demonstrates the feasibility of using CHWs and patient navigators for reducing barriers to vision screening and optometrist-based eye exams in vulnerable populations, ultimately improving early detection of eye disease and linking individuals to additional eye care appointments. The full five-year study aims to further examine these outcomes.

Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-up Study in Vulnerable Populations (NYC-SIGHT): Design and Methodology

PRCIS

The Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-up Study in Vulnerable Populations is a 5-year prospective, cluster-randomized study to improve detection and management of glaucoma and other eye diseases in vulnerable populations living in affordable housing developments.

PURPOSE

To describe the study design and methodology of the Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-up Study in Vulnerable Populations, which aims to investigate whether community-based vision screenings can improve detection and management of glaucoma, vision impairment, cataract, and other eye diseases among vulnerable populations living in affordable housing developments in upper Manhattan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This 5-year prospective, cluster-randomized, controlled trial consists of vision screening and referral for follow-up eye care among eligible residents aged 40 and older. Visual acuity, intraocular pressure (IOP), and fundus photography are measured. Participants with visual worse than 20/40, or IOP 23 to 29 mm Hg, or unreadable fundus images fail the screening and are scheduled with the on-site optometrist. Those with an abnormal image and/or IOP ≥30 mm Hg, are assigned as "fast-track" and referred to ophthalmology. Participants living in 7 developments randomized to the Enhanced Intervention Group who fail the screening and need vision correction receive complimentary eyeglasses. Those referred to ophthalmology receive enhanced support with patient navigators to assist with follow-up eye care. Participants living in 3 developments randomized to the Usual Care Group who fail the screening and need vision correction are given an eyeglasses prescription only and a list of optical shops. No enhanced support is given to the Usual Care Group. All participants referred to ophthalmology are assisted in making their initial eye exam appointment.

CONCLUSION

This study targets vulnerable populations where they live to ensure improved access to and utilization of eye care services in those who are least likely to seek eye care.