Inpatient Hepatitis C Screening, Health Disparities, and Inadequate Linkage to Outpatient Care at a Large Academic Medical Center

2017 ◽  
Vol 152 (5) ◽  
pp. S1190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amit Mehta ◽  
Carrie Down ◽  
Nicole T. Shen ◽  
Sonal Kumar
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Winetsky ◽  
Jason Zucker ◽  
Jacek Slowikowski ◽  
Matthew Scherer ◽  
Elizabeth C Verna ◽  
...  

Abstract In December 2017, our academic medical center implemented universal hepatitis C virus screening among adult hospitalized patients. We reviewed charts of patients screening positive outside the birth cohort (1945–1965) in the first 6 months after implementation. Documented risk factors were common in younger patients but rare in patients born before 1945.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (11) ◽  
pp. 1355-1358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Winetsky ◽  
Jason Zucker ◽  
Caroline Carnevale ◽  
Deborah Theodore ◽  
Matthew Scherer ◽  
...  

PRiMER ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce E. Balls-Berry ◽  
Eddie Greene ◽  
Jennifer McCormick ◽  
Onelis Quirindongo-Cedeno ◽  
Karen Weavers ◽  
...  

Introduction: Lack of health equity ultimately leads to unequal treatment of diverse patients and contributes to the growing disparities seen in national health. Academic medical centers should consider providing health care providers and biomedical researchers training on how to identify and address health disparities. Methods: The authors led an introductory health disparities course for graduate students and research and clinical fellows at an academic medical center in the Midwest. We compared pre/postcourse assessments to determine changes in learners’ perceptions and knowledge of health disparities using an unpaired analysis to permit inclusion of responses provided only at baseline. Results: Sixty-two learners completed preassessment, with 56 completing the postassessment (90%). In the postcourse assessment, learners reported an increase in knowledge of disparities and had changes in their perceptions of health disparities linked to treatment of different patient groups based on demographic characteristics. There was a statistically significant difference in learners’ perceptions of how patients are treated based on gender identity (P=0.02) and sexual orientation (P=0.04). Conclusions: The results detail how an academic medical center can provide training on health disparities for diverse learners. This study underscores the influence of health disparities from the perspective of learners who conduct biomedical research and patient care. This course serves a model for introductory-level health disparities courses.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S645-S646
Author(s):  
Hayley Crossman ◽  
Mehdi Tavakol ◽  
Chris Freise ◽  
Peter Chin-Hong

Abstract Background Increased utilization of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected organs could reduce the supply–demand mismatch in organ transplantation. It is important to determine precise outcomes of HCV-positive organs transplanted into HCV-positive recipients (HCV D+\R+) to quantify risk for patients and other stakeholders. Small studies have identified shorter wait times in HCV D+\R+ compared with HCV-negative donor and HCV-positive recipients (HCV D−\R+), but there is little information about survival and rejection in the era of effective direct-acting antivirals (DAA). Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of all cases of renal transplantation involving HCV-positive recipients at an academic medical center from 2008 to 2019. We extracted data using the institutional electronic transplant database. Demographics, incidence of organ rejection, renal function and patient mortality data were compared between HCV D+\R+ and HCV D−\R+. Results Among 3,781 patients who received a kidney transplant between 2008–19, 139 were HCV D-\R+ and 51 were HCV D+\R+. Both groups had similar waiting list time (1,196 ± 889 days vs. 1,301 ± 1240 days, P > 0.20), donor mean age (37 ± 11 y vs. 39 ± 13 years, P > 0.20) and sex (female: 37% vs. 42%, P > 0.20). Follow-up time was similar between both groups (5.2 ± 4 years vs. 5.3 ± 3 years, P > 0.20). The incidence of mortality (16% vs. 17%, P > 0.20) [Figure 1] and rejection (18% vs. 19%, P > 0.20) [Figure 2] was similar between two groups. Using a Cox Hazards model, we found no association between HCV D+/R+ and increasing risk of rejection (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.43–1.95, P > 0.20) or mortality (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.42–2.1, P > 0.20). In a multivariate analysis, age was the only independent risk factor for HCV D+/R+ mortality (HR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.03–1.14, P < 0.001). Conclusion Patients who are HCV-positive did not have worse mortality or graft rejection if they received HCV-positive kidneys compared with HCV-negative kidneys. Providers can use these data to give specific risk information to HCV-positive patients about accepting an HCV-positive kidney for transplant, even perhaps encouraging it. Increasing the utilization of HCV-positive kidneys for transplantation in the era of effective DAA has the potential to offer life-saving treatment to substantially more patients. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document