Racial Differences in the Use of Epidural Analgesia for Labor

2007 ◽  
Vol 106 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurent G. Glance ◽  
Richard . Wissler ◽  
Christopher Glantz ◽  
Turner M. Osler ◽  
Dana B. Mukamel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Epidural Analgesia ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Adjusted Odds Ratio ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Insurance Coverage ◽  
Black Patients ◽  
Hispanic Patients ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Hispanic White

Background There is strong evidence that pain is undertreated in black and Hispanic patients. The association between race and ethnicity and the use of epidural analgesia for labor is not well described. Methods Using the New York State Perinatal Database, the authors examined whether race and ethnicity were associated with the likelihood of receiving epidural analgesia for labor after adjusting for clinical characteristics, demographics, insurance coverage, and provider effect. This retrospective cohort study was based on 81,883 women admitted for childbirth between 1998 and 2003. Results Overall, 38.3% of the patients received epidural analgesia for labor. After adjusting for clinical risk factors, socioeconomic status, and provider fixed effects, Hispanic and black patients were less likely than non-Hispanic white patients to receive epidural analgesia: The adjusted odds ratio was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.78-0.93) for white/Hispanic and 0.78 (0.74-0.83) for blacks compared with non-Hispanic whites. Compared with patients with private insurance, patients without insurance were least likely to receive epidural analgesia (adjusted odds ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.89). Black patients with private insurance had similar rates of epidural use to white/non-Hispanic patients without insurance coverage: The adjusted odds ratio was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.53-0.82) for white/non-Hispanic patients without insurance versus 0.69 (0.57-0.85) for black patients with private insurance. Conclusion Black and Hispanic women in labor are less likely than non-Hispanic white women to receive epidural analgesia. These differences remain after accounting for differences in insurance coverage, provider practice, and clinical characteristics.

scholarly journals Racial and ethnic disparities in discharge to rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury

2015 ◽  
Vol 122 (3) ◽  
pp. 595-601 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley D. Meagher ◽  
Christopher A. Beadles ◽  
Jennifer Doorey ◽  
Anthony G. Charles
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Racial Disparities ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Insurance Coverage ◽  
Inpatient Rehabilitation ◽  
Discharge Destination ◽  
Black Patients ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Hispanic White

OBJECT Disparities in access to inpatient rehabilitation services after traumatic brain injury (TBI) have been identified, but less well described is the likelihood of discharge to a higher level of rehabilitation for Hispanic or black patients compared with non-Hispanic white patients. The authors investigate racial disparities in discharge destination (inpatient rehabilitation vs skilled nursing facility vs home health vs home) following TBI by using a nationwide database and methods to address racial differences in prehospital characteristics. METHODS Analysis of discharge destination for adults with moderate to severe TBI was performed using National Trauma Data Bank data for the years 2007–2010. The authors performed propensity score weighting followed by ordered logistic regression in their analytical sample and in a subgroup analysis of older adults with Medicare. Likelihood of discharge to a higher level of rehabilitation based on race/ethnicity accounting for prehospital and in-hospital variables was determined. RESULTS The authors identified 299,205 TBI incidents: 232,392 non-Hispanic white, 29,611 Hispanic, and 37,202 black. Propensity weighting resulted in covariate balance among racial groups. Hispanic (adjusted OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.68–0.75) and black (adjusted OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.91–0.97) populations were less likely to be discharged to a higher level of rehabilitation than were non-Hispanic whites. The subgroup analysis indicated that Hispanic (adjusted OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71–0.86) and black (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81–0.94) populations were still less likely to receive a higher level of rehabilitation, despite uniform insurance coverage (Medicare). CONCLUSIONS Adult Hispanic and black patients with TBI are significantly less likely to receive intensive rehabilitation than their non-Hispanic white counterparts; notably, this difference persists in the Medicare population (age ≥ 65 years), indicating that uniform insurance coverage alone does not account for the disparity. Given that insurance coverage and a wide range of prehospital characteristics do not eliminate racial disparities in discharge destination, it is crucial that additional unmeasured patient, physician, and institutional factors be explored to eliminate them.

scholarly journals Racial Disparities in the SOFA Score Among Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Tolchin ◽  
Carol Oladele ◽  
Deron Galusha ◽  
Nitu Kashyap ◽  
Mary Showstark ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sofa Score ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Medical Resources ◽  
Black Patients ◽  
Hispanic Patients ◽  
Design And Methods ◽  
Hispanic White ◽  
White Patients

AbstractBackgroundSequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score predicts probability of in-hospital mortality. Many crisis standards of care use SOFA score to allocate medical resources during the COVID-19 pandemic.Research QuestionAre SOFA scores disproportionately elevated among Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients hospitalized with COVID-19, compared to Non-Hispanic White patients?Study Design and MethodsRetrospective cohort study conducted in Yale New Haven Health System, including 5 hospitals with total of 2681 beds. Study population drawn from consecutive patients aged ≥18 admitted with COVID-19 from March 29th to August 1st, 2020. Patients excluded from the analysis if not their first admission with COVID-19, if they did not have SOFA score recorded within 24 hours of admission, if race and ethnicity data were not Non-Hispanic Black, Non-Hispanic White, or Hispanic, or if they had other missing data. The primary outcomes was SOFA score, with peak score within 24 hours of admission dichotomized as <6 or ≥6.ResultsOf 2982 patients admitted with COVID-19, 2320 met inclusion criteria and were analyzed, of whom 1058 (45.6%) were Non-Hispanic White, 645 (27.8%) were Hispanic, and 617 (26.6%) were Non-Hispanic Black. Median age was 65.0 and 1226 (52.8%) were female. In univariate logistic screen and in full multivariate model, Non-Hispanic Black patients but not Hispanic patients had greater odds of an elevated SOFA score ≥6 when compared to Non-Hispanic White patients (OR 1.49, 95%CI 1.11-1.99).InterpretationCrisis standards of care utilizing the SOFA score to allocate medical resources would be more likely to deny these resources to Non-Hispanic Black patients.

scholarly journals Racial disparities in the SOFA score among patients hospitalized with COVID-19

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0257608
Author(s):  
Benjamin Tolchin ◽  
Carol Oladele ◽  
Deron Galusha ◽  
Nitu Kashyap ◽  
Mary Showstark ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sofa Score ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Medical Resources ◽  
Black Patients ◽  
Hispanic Patients ◽  
Design And Methods ◽  
Hispanic White ◽  
White Patients

Background Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score predicts probability of in-hospital mortality. Many crisis standards of care suggest the use of SOFA scores to allocate medical resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. Research question Are SOFA scores elevated among Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients hospitalized with COVID-19, compared to Non-Hispanic White patients? Study design and methods Retrospective cohort study conducted in Yale New Haven Health System, including 5 hospitals with total of 2681 beds. Study population drawn from consecutive patients aged ≥18 admitted with COVID-19 from March 29th to August 1st, 2020. Patients excluded from the analysis if not their first admission with COVID-19, if they did not have SOFA score recorded within 24 hours of admission, if race and ethnicity data were not Non-Hispanic Black, Non-Hispanic White, or Hispanic, or if they had other missing data. The primary outcome was SOFA score, with peak score within 24 hours of admission dichotomized as <6 or ≥6. Results Of 2982 patients admitted with COVID-19, 2320 met inclusion criteria and were analyzed, of whom 1058 (45.6%) were Non-Hispanic White, 645 (27.8%) were Hispanic, and 617 (26.6%) were Non-Hispanic Black. Median age was 65.0 and 1226 (52.8%) were female. In univariate logistic screen and in full multivariate model, Non-Hispanic Black patients but not Hispanic patients had greater odds of an elevated SOFA score ≥6 when compared to Non-Hispanic White patients (OR 1.49, 95%CI 1.11–1.99). Interpretation Given current unequal patterns in social determinants of health, US crisis standards of care utilizing the SOFA score to allocate medical resources would be more likely to deny these resources to Non-Hispanic Black patients.

Labor Analgesia and Cesarean Delivery

2004 ◽  
Vol 100 (1) ◽  
pp. 142-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiv K. Sharma ◽  
Donald D. McIntire ◽  
Jackie Wiley ◽  
Kenneth J. Leveno
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Epidural Analgesia ◽  
Cesarean Delivery ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Adjusted Odds Ratio ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Opioid Analgesia ◽  
Cesarean Deliveries ◽  
Nulliparous Women ◽  
To Receive

Background The authors performed an individual patient meta-analysis of 2,703 nulliparous women who were randomized to either epidural analgesia or intravenous opioids for pain relief during labor from five trials conducted at their hospital. The primary purpose in this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of epidural analgesia during labor on the rate of cesarean delivery. Methods Between November 1, 1993, and November 3, 2000, 2,703 nulliparous women (2,188 healthy parturients and 515 women with pregnancy-induced hypertension) in spontaneous labor at term were randomized to receive either epidural analgesia or intravenous opioid analgesia in the five studies. Epidural analgesia was initiated with either epidural bupivacaine or intrathecal sufentanil and was maintained with a low-dose (0.0625% or 0.125%) mixture of bupivacaine with fentanyl. Intravenous opioid analgesia was initiated with 50 mg meperidine and 25 mg promethazine hydrochloride and was maintained with intravenous boluses of meperidine as needed. Results A total of 1,339 nulliparous women were randomized to receive epidural analgesia, and 1,364 women were randomized to receive intravenous meperidine analgesia. There was no difference in the rate of cesarean deliveries between the two analgesia groups (epidural analgesia, 10.5% [140 of 1,339] vs. intravenous meperidine analgesia, 10.3% [141 of 1,364]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-1.34; P = 0.920). Significantly more women randomized to epidural analgesia had forceps deliveries compared to meperidine analgesia (13% [172 of 1,339] vs. 7% [101 of 1,364]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-2.40; P &lt; 0.001). Epidural women had longer first and second stages of labor. Women who received epidural analgesia reported lower pain scores during labor and delivery compared to women who received intravenous meperidine analgesia. Conclusion Epidural analgesia compared to intravenous meperidine analgesia during labor does not increase the number of cesarean deliveries.

Health Insurance Differentials Among Minority Children With Chronic Conditions and the Role of Federal Agencies and Private Foundations in Improving Financial Access

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 91 (5) ◽  
pp. 1040-1047
Author(s):  
Margaret A. McManus ◽  
Paul Newacheck
Keyword(s):  
Health Insurance ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Health Care Policy ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Insurance Coverage ◽  
Minority Population ◽  
Hispanic Children ◽  
Health Services Use ◽  
Financial Barriers ◽  
White Children

Minorities experience a disproportionate share of the financial barriers resulting from higher rates of uninsuredness and a greater reliance on Medicaid vs private insurance. As a result, health services use and patterns of expenditures vary markedly by race and ethnicity.1,2 National survey data reveal a rapid increase in the number of uninsured black and Hispanic persons between 1977 and 1987.3 The major factors contributing to this increase are (1) overall growth in the size of the minority population, especially Hispanics; (2) reductions in private insurance coverage; and (3) the lack of significant expansions in public programs, largely Medicaid (note: several Medicaid eligibility expansions affecting poor children occurred during and after 1987). In 1987, 14% of white children younger than age 18 were uninsured compared to 22% of black children and 33% of Hispanic children (Cornelius LJ. Unpublished data). Black and Hispanic persons were more likely to rely on Medicaid as their primary financing source than were white persons.3 In 1987, 8% of white children were covered by Medicaid vs 38% of black and 28% of Hispanic children (Cornelius LJ. Unpublished data from the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1992.). Despite Medicaid's importance as a financing source, low reimbursement rates have resulted in inadequate provider participation and corresponding access barriers.4,5 In comparison with white persons, minorities have less access to employer-based insurance benefits. Part of the reason lies in the types of jobs that are disproportionately held by minorities. Personal service and agricultural employers typically do not offer health insurance to their employees.

Racial Disparities in Invasive Management for Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction With Chronic Kidney Disease

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Rymer ◽  
Shuang Li ◽  
Patrick H. Pun ◽  
Laine Thomas ◽  
Tracy Y. Wang
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Racial Disparities ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Adjusted Odds Ratio ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Black Patients ◽  
Invasive Management ◽  
White Patients

Background: Due to increased risks of contrast nephropathy, chronic kidney disease (CKD) can deter consideration of invasive management for patients with myocardial infarction (MI). Black patients have a higher prevalence of CKD. Whether racial disparities exist in the use of invasive MI management for patients with CKD presenting with MI is unknown. Methods: We examined 717 012 White and 99 882 Black patients with MI treated from 2008 to 2017 at 914 hospitals in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Chest Pain—MI Registry. CKD status was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥90 mL/(min·1.73 m 2 ; no CKD), eGFR <90 but ≥60 (mild), eGFR <60 but ≥30 (moderate), and eGFR <30 or dialysis (severe). We used multivariable logistic regression models to examine the interaction of race and CKD severity in invasive MI management. Results: Among those with MI, Black patients were more likely than White patients to have CKD (eGFR <90; 61.4% versus 58.5%; P <0.001). Among those with MI and CKD, Black patients were more likely than White patients to have severe CKD (21.2% versus 12.4%; P <0.001). Patients with CKD were more likely than those without CKD to have diabetes or heart failure; Black patients with CKD were more likely to have these comorbidities when compared with White patients with CKD (all P <0.0001). Black race and CKD were associated with a lower likelihood of invasive management (adjusted odds ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.75–0.81]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.70–0.74]; P <0.001 for both). At eGFR levels ≥10, Black patients were significantly less likely than White patients to undergo invasive management. Conclusions: Black patients with MI and mild or moderate CKD were less likely to undergo invasive management compared with White patients with similar CKD severity. National efforts are needed to address racial disparities that may remain in the invasive management of MI.

scholarly journals Racial and Ethnic Differences in Presentation and Outcomes for Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: Findings from the American Heart Association's COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatima Rodriguez ◽  
Nicole Solomon ◽  
James A. de Lemos ◽  
Sandeep R. Das ◽  
David A. Morrow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Ethnic Differences ◽  
American Heart ◽  
Disease Registry ◽  
Asian Patients ◽  
Black Patients ◽  
Hispanic Patients ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Racial Ethnic ◽  
Hispanic White

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed longstanding racial/ethnic inequities in health risks and outcomes in the U.S.. We sought to identify racial/ethnic differences in presentation and outcomes for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods: The American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry is a retrospective observational registry capturing consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We present data on the first 7,868 patients by race/ethnicity treated at 88 hospitals across the US between 01/17/2020 and 7/22/2020. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: death, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure) and COVID-19 cardiorespiratory ordinal severity score (worst to best: death, cardiac arrest, mechanical ventilation with mechanical circulatory support, mechanical ventilation with vasopressors/inotrope support, mechanical ventilation without hemodynamic support, and hospitalization without any of the above). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship between race/ethnicity and each outcome adjusting for differences in sociodemographic, clinical, and presentation features, and accounting for clustering by hospital. Results: Among 7,868 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 33.0% were Hispanic, 25.5% were non-Hispanic Black, 6.3% were Asian, and 35.2% were non-Hispanic White. Hispanic and Black patients were younger than non-Hispanic White and Asian patients and were more likely to be uninsured. Black patients had the highest prevalence of obesity, hypertension, and diabetes. Black patients also had the highest rates of mechanical ventilation (23.2%) and renal replacement therapy (6.6%) but the lowest rates of remdesivir use (6.1%). Overall mortality was 18.4% with 53% of all deaths occurring in Black and Hispanic patients. The adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for mortality were 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-1.14) for Black patients, 0.90 (95% CI 0.73-1.11) for Hispanic patients, and 1.31 (95% CI 0.96-1.80) for Asian patients compared with non-Hispanic White patients. The median OR across hospitals was 1.99 (95% CI 1.74-2.48). Results were similar for MACE. Asian patients had the highest COVID-19 cardiorespiratory severity at presentation (adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.16-1.90). Conclusions: Although in-hospital mortality and MACE did not differ by race/ethnicity after adjustment, Black and Hispanic patients bore a greater burden of mortality and morbidity due to their disproportionate representation among COVID-19 hospitalizations.

scholarly journals Ethnicity and quality of antipsychotic prescribing among in-patients in south London

2008 ◽  
Vol 193 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Connolly ◽  
David Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Adjusted Odds Ratio ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Median Dose ◽  
Black And White ◽  
Prescribing Quality ◽  
Black Patients

SummaryEthnicity may influence treatment decisions in mental disorders. We undertook a survey of the prescribing of antipsychotics for in-patients in three south London mental health trusts. A total of 255 patients (152 White, 103 Black) were included. Median dose of antipsychotic (% of licensed dose) was 58.3% for White and 50.0% for Black patients (adjusted effect size=0.14, 95% CI −0.34 to 0.63). High-dose antipsychotics were prescribed to 15.1% of White and 11.7% of Black patients (adjusted odds ratio (OR)=0.5, 95% CI 0.19–1.33), and antipsychotic polypharmacy was recorded for 25.7% and 31.1% respectively (adjusted OR=3.05, 95% CI 1.44–6.46). Prescribing quality was similar for Black and White patients.

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN THE TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH ACUTE MYOCARDIAL ISCHEMIA AND INFARCTION IN ENGLAND

1999 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosalind A. Raine ◽  
Tim J. B. Crayford ◽  
Koon Lan Chan ◽  
John B. Chambers
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Ischemia ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Adjusted Odds Ratio ◽  
Cardiac Risk ◽  
Acute Myocardial Ischemia ◽  
Treatment Pathways ◽  
Myocardial Ischemia And Infarction ◽  
Cardiac Pain ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Case Note Review

We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on a case note review to determine whether there are differences in the treatment pathways followed for men and women admitted with acute myocardial ischemia and infarction after adjusting for differences in case mix. Women were as likely as men to receive thrombolysis, but were less likely subsequently to undergo exercise testing (adjusted odds ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.40–0.84) or angiography (adjusted odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39–0.99). Coronary anatomy was the strongest predictor of revascularization regardless of sex. Women with diagnosed cardiac pain are less likely than men to be placed on the investigative pathways that lead to revascularization. Those women who are investigated are as likely as men to undergo revascularization. These findings are independent of the effects of age, angina grade, comorbidity, or cardiac risk factors. Clinicians' and patients' beliefs and preferences about treatment require investigation.

scholarly journals Who Receives Speech/Language Services by 5 Years of Age in the United States?

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul. L. Morgan ◽  
Carol Scheffner Hammer ◽  
George Farkas ◽  
Marianne M. Hillemeier ◽  
Steve Maczuga ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Adjusted Odds Ratio ◽  
The United States ◽  
Expressive Vocabulary ◽  
Minority Children ◽  
White Children ◽  
Language Services ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Ratio Range

PurposeWe sought to identify factors predictive of or associated with receipt of speech/language services during early childhood. We did so by analyzing data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Birth Cohort (ECLS-B; Andreassen & Fletcher, 2005), a nationally representative data set maintained by the U.S. Department of Education. We addressed two research questions of particular importance to speech-language pathology practice and policy. First, do early vocabulary delays increase children's likelihood of receiving speech/language services? Second, are minority children systematically less likely to receive these services than otherwise similar White children?MethodMultivariate logistic regression analyses were performed for a population-based sample of 9,600 children and families participating in the ECLS-B.ResultsExpressive vocabulary delays by 24 months of age were strongly associated with and predictive of children's receipt of speech/language services at 24, 48, and 60 months of age (adjusted odds ratio range = 4.32–16.60). Black children were less likely to receive speech/language services than otherwise similar White children at 24, 48, and 60 months of age (adjusted odds ratio range = 0.42–0.55). Lower socioeconomic status children and those whose parental primary language was other than English were also less likely to receive services. Being born with very low birth weight also significantly increased children's receipt of services at 24, 48, and 60 months of age.ConclusionExpressive vocabulary delays at 24 months of age increase children’s risk for later speech/language services. Increased use of culturally and linguistically sensitive practices may help racial/ethnic minority children access needed services.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document