Diversity and Equity in Healthcare

Overcoming diversity and equity challenges in healthcare is no small feat for healthcare facilities, professionals, and the healthcare industry at large. This chapter will bring awareness to healthcare disparities that transpire because of the lack of equity which can occur when diversity is finite. It will identify and explore how diversity and equity have been omitted from medical facilities and look at the impact of the presence of diversity and equity on both consumers and medical personnel. In addition, it will uncover factors that contribute to negative outcomes at the virtual level and uncover ways to reduce inefficiencies and negative outcomes caused by the lack of diversity and equity in healthcare.

PARTNER-MH, a Peer-Led Patient Navigation Intervention for Racial and Ethnic Minority Veterans in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Mental Health Services: A Mixed-Methods Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial Study Protocol

Background: Mental healthcare disparities are persistent and have increased in recent years. Compared to their White counterparts, racial and ethnic minority groups have less access to mental healthcare. Minority groups also have lower engagement in mental health treatment and are more likely to experience ineffective patient-provider communication, which contribute to negative mental healthcare experiences and poor mental health outcomes. Interventions that embrace recovery-oriented practices to support patient engagement and empower patients to participate in their mental healthcare and treatment decisions may help to reduce mental healthcare disparities. Designed to achieve this goal, PARTNER-MH is a peer-led, patient navigation intervention that aims to engage minority patients in mental health treatment, support them to take a greater role in their care, and facilitate their participation in treatment shared decision-making. Methods: This pilot study evaluates the feasibility and acceptability of PARTNER-MH in a VHA mental health setting using a mixed-methods, randomized controlled trial study design. PARTNER-MH is tested under real-world conditions, using certified VHA peer support specialists (peers), selected via usual VHA hiring practices and assigned to the mental health service. The peers provide PARTNER-MH and usual peer support services. The study compares the impact of PARTNER-MH versus a wait-list control group on patient activation, patient engagement, and shared decision-making, as well as other patient-level outcomes. PARTNER-MH also examines organizational factors that could impact its future implementation in VHA settings. Results: Participants (N=50) were veterans who were mostly male (62%), self-identified as non-Hispanic Black (70%), with a median age in the 45-54 group. Most had at least some college education, and 32% completed 4 or more years of college. Randomization produced comparable groups in terms of characteristics and outcome measures at baseline, except for gender. Discussion and Conclusion: Rather than simply documenting health disparities among vulnerable populations, PARTNER-MH offers opportunities to evaluate a tailored, culturally-sensitive system-based intervention to improve patient engagement and patient-provider communication in mental healthcare for racial and ethnic minorities. IRB Protocol #1708628270Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04515771. Registered 14 August 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04515771

Enhancing existing medical school curricula with an innovative healthcare disparities curriculum

Background Effective healthcare disparities curricula seek to train physicians who are well equipped to address the health needs of an increasingly diverse society. Current literature on healthcare disparities curricula and implementation focuses on courses created independent of existing educational materials. Our aim was to develop and implement a novel resource-conserving healthcare disparities curriculum to enhance existing medical school lectures without the need for additional lectures. Methods This non-randomized intervention was conducted at the University of California Los Angeles. The curriculum was offered to all first-year medical students in the class of 2021 (n=188). With institutional approval, a new healthcare disparities curriculum was created based on the Society of General Internal Medicine’s core learning objectives for effective healthcare disparities curricula (J General Internal Med 25:S160–163, 2010). Implementation of the curriculum made use of “teachable moments” within existing medical school lectures. Teachable moments were broad lecture topics identified by the research team as suitable for introducing relevant healthcare disparities content. The new lecture-enhancing healthcare disparities curriculum was delivered with the related lecture via integrated PDF documents uploaded to an online learning management system. Students were encouraged to complete pre- and post- course assessments to examine changes in disparities knowledge and self-rated confidence in addressing disparities. Matched χ2 tests were used for statistical analysis. Results Participating students (n=92) completed both pre- and post-course assessments and were retrospectively stratified, based on self-reported use of the new lecture enhancing curriculum, into the “high utilizer” group (use of materials “sometimes” or “very often,” n=52) and the comparison “low utilizer” group (use of the materials “rarely” or “very rarely,” n=40). Students who self-identified as underrepresented racial and ethnic minorities in medicine were more likely to utilize the material (41% of the high utilizers vs. 17% of the low utilizer group, p<.01). Post-course knowledge assessment scores and self-reported confidence in addressing healthcare disparities improved only in the high utilizer group. Conclusions Integrating new guideline based curricula content simultaneously into pre-existing lectures by identifying and harnessing teachable moments may be an effective and resource-conserving strategy for enhancing healthcare disparities education among first year medical students.

Telemedicine and Remote Monitoring as an Adjunct to Medical Management of Bronchiectasis

The limited resources and the practice of social distancing during the COVID pandemic create a paradigm shift in the utilization of telemedicine in healthcare. However, the implementation of best practices is hampered in part by a lack of literature devoted to telehealth in bronchiectasis. In this commentary, we examine multiple approaches to structuring of telemedicine care for patients with bronchiectasis, highlight current evidence-based interventions that can be incorporated into the management of bronchiectasis, and describe our experience with telemedicine at the University of Connecticut Center for Bronchiectasis Care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The structural model must be adapted to different local dynamics and available technologies with careful attention to patient characteristics and access to technology to avoid the potential paradoxical effects of increasing patients’ burden and healthcare disparities in underserved populations.

Abstract 1122‐000121: Integrated Geomapping Tool of Certified Stroke Centers in United States: A SVIN MT2020+ Committee Collaboration

Introduction : Stroke is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality and healthcare spending in the United States. Acute management of ischemic stroke is time‐dependent and evidence suggests improved clinical outcomes for patients treated at designated certified stroke centers. There is an increasing trend among hospitals to obtain certification as designated stroke centers. A common source or integrated tool providing both information and location of all available stroke centers in the US irrespective of the certifying organization is not readily available. The objective of our research is to generate a comprehensive and interactive electronic resource with combined data on all geographically‐coded certified stroke centers to assist in pre‐hospital triage and study healthcare disparities in stroke including availability and access to acute stroke care by location and population. Methods : Data on stroke center certification was primarily obtained from each of the three main certifying organizations: The Joint Commission (TJC), Det Norske Veritas (DNV) and Healthcare Facilities Accreditation Program (HFAP). Geographic mapping of all stroke center locations was performed using the ArcGIS Pro application. The most current data on stroke centers is presented in an interactive electronic format and the information is frequently updated to represent newly certified centers. Utility of the tool and its analytics are shown. Role of the tool in improving pre‐hospital triage in the stroke systems of care, studying healthcare disparities and implications for public health policy are discussed. Results : Aggregate data analysis at the time of submission revealed 1,806 total certified stroke centers. TJC‐certified stroke centers represent the majority with 106 Acute Stroke Ready (ASR), 1,040 Primary Stroke Centers (PSCs), 49 Thrombectomy Capable Centers (TSCs) and 197 Comprehensive Stroke Centers (CSCs). A total of 341 DNV‐certified programs including 36 ASRs, 162 PSCs, 16 PSC Plus (thrombectomy capable) and 127 CSCs were identified. HFAP‐certified centers (75) include 16 ASRs, 49 PSCs, 2 TSCs and 8 CSCs. A preliminary map of all TJC‐certified CSCs and TSCs is shown in the figure (1). Geospatial analysis reveals distinct areas with currently limited access to certified stroke centers and currently, access to certified stroke centers is extremely limited to non‐existent in fe States (for example: Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico and South Dakota). Conclusions : Stroke treatment and clinical outcomes are time‐dependent and prompt assessment and triage by EMS directly to appropriate designated stroke centers is therefore critical. A readily available electronic platform providing location and treatment capability for all nearby certified centers will enhance regional stroke systems of care, including enabling more rapid inter‐hospital transfers for advanced intervention. Identifying geographic areas of limited access to treatment can also help improve policy and prioritize the creation of a more equitable and well‐distributed network of stroke care in the United States.