Suchergebnisse

To reduce racial and ethnic disparities in diabetes care and outcomes, it is critical to integrate health care and community approaches. However, little work describes how to expand and sustain such partnerships and initiatives. We outline our experience creating and growing an initiative to improve diabetes care and outcomes in the predominantly African American South Side of Chicago. Our project involves patient education and activation, a quality improvement collaborative with six clinics, provider education, and community partnerships. We aligned our project with the needs and goals of community residents and organizations, the mission and strategic plan of our academic medical center, various strengths and resources in Chicago, and the changing health care marketplace. We use the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Finding Answers: Disparities Research for Change conceptual model and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to elucidate how we expanded and sustained our project within a shifting environment. We recommend taking action to integrate health care with community projects, being inclusive, building partnerships, working with the media, and understanding vital historical, political, and economic contexts.

In 2005, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation created Finding Answers: Disparities Research for Change, a program to identify, evaluate, and disseminate interventions to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in the care and outcomes of patients with cardiovascular disease, depression, and diabetes. In this introductory paper, we present a conceptual model for interventions that aim to reduce disparities. With this model as a framework, we summarize the key findings from the six other papers in this supplement on cardiovascular disease, diabetes, depression, breast cancer, interventions using cultural leverage, and pay-for-performance and public reporting of performance measures. Based on these findings, we present global conclusions regarding the current state of health disparities interventions and make recommendations for future interventions to reduce disparities. Multifactorial, culturally tailored interventions that target different causes of disparities hold the most promise, but much more research is needed to investigate potential solutions and their implementation.

Pay-for-performance and public reporting programs may have a neutral, narrowing, or widening effect on racial disparities in health care. The authors begin this article by suggesting that certain characteristics of these programs may affect disparities. They then present results from a systematic review of the literature on the effects of performance incentive programs on racial disparities in health care. The review revealed that only one empirical study provided data on this issue: It showed that a major public reporting program increased disparities in coronary artery bypass graft rates. The authors then present the results of interviews with leaders of 15 major performance incentive programs in the United States. The interviews indicated that current programs are not designed to reduce disparities and often lack characteristics that may be important in reducing disparities. The article concludes with program leaders' recommendations on how performance incentive programs could be designed to reduce disparities.

The authors reviewed interventions using cultural leverage to narrow racial disparities in health care. Thirty-eight interventions of three types were identified: interventions that modified the health behaviors of individual patients of color, that increased the access of communities of color to the existing health care system, and that modified the health care system to better serve patients of color and their communities. Individual-level interventions typically tapped community members' expertise to shape programs. Access interventions largely involved screening programs, incorporating patient navigators and lay educators. Health care interventions focused on the roles of nurses, counselors, and community health workers to deliver culturally tailored health information. These interventions increased patients' knowledge for self-care, decreased barriers to access, and improved providers' cultural competence. The delivery of processes of care or intermediate health outcomes was significantly improved in 23 interventions. Interventions using cultural leverage show tremendous promise in reducing health disparities, but more research is needed to understand their health effects in combination with other interventions.

The rate of successful health care innovation implementation is dismal. Middle managers have a potentially important yet poorly understood role in health care innovation implementation. This study used self-administered surveys and interviews of middle managers in health centers that implemented an innovation to reduce health disparities to address the questions: Does middle managers' commitment to health care innovation implementation influence implementation effectiveness? If so, in what ways does their commitment influence implementation effectiveness? Although quantitative survey data analysis results suggest a weak relationship, qualitative interview data analysis results indicate that middle managers' commitment influences implementation effectiveness when middle managers are proactive. Scholars should account for middle managers' influence in implementation research, and health care executives may promote implementation effectiveness by hiring proactive middle managers and creating climates in which proactivity is rewarded, supported, and expected.

Aotearoa/New Zealand (Aotearoa/NZ) and the United States (U.S.) suffer inequities in health outcomes by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. This paper compares both countries' approaches to health equity to inform policy efforts. We developed a conceptual model that highlights how government and private policies influence health equity by impacting the healthcare system (access to care, structure and quality of care, payment of care), and integration of healthcare system with social services. These policies are shaped by each country's culture, history, and values. Aotearoa/NZ and U.S. share strong aspirational goals for health equity in their national health strategy documents. Unfortunately, implemented policies are frequently not explicit in how they address health inequities, and often do not align with evidence-based approaches known to improve equity. To authentically commit to achieving health equity, nations should: 1) Explicitly design quality of care and payment policies to achieve equity, holding the healthcare system accountable through public monitoring and evaluation, and supporting with adequate resources; 2) Address all determinants of health for individuals and communities with coordinated approaches, integrated funding streams, and shared accountability metrics across health and social sectors; 3) Share power authentically with racial/ethnic minorities and promote indigenous peoples' self-determination; 4) Have free, frank, and fearless discussions about impacts of structural racism, colonialism, and white privilege, ensuring that policies and programmes explicitly address root causes.

Differences in rates of diabetes-related lower extremity amputations represent one of the largest and most persistent health disparities found for African Americans and Hispanics compared with Whites in the United States. Since many minority patients receive care in underresourced settings, quality improvement (QI) initiatives in these settings may offer a targeted approach to improve diabetes outcomes in these patient populations. Health information technology (health IT) is widely viewed as an essential component of health care QI and may be useful in decreasing diabetes disparities in underresourced settings. This article reviews the effectiveness of health care interventions using health IT to improve diabetes process of care and intermediate diabetes outcomes in African American and Hispanic patients. Health IT interventions have addressed patient, provider, and system challenges in the provision of diabetes care but require further testing in minority patient populations to evaluate their effectiveness in improving diabetes outcomes and reducing diabetes-related complications.

This article discusses development and testing of the Provider and Staff Perceptions of Integrated Care Survey, a 21-item questionnaire, informed by Singer and colleagues' seven-construct framework. Questionnaires were sent to 2,936 providers and staff at 100 federally qualified health centers and other safety net clinics in 10 Midwestern U.S. states; 332 were ineligible, leaving 2,604 potential participants. Following 4 mailings, 781 (30%) responded from 97 health centers. Item analyses, exploratory factor analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis were undertaken. Exploratory factor analysis suggests four latent factors: Teams and Care Continuity, Patient Centeredness, Coordination with External Providers, and Coordination with Community Resources. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed these factor groupings. For the total sample, Cronbach's alpha exceeded 0.7 for each latent factor. Descriptive responses to each of the 21 Provider and Staff Perceptions of Integrated Care questions appear to have potential in identifying areas that providers and staff recognize as care integration strengths, and areas that may warrant improvement.

Sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation are key indicators of the demographic diversity in the United States. Sex and gender are often conflated under the assumptions that they are mutually determined and do not differ from each other; however, the growing visibility of transgender and intersex populations, as well as efforts to improve the measurement of sex and gender across many scientific fields, has demonstrated the need to reconsider how sex, gender, and the relationship between them are conceptualized. This is turn affects sexual orientation, because it is defined on the basis of the relationship between a person's own sex or gender and that of their actual or preferred partners. Sex, gender, and sexual orientation are core aspects of identity that shape opportunities, experiences with discrimination, and outcomes through the life course; therefore, it is crucial that measures of these concepts accurately capture their complexity. Recognition of the diversity within the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and other sexual and gender minorities - the LGBTQI+ population - has also led to a reexamination of how the concepts of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation are measured. Better measurement will improve the ability to identify sexual and gender minority populations and understand the challenges they face. LGBTQI+ people continue to experience disparate and inequitable treatment, including harassment, discrimination, and violence, which in turn affects outcomes in many areas of everyday life, including health and access to health care services, economic and educational attainment, and family and social support. Though knowledge of these disparities has increased significantly over the past decade, glaring gaps remain, often driven by a lack of reliable data. Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation recommends that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) adopt new practices for collecting data on sex, gender, and sexual orientation - including collecting gender data by default, and not conflating gender with sex as a biological variable. The report recommends standardized language to be used in survey questions that ask about a respondent's sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Better measurements will improve data quality, as well as the NIH's ability to identify LGBTQI+ populations and understand the challenges they face.