Search

PURPOSE: Findings are conflicting about the relationship between vitamin D levels and cardiovascular mortality. We wanted to determine the contribution of vitamin D levels to black-white disparities in cardiovascular mortality. METHODS: We examined the association of serum 25(OH)D levels with cardiovascular mortality and its contribution to elevated risk among blacks through a retrospective cohort using baseline data from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1988-1994 and cause-specific mortality through 2001 using the National Death Index. Using piecewise Poisson regression models, we examined the risk of cardiovascular death (coronary heart disease, heart failure, and stroke) by sample 25(OH)D quartile, adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors, and compared models of adjusted race-related cardiovascular mortality with and without further adjustment for 25(OH)D levels. RESULTS: Participants with 25(OH)D levels in the lowest quartile (mean = 13.9 ng/mL) compared with those in the 3 higher quartiles (mean = 21.6, 28.4, and 41.6 ng/mL) had higher adjusted risk of cardiovascular death (incident rate ratio [IRR] = 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.70). The higher age- and sex-adjusted cardiovascular mortality observed in blacks vs whites (IRR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.13-1.70) was attenuated (IRR = 1.14; 95% CI, 0.91-1.44) by adjustment for 25(OH)D levels and fully eliminated with further adjustment for income (IRR=1.01; 95% CI, 0.82-1.24). CONCLUSIONS: Low serum levels of 25(OH)D are associated with increased cardiovascular mortality in a nationally representative US sample. Black-white differences in 25(OH)D levels may contribute to excess cardiovascular mortality in blacks. Interventional trials among persons with low vitamin D levels are needed to determine whether oral supplementation improves cardiovascular outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities in health care have been well documented, but poorly explained. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of access barriers, including English fluency, on racial and ethnic disparities in health care. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of the Community Tracking Survey (1996 –1997). SUBJECTS: Adults 18 to 64 years with private or Medicaid health insurance. MEASURES: Independent variables included race, ethnicity, and English fluency. Dependent variables included having had a physician or mental health visit, influenza vaccination, or mammogram during the past year. RESULTS: The health care use pattern for English-speaking Hispanic patients was not significantly different than for non-Hispanic white patients in the crude or multivariate models. In contrast, Spanish-speaking Hispanic patients were significantly less likely than non-Hispanic white patients to have had a physician visit (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.72– 0.83), mental health visit (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32–0.76), or influenza vaccination (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.15– 0.52). After adjustment for predisposing,need, and enabling factors, Spanish-speaking Hispanic patients showed significantly lower use than non-Hispanic white patients across all four measures. Black patients had a significantly lower crude relative risk of having received an influenza vaccination(RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58–0.87). Adjustment for additional factors had little impact on this effect, but resulted in black patients being significantly less likely than non-Hispanic white patients to have had a visit with a mental health professional (RR, 0.46; 95% CI,0.37– 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Among insured nonelderly adults, there are appreciable disparities in health-care use by race and Hispanic ethnicity. Ethnic disparities in care are largely explained by differences in English fluency, but racial disparities in care are not explained by commonly used access factors.

Socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparities in health care quality have been extensively documented. Recently, the elimination of disparities in health care has become the focus of a national initiative. Yet, there is little effort to monitor and address disparities in health care through organizational quality improvement. After reviewing literature on disparities in health care, we discuss the limitations in existing quality assessment for identifying and addressing these disparities. We propose 5 principles to address these disparities through modifications in quality performance measures: disparities represent a significant quality problem; current data collection efforts are inadequate to identify and address disparities; clinical performance measures should be stratified by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position for public reporting; population-wide monitoring should incorporate adjustment for race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position; and strategies to adjust payment for race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position should be considered to reflect the known effects of both on morbidity. JAMA. 2000;283:2579-2584