Search

Background Stable, affordable housing is an established determinant of health. As affordable housing shortages across the USA threaten to displace people from their homes, it is important to understand the implications of cost-related residential moves for healthcare access. Objective To examine the relationship between cost-related moves and unmet medical needs. Design We performed a cross-sectional analysis of 7 waves (2011–2017) of the California Health Interview Survey. Participants We included all respondents ages 18 and older. Main Measures The primary predictor variable was residential move history in the past 5 years (cost-related move, non-cost-related move, or no move). The primary outcome was unmet medical needs in the past year (necessary medications and/or medical care that were delayed or not received). Key Results Our sample included 146,417 adults (42–47% response rate), representing a weighted population of 28,518,590. Overall, 20.3% of the sample reported unmet medical needs in the past year, and 4.9% reported a cost-related move in the past 5 years. In multivariable logistic regression models, adjusted risk of unmet medical needs increased for adults with both cost-related moves (aOR 1.38; 95% CI 1.19–1.59) and non-cost-related moves (aOR 1.17; 95% CI 1.09–1.26) compared to those with no moves. Among people who had moved, those with cost-related moves were more likely to report unmet medical needs compared to people with non-cost-related moves (p = 0.03). Conclusions People who have moved due to unaffordable housing represent a population at increased risk for unmet medical needs. Policy makers seeking to improve population health should consider strategies to limit cost-related moves and to mitigate their adverse effects on healthcare access. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11606-020-06347-3.

To examine mediation and moderation of racial/ethnic all-cause mortality disparities among Veteran Health Administration (VHA)-users by neighborhood deprivation and residential segregation.Electronic medical records for 10/2008-9/2009 VHA-users linked to National Death Index, 2000 Area Deprivation Index, and 2006-2009 US Census.Racial/ethnic groups included American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN), Asian, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, and non-Hispanic white (reference). We measured neighborhood deprivation by Area Deprivation Index, calculated segregation for non-Hispanic black, Hispanic, and AI/AN using the Isolation Index, evaluated mediation using inverse odds-weighted Cox regression models and moderation using Cox regression models testing for neighborhood*race/ethnicity interactions.Mortality disparities existed for AI/ANs (HR = 1.07, 95%CI:1.01-1.10) but no other groups after covariate adjustment. Neighborhood deprivation and Hispanic segregation neither mediated nor moderated AI/AN disparities. Non-Hispanic black segregation both mediated and moderated AI/AN disparities. The AI/AN vs. non-Hispanic white disparity was attenuated for AI/ANs living in neighborhoods with greater non-Hispanic black segregation (P = .047). Black segregation's mediating effect was limited to VHA-users living in counties with low black segregation. AI/AN segregation also mediated AI/AN mortality disparities in counties that included or were near AI/AN reservations.Neighborhood characteristics, particularly black and AI/AN residential segregation, may contribute to AI/AN mortality disparities among VHA-users, particularly in communities that were rural, had greater black segregation, or were located on or near AI/AN reservations. This suggests the importance of neighborhood social determinants of health on racial/ethnic mortality disparities. Living near reservations may allow AI/AN VHA-users to maintain cultural and tribal ties, while also providing them with access to economic and other resources. Future research should explore the experiences of AI/ANs living in black communities and underlying mechanisms to identify targets for intervention.

Purpose: To evaluate whether exposure to MyFamilyPlan—a web-based preconception health education module—changes the proportion of women discussing reproductive health with providers at well-woman visits. Design: Cluster randomized controlled trial. One hundred thirty participants per arm distributed among 34 clusters (physicians) required to detect a 20% change in the primary outcome. Setting: Urban academic medical center (California). Participants: Eligible women were 18 to 45 years old, were English speaking, were nonpregnant, were able to access the Internet, and had an upcoming well-woman visit. E-mail and phone recruitment between September 2015 and May 2016; 292 enrollees randomized. Intervention: Intervention participants completed the MyFamilyPlan module online 7 to 10 days before a scheduled well-woman visit; control participants reviewed standard online preconception health education materials. Measures: The primary outcome was self-reported discussion of reproductive health with the physician at the well-woman visit. Self-reported secondary outcomes were folic acid use, contraceptive method initiation/change, and self-efficacy score. Analysis: Multilevel multivariate logistic regression. Results: After adjusting for covariates and cluster, exposure to MyFamilyPlan was the only variable significantly associated with an increase in the proportion of women discussing reproductive health with providers (odds ratio: 1.97, 95% confidence interval: 1.22-3.19). Prespecified secondary outcomes were unaffected. Conclusion: MyFamilyPlan exposure was associated with a significant increase in the proportion of women who reported discussing reproductive health with providers and may promote preconception health awareness; more work is needed to affect associated behaviors.

Background: Although Medicare Part D improved drug benefits for many beneficiaries, its impact on the coverage of Medicare Advantage Part D (MAPD) enrollees depended on their pre-existing benefits and whether they had gap coverage under Part D. Objective: To examine changes in prescription drug utilization and expenditures associated with drug benefit changes resulting from the implementation of Part D. Patients: We studied 248,773 continuously enrolled MAPD patients in eight states. Patients whose insurance product or Census block could not be identified or who had atypical benefits, low-income subsidies or Medicaid coverage were excluded. Main Measures: The main outcomes were changes in prescription drug days supply and expenditures from 2005 to 2006 and 2005 to 2007. Design: We linked Census data with 2005-7 MAPD claims, encounter, enrollment, and benefits data and estimated associations of the outcomes with changes in drug benefits, controlling for 2005 comorbidities, demographics, and Census population characteristics. Key Results: MAPD enrollees whose drug benefits became potentially less generous after Part D had the smallest increases in drug utilization and expenditures (e.g., drug expenditures increased by $130 between 2005 and 2006), while those who potentially gained the most from Part D experienced the largest increases ($302). The differences in benefit design changes had a stronger association with drug utilization and outcomes among patients at high risk of gap entry than among the entire sample. Conclusions: Although Medicare Part D unambiguously improved drug coverage for many elderly, it led to heterogeneous changes in drug benefits among MAPD enrollees, who already had generic and sometimes branded drug benefits. After 2006, benefits were worse for individuals who had branded drug coverage in 2005 but now had a coverage gap, but benefits may have improved for individuals who acquired branded drug coverage. Commensurate with these differential changes in benefits following Part D, changes in drug utilization and expenditures varied substantially as well. © 2011 Society of General Internal Medicine.

Background: Although disease management programs are widely implemented, little is known about their effectiveness. Objective: To determine whether disease management by physician groups is associated with diabetes care processes, control of intermediate outcomes, or the amount of medication used when intermediate outcomes are above target levels. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Patients were randomly sampled from 63 physician groups nested in 7 health plans sponsored by Translating Research into Action for Diabetes (87%) and from 4 health plans with individual physician contracts (13%). Patients: 8661 adults with diabetes who completed a survey (2000-2001) and had medical record data. Measurements: Physician group and health plan directors described their organizations' use of physician reminders, performance feedback, and structured care management on a survey; their responses were used to determine measures of intensity of disease management. The current study measured 8 processes of care, including most recent hemoglobin A1c level, systolic blood pressure, serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, and several measures of medication use. Results: Increased use of any of 3 disease management strategies was significantly associated with higher adjusted rates of retinal screening, nephropathy screening, foot examinations, and measurement of hemoglobin A1c levels. Serum lipid level testing and influenza vaccine administration were associated with greater use of structured care management and performance feedback. Greater use of performance feedback correlated with an increased rate of foot examinations (difference, 5 percentage points [95% CI, 1 to 8 percentage points]), and greater use of physician reminders was associated with an increased rate of nephropathy screening (difference, 15 percentage points [CI, 6 to 23 percentage points]). No strategies were associated with intermediate outcome levels or level of medication management. Limitations: Physician groups were not randomly sampled from population-based listings, and disease management strategies were not randomly allocated across groups. Conclusions: Disease management strategies were associated with better processes of diabetes care but not with improved intermediate outcomes or level of medication management. A greater focus on direct measurement, feedback, and reporting of intermediate outcome levels or of level of medication management may enhance the effectiveness of these programs.