Community engaged research to measure the impact of COVID-19 on vulnerable community member's well-being and health : A mixed methods approach.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated existing income inequality and health disparities in the United States (US). The objective of this study was to conduct timely, community-engaged research to understand the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on historically under-resourced communities with the goal of improving health equity. The initiative focused on priorities identified by Community Health Needs Assessments (CHNA) conducted every 3 years per Federal funding requirements. These were access to healthcare, maternal/child health, obesity/food insecurity/physical activity, and mental health/addiction. METHODS: In the first three quarters of 2021, we developed and employed mixed methods in three simultaneous phases of data collection. In phase 1, we used purposive sampling to identify key informants from multiple stakeholder groups and conducted semi-structured interviews. In phase 2, we held focus groups with community members from historically marginalized demographics. In phase 3, we developed a survey using validated scales and distributed it to diverse communities residing in the geographic areas of our healthcare system across four states. CONCLUSION: Healthcare systems may use the methodology outlined in this paper to conduct responsive community engagement during periods of instability and/or crisis and to address health equity issues. The results can inform sustainable approaches to collaborate with communities to build resilience and prepare for future crises.

Key Stakeholder Perspectives of Community Engagement Efforts and the Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionally affected historically marginalized populations and their access to resources and healthcare. In times of crisis, authentic community engagement is more important than ever. This study was Phase 1 of a larger 3-phase study to conduct timely community-engaged research with community members to understand the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on historically underserved communities. The objective of this work was to conduct key informant (KI) interviews (1) to understand community organizations perspectives about the role that large academic health centers play as they interface with community organizations to support their work, (2) to leverage KI's expertise to identify needs and assets within the community, and (3) to inform both Phase 2 (focus group qualitative research) and Phase 3 (survey) of the broader study. METHODS: A total of 24 key informants were identified through purposeful sampling and one-on-one semi-structured interviews were conducted across 4 states using video conferencing. RESULTS: Barriers to access and lack of transparency were highlighted as major issues requiring reform-in particular, aggressive billing practices and insurance barriers exacerbated local distrust of medical institutions. KIs recognized the health institution's support for testing and vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic, but noted other significant gaps in care, especially regarding mental health support. Although communication with the health institution was consistent for some KIs, others experienced unsustained communication efforts that hindered cooperation and relationship building. CONCLUSIONS: Leaders in the community as key stakeholders can provide unique insights into the challenges and potential solutions required to promote health equity, and foster understanding between local communities and healthcare institutions.

The Impact of Health Information Technology for Early Detection of Patient Deterioration on Mortality and Length of Stay in the Hospital Acute Care Setting: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of health information technology (HIT) for early detection of patient deterioration on patient mortality and length of stay (LOS) in acute care hospital settings. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus from 1990 to January 19, 2021. STUDY SELECTION: We included studies that enrolled patients hospitalized on the floor, in the ICU, or admitted through the emergency department. Eligible studies compared HIT for early detection of patient deterioration with usual care and reported at least one end point of interest: hospital or ICU LOS or mortality at any time point. DATA EXTRACTION: Study data were abstracted by two independent reviewers using a standardized data extraction form. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool data. Among the 30 eligible studies, seven were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 23 were pre-post studies. Compared with usual care, HIT for early detection of patient deterioration was not associated with a reduction in hospital mortality or LOS in the meta-analyses of RCTs. In the meta-analyses of pre-post studies, HIT interventions demonstrated a significant association with improved hospital mortality for the entire study cohort (odds ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.70-0.87]) and reduced hospital LOS overall. CONCLUSIONS: HIT for early detection of patient deterioration in acute care settings was not significantly associated with improved mortality or LOS in the meta-analyses of RCTs. In the meta-analyses of pre-post studies, HIT was associated with improved hospital mortality and LOS; however, these results should be interpreted with caution. The differences in patient outcomes between the findings of the RCTs and pre-post studies may be secondary to confounding caused by unmeasured improvements in practice and workflow over time.

Clinical Characteristics, Treatment, and Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Scoping Review.

A growing number of studies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are becoming available, but a synthesis of available data focusing on the critically ill population has not been conducted. We performed a scoping review to synthesize clinical characteristics, treatment, and clinical outcomes among critically ill patients with COVID-19. Between January 1, 2020, and May 15, 2020, we identified high-quality clinical studies describing critically ill patients with a sample size of greater than 20 patients by performing daily searches of the World Health Organization and LitCovid databases on COVID-19. Two reviewers independently reviewed all abstracts (2785 unique articles), full text (218 articles), and abstracted data (92 studies). The 92 studies included 61 from Asia, 16 from Europe, 10 from North and South America, and 5 multinational studies. Notable similarities among critically ill populations across all regions included a higher proportion of older males infected and with severe illness, high frequency of comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease), abnormal chest imaging findings, and death secondary to respiratory failure. Differences in regions included newly identified complications (eg, pulmonary embolism) and epidemiological risk factors (eg, obesity), less chest computed tomography performed, and increased use of invasive mechanical ventilation (70% to 100% vs 15% to 47% of intensive care unit patients) in Europe and the United States compared with Asia. Future research directions should include proof-of-mechanism studies to better understand organ injuries and large-scale collaborative clinical studies to evaluate the efficacy and safety of antivirals, antibiotics, interleukin 6 receptor blockers, and interferon. The current established predictive models require further verification in other regions outside China.