Racial and sociodemographic predictors of COVID-19 compared with influenza, appendicitis, and all-cause hospitalization: retrospective cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether inequities in COVID-19 infection and hospitalization differ from those for common medical conditions: influenza, appendicitis, and all-cause hospitalization. DESIGN: Retrospective study based on electronic health records of three healthcare systems in San Francisco (university, public, and community) examining (1) racial/ethnic distribution in cases and hospitalization among patients with diagnosed COVID-19 (March-August 2020) and patients with diagnosed influenza, diagnosed appendicitis, or all-cause hospitalization (August 2017-March 2020), and (2) sociodemographic predictors of hospitalization among those with diagnosed COVID-19 and influenza. RESULTS: Patients 18 years or older with diagnosed COVID-19 (N = 3934), diagnosed influenza (N = 5932), diagnosed appendicitis (N = 1235), or all-cause hospitalization (N = 62,707) were included in the study. The age-adjusted racial/ethnic distribution of patients with diagnosed COVID-19 differed from that of patients with diagnosed influenza or appendicitis for all healthcare systems, as did hospitalization from these conditions compared to any cause. For example, in the public healthcare system, 68% of patients with diagnosed COVID-19 were Latine, compared with 43% of patients with diagnosed influenza, and 48% of patients with diagnosed appendicitis (p < 0.05). In multivariable logistic regressions, COVID-19 hospitalizations were associated with male sex, Asian and Pacific Islander race/ethnicity, Spanish language, and public insurance in the university healthcare system, and Latine race/ethnicity and obesity in the community healthcare system. Influenza hospitalizations were associated with Asian and Pacific Islander and other race/ethnicity in the university healthcare system, obesity in the community healthcare system, and Chinese language and public insurance in both the university and community healthcare systems. CONCLUSIONS: Racial/ethnic and sociodemographic inequities in diagnosed COVID-19 and hospitalization differed from those for diagnosed influenza and other medical conditions, with consistently higher odds among Latine and Spanish-speaking patients. This work highlights the need for disease-specific public health efforts in at-risk communities in addition to structural upstream interventions.

Neighborhood-level COVID vaccination and booster disparities: A population-level analysis across California.

Objectives: To describe vaccine and booster uptake by neighborhood-level factors in California. Methods: We examined trends in COVID-19 vaccination up to September 21, 2021, and boosters up to March 29, 2022 using data from the California Department of Public Health. Quasi-Poisson regression was used to model the association between neighborhood-level factors and fully vaccinated and boosted among ZIP codes. Sub-analyses on booster rates were compared among the 10 census regions. Results: In a minimally adjusted model, a higher proportion of Black residents was associated with lower vaccination (HR = 0.97; 95%CI: 0.96-0.98). However, in a fully adjusted model, proportion of Black, Hispanic/Latinx, and Asian residents were associated with higher vaccination rates (HR = 1.02; 95%CI: 1.01-1.03 for all). The strongest predictor of low vaccine coverage was disability (HR = 0.89; 95%CI: 0.86-0.91). Similar trends persisted for booster doses. Factors associated with booster coverage varied by region. Conclusions: Examining neighborhood-level factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination and booster rates uncovered significant variation within the large and geographically and demographically diverse state of California. Equity-based approaches to vaccination must ensure a robust consideration of multiple social determinants of health.

Impacts of Individual Patient Language and Neighborhood Ethnic Enclave on COVID-19 Test Positivity Among Hispanic/Latinx Patients in San Francisco.

BACKGROUND: Given the known disparities in COVID-19 within the Hispanic/Latinx community, we sought to examine the interaction between individual-level and neighborhood-level social determinants of health using linked electronic health record data. METHODS: We examined electronic health record data linked to neighborhood data among Hispanic/Latinx patients tested for COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and February 28, 2021, from 2 large health care systems in San Francisco. Hispanic/Latinx ethnic enclave is measured using an index of census-tract level indicators of ethnicity, nativity, and language. Multilevel logistic regression models examined associations between ethnic enclave and COVID-19 positivity (COVID-19+), adjusting for patient-level sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and health system. Cross-level interactions were used to test whether associations between ethnic enclave and COVID-19+ differed by patient language preference. RESULTS: Among 26,871 patients, mean age was 37 years, 56% had Spanish-language preference, and 21% were COVID-19+. In unadjusted models, patients living in the highest versus lowest Hispanic/Latinx enclave had 3.2 higher odds of COVID-19+ (95% CI, 2.45-4.24). Adjusted, the relationship between ethnic enclave and COVID-19+ was attenuated, but not eliminated (odds ratio: 1.4; 95% CI, 1.13-1.17). Our results demonstrated a significant cross-level interaction, such that the influence of ethnic enclave was modified by patient language preference. For individuals with Spanish-language preference, risk of COVID-19+ was high regardless of neighborhood context, whereas for those with English preference, neighborhood ethnic enclave more than doubled the odds of infection. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that a multilevel and intersectional approach to the study of COVID-19 inequities may illuminate dimensions of health inequity that affect marginalized communities and offer insights for targeted clinical and community-based interventions.

Perspectives from leadership and frontline staff on telehealth transitions in the Los Angeles safety net during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Objectives: The start of the COVID-19 pandemic led the Los Angeles safety net health system to dramatically reduce in-person visits and transition abruptly to telehealth/telemedicine services to deliver clinical care (remote telephone and video visits). However, safety net patients and the settings that serve them face a "digital divide" that could impact effective implementation of such digital care. The study objective was to examine attitudes and perspectives of leadership and frontline staff regarding telehealth integration in the Los Angeles safety net, with a focus on telemedicine video visits. Methods: This qualitative study took place in the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC DHS), the second-largest safety net health system in the US. This system disproportionately serves the uninsured, Medicaid, racial/ethnic minority, low-income, and Limited English Proficient (LEP) patient populations of Los Angeles County. Staff and leadership personnel from each of the five major LAC DHS hospital center clinics, and community-based clinics from the LAC DHS Ambulatory Care Network (ACN) were individually interviewed (video or phone calls), and discussions were recorded. Interview guides were based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and included questions about the video visit technology platform and its usability, staff resources, clinic needs, and facilitators and barriers to general telehealth implementation and use. Interviews were analyzed for summary of major themes. Results: Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted in August to October 2020. Participants included LAC DHS physicians, nurses, medical assistants, and physical therapists with clinical and/or administrative roles. Narrative themes surrounding telehealth implementation, with video visits as the case study, were identified and then categorized at the patient, clinic (including provider), and health system levels. Conclusions: Patient, clinic, and health system level factors must be considered when disseminating telehealth services across the safety net. Participant discussions illustrated how multilevel facilitators and barriers influenced the feasibility of video visits and other telehealth encounters. Future research should explore proposed solutions from frontline stakeholders as testable interventions towards advancing equity in telehealth implementation: from patient training and support, to standardized workflows that leverage the expertise of multidisciplinary teams.

Perspectives from leadership and frontline staff on telehealth transitions in the Los Angeles safety net during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond

Objectives The start of the COVID-19 pandemic led the Los Angeles safety net health system to dramatically reduce in-person visits and transition abruptly to telehealth/telemedicine services to deliver clinical care (remote telephone and video visits). However, safety net patients and the settings that serve them face a “digital divide” that could impact effective implementation of such digital care. The study objective was to examine attitudes and perspectives of leadership and frontline staff regarding telehealth integration in the Los Angeles safety net, with a focus on telemedicine video visits. Methods This qualitative study took place in the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC DHS), the second-largest safety net health system in the US. This system disproportionately serves the uninsured, Medicaid, racial/ethnic minority, low-income, and Limited English Proficient (LEP) patient populations of Los Angeles County. Staff and leadership personnel from each of the five major LAC DHS hospital center clinics, and community-based clinics from the LAC DHS Ambulatory Care Network (ACN) were individually interviewed (video or phone calls), and discussions were recorded. Interview guides were based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and included questions about the video visit technology platform and its usability, staff resources, clinic needs, and facilitators and barriers to general telehealth implementation and use. Interviews were analyzed for summary of major themes. Results Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted in August to October 2020. Participants included LAC DHS physicians, nurses, medical assistants, and physical therapists with clinical and/or administrative roles. Narrative themes surrounding telehealth implementation, with video visits as the case study, were identified and then categorized at the patient, clinic (including provider), and health system levels. Conclusions Patient, clinic, and health system level factors must be considered when disseminating telehealth services across the safety net. Participant discussions illustrated how multilevel facilitators and barriers influenced the feasibility of video visits and other telehealth encounters. Future research should explore proposed solutions from frontline stakeholders as testable interventions towards advancing equity in telehealth implementation: from patient training and support, to standardized workflows that leverage the expertise of multidisciplinary teams.

Centering Health Equity in Telemedicine.

In the wake of the racial injustices laid bare in 2020, on top of centuries of systemic racism, it is clear we need actionable strategies to fundamentally restructure health care systems to achieve racial/ethnic health equity. This paper outlines the pillars of a health equity framework from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, overlaying a concrete example of telemedicine equity. Telemedicine is a particularly relevant and important topic, given the growing evidence of disparities in uptake by racial/ethnic, linguistic, and socioeconomic groups in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the new standard of care that telemedicine represents post-pandemic. We present approaches for telemedicine equity across the domains of: (1) strategic priorities of a health care organization, (2) structures and processes to advance equity, (3) strategies to address multiple determinants of health, (4) elimination of institutional racism and oppression, and (5) meaningful partnerships with patients and communities.

System-Level Factors Associated With Telephone and Video Visit Use: Survey of Safety-Net Clinicians During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted safety-net health care systems to rapidly implement telemedicine services with little prior experience, causing disparities in access to virtual visits. While much attention has been given to patient barriers, less is known regarding system-level factors influencing telephone versus video-visit adoption. As telemedicine remains a preferred service for patients and providers, and reimbursement parity will not continue for audio visits, health systems must evaluate how to support higher-quality video visit access. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess health system-level factors and their impact on telephone and video visit adoption to inform sustainability of telemedicine for ambulatory safety-net sites. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among ambulatory care clinicians at a hospital-linked ambulatory clinic network serving a diverse, publicly insured patient population between May 28 and July 14, 2020. We conducted bivariate analyses assessing health care system-level factors associated with (1) high telephone adoption (4 or more visits on average per session); and (2) video visit adoption (at least 1 video visit on average per session). RESULTS: We collected 311 responses from 643 eligible clinicians, yielding a response rate of 48.4%. Clinician respondents (N=311) included 34.7% (n=108) primary or urgent care, 35.1% (n=109) medical, and 7.4% (n=23) surgical specialties. Our sample included 178 (57.2%) high telephone adopters and 81 (26.05%) video adopters. Among high telephone adopters, 72.2% utilized personal devices for telemedicine (vs 59.0% of low telephone adopters, P=.04). Video nonadopters requested more training in technical aspects than adopters (49.6% vs 27.2%, P<.001). Primary or urgent care had the highest proportion of high telephone adoption (84.3%, compared to 50.4% of medical and 37.5% of surgical specialties, P<.001). Medical specialties had the highest proportion of video adoption (39.1%, compared to 14.8% of primary care and 12.5% of surgical specialties, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Personal device access and department specialty were major factors associated with high telephone and video visit adoption among safety-net clinicians. Desire for training was associated with lower video visit use. Secure device access, clinician technical trainings, and department-wide assessments are priorities for safety-net systems implementing telemedicine.

Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Virtual Reality as a Pain Management Modality in Academic, Community, and Safety-Net Settings: Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have shown that virtual reality (VR) is an efficacious treatment modality for opioid-sparing pain management. However, the majority of these studies were conducted among primarily White, relatively advantaged populations and in well-resourced settings. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a qualitative, theory-informed implementation science study to assess the readiness for VR in safety-net settings. METHODS: Using the theoretical lens of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) framework, we conducted semistructured interviews with current VR users and nonusers based in safety-net health systems (n=15). We investigated barriers and facilitators to a commercially available, previously validated VR technology platform AppliedVR (Los Angeles, CA, USA). We used deductive qualitative analysis using the overarching domains of the CFIR framework and performed open, inductive coding to identify specific themes within each domain. RESULTS: Interviewees deemed the VR intervention to be useful, scalable, and an appealing alternative to existing pain management approaches. Both users and nonusers identified a lack of reimbursement for VR as a significant challenge for adoption. Current users cited positive patient feedback, but safety-net stakeholders voiced concern that existing VR content may not be relevant or appealing to diverse patients. All respondents acknowledged the challenge of integrating and maintaining VR in current pain management workflows across a range of clinical settings, and this adoption challenge was particularly acute, given resource and staffing constraints in safety-net settings. CONCLUSIONS: VR for pain management holds interest for frontline pain management clinicians and leadership in safety-net health settings but will require significant tailoring and adaption to address the needs of diverse populations. Integration into complex workflows for pain management is a significant barrier to adoption, and participants cited structural cost and reimbursement concerns as impediments to initial implementation and scaling of VR use.

The need for feminist intersectionality in digital health.

Digital health, including the use of mobile health apps, telemedicine, and data analytics to improve health systems, has surged during the COVID-19 pandemic. The social and economic fallout from COVID-19 has further exacerbated gender inequities, through increased domestic violence against women, soaring unemployment rates in women, and increased unpaid familial care taken up by women-all factors that can worsen women's health. Digital health can bolster gender equity through increased access to health care, empowerment of one's own health data, and reduced burden of unpaid care work. Yet, digital health is rarely designed from a gender equity perspective. In this Viewpoint, we show that because of lower access and exclusion from app design, gender imbalance in digital health leadership, and harmful gender stereotypes, digital health is disadvantaging women-especially women with racial or ethnic minority backgrounds. Tackling digital health's gender inequities is more crucial than ever. We explain our feminist intersectionality framework to tackle digital health's gender inequities and provide recommendations for future research.

Clinician Experience with Telemedicine at a Safety-net Hospital Network during COVID-19: A Cross-sectional Survey

Objective. The COVID-19 pandemic prompted unprecedented expansion of telemedicine services. We sought to describe clinician experiences providing telemedicine to publiclyinsured, lowincome patients during COVID-19. Methods. Online survey of ambulatory clinicians in an urban safetynet hospital system, conducted May 28, 2020–July 14, 2020. Results. Among 311 participants (response rate 48.3%), 34.7% (n=108/311) practiced in primary/urgent care, 37.0% (n=115/311) medical specialty, and 7.7% (n=24/311) surgical clinics. A large majority (87.8%, 273/311) had conducted telephone visits, 26.0% (81/311) video. Participants reported observing both technical and nontechnical patient barriers. Clinicians reported concerns about the diagnostic safety of telephone (58.9%, 129/219) vs. video (35.3%, 24/68). However, clinician comfort with telemedicine was high for telephone (89.3%, 216/242) and for video (91.0%, 61/67), with many clinicians (92.1%, 220/239 telephone;90.9%, 60/66 video) planning to continue telemedicine after COVID-19. Conclusions. Clinicians in a safetynet health care system report great comfort with and intention to continue telemedicine after the pandemic, despite safety concerns and patient challenges.

Real-world insights from launching remote peer-to-peer mentoring in a safety net healthcare delivery setting.

Peer mentors have been proven to improve diabetes outcomes, especially among diverse patients. Delivering peer mentoring via remote strategies (phone, text, mobile applications) is critical, especially in light of the recent pandemic. We conducted a real-world evaluation of a remote diabetes intervention in a safety-net delivery system in New York. We summarized the uptake, content, and pre-post clinical effectiveness for English- and Spanish-speaking participants. Of patients who could be reached, 71% (n = 690/974) were enrolled, and 90% of those (n = 618/690) participated in coaching. Patients and mentors had a mean of 32 check-ins, and each patient set an average of 10 goals. 29% of the participants accessed the program via the smartphone application. Among participants with complete hemoglobin A1c data (n = 179), there was an absolute 1.71% reduction (P < .01). There are multiple lessons for successful implementation of remote peer coaching into settings serving diverse patients, including meaningful patient-mentor matching and addressing social determinants.