A Socio-Ecological Approach to Addressing Digital Redlining in the United States: A Call to Action for Health Equity.

Physical distancing requirements due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has increased the need for broadband internet access. The World Health Organization defines social determinants of health as non-medical factors that impact health outcomes by affecting the conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live, and age. By this definition broadband internet access is a social determinant of health. Digital redlining-the systematic process by which specific groups are deprived of equal access to digital tools such as the internet-creates inequities in access to educational and employment opportunities, as well as healthcare and health information. Although it is known that internet service providers systematically exclude low-income communities from broadband service, little has been done to stop this discriminatory practice. In this paper, we seek to amplify the call to action against the practice of digital redlining in the United States, describe how it contributes to health disparities broadly and within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and use a socio-ecological framework to propose short- and long-term actions to address this inequity.

Diversity in clinical research: public health and social justice imperatives.

It is well established that demographic representation in clinical research is important for understanding the safety and effectiveness of novel therapeutics and vaccines in diverse patient populations. In recent years, the National Institutes of Health and Food and Drug Administration have issued guidelines and recommendations for the inclusion of women, older adults, and racial and ethnic minorities in research. However, these guidelines fail to provide an adequate explanation of why racial and ethnic representation in clinical research is important. This article aims to both provide the missing arguments for why adequate representation of racial and ethnic minorities in clinical research is essential and to articulate a number of recommendations for improving diversity going forward.Appropriate racial and ethnic representation and fair inclusion help (1) increase the generalisability of clinical trial results, (2) equitably distribute any benefits of clinical research and (3) enable trust in the research enterprise.

Breast Cancer Screening During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Moving from Disparities to Health Equity.

The COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented disruptions to routine health care in the United States. Screening mammography, a cornerstone of breast cancer control and prevention, was completely halted in the spring of 2020, and screening programs have continued to face challenges with subsequent COVID-19 waves. Although screening mammography rates dropped for all women during the pandemic, a number of studies have now clearly documented that reductions in screening have been greater for some populations than others. Specifically, minoritized women have been screened at lower rates than White women across studies, although the specific patterns of disparity vary depending on the populations and communities studied. We posit that these disparities are likely due to a variety of structural and contextual factors, including the differential impact of COVID-19 on communities. We also outline key considerations for closing gaps in screening mammography. First, practices, health systems, and communities must measure screening mammography use to identify whether gaps exist, and which populations are most affected. Second, we propose that strategies to close disparities in breast cancer screening must be multifaceted, targeting the health system/practice, but also structural factors at the policy level. Health disparities arise from a complex set of conditions, and multimodal solutions that address the complex, multifactorial conditions that lead to disparities may be more likely to succeed and are necessary for promoting health equity.

A Socio-Ecological Approach to Addressing Digital Redlining in the United States: A Call to Action for Health Equity

Physical distancing requirements due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has increased the need for broadband internet access. The World Health Organization defines social determinants of health as non-medical factors that impact health outcomes by affecting the conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live, and age. By this definition broadband internet access is a social determinant of health. Digital redlining—the systematic process by which specific groups are deprived of equal access to digital tools such as the internet—creates inequities in access to educational and employment opportunities, as well as healthcare and health information. Although it is known that internet service providers systematically exclude low-income communities from broadband service, little has been done to stop this discriminatory practice. In this paper, we seek to amplify the call to action against the practice of digital redlining in the United States, describe how it contributes to health disparities broadly and within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and use a socio-ecological framework to propose short- and long-term actions to address this inequity.

Loneliness, sadness, and feelings of social disconnection in older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Public health measures to control the COVID-19 pandemic have led to feelings of loneliness among older adults, which, prior to COVID, has been associated with subsequent morbidity and mortality. We sought to identify differences in feelings of loneliness, sadness, and social disconnection early in the pandemic across racial groups, and possible mitigating factors. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis using the weighted nationally-representative Medicare Current Beneficiaries Survey COVID-19 supplement, collected summer 2020. We included all Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older who did not respond by proxy. We examined changes in loneliness, sadness, or feelings of social disconnection. Multivariable logistic regression models accounted for sociodemographic variables, access to primary care and the internet, and history of depression or dementia. RESULTS: Among 8125 beneficiaries, representative of 43.7 million Medicare beneficiaries, 22.6% reported loneliness or sadness, and 37.1% feeling socially disconnected. In fully-adjusted models, Hispanic/Latinx beneficiaries were most likely to report loneliness or sadness (OR = 1.3, CI: 1.02-1.65; p = 0.02) and Black beneficiaries were least likely to report feeling socially disconnected (OR = 0.55; CI: 0.42-0.73; p < 0.001). Internet access was associated with increased odds of both (OR = 1.29, 95 CI: 1.07-1.56; p = 0.009; and OR = 1.42, 95 CI: 1.24-1.63; p < 0.001, respectively). Access to primary care was associated with lower odds of both (OR = 0.77, 95 CI: 0.61-0.96; p = 0.02; and OR = 0.72, 95 CI: 0.61-0.87; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Loneliness, sadness, and feelings of social disconnection were common among older Medicare beneficiaries early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Differences by race/ethnicity may be driven by different living structures and social networks, and warrant further study. Policy makers and clinicians should consider facilitating connection by phone or in person, as internet access did not diminish feelings of loneliness, particularly for those living alone. Access to primary care, and tools for clinicians to address loneliness should be prioritized.

Racial disparities in the SOFA score among patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score predicts probability of in-hospital mortality. Many crisis standards of care suggest the use of SOFA scores to allocate medical resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESEARCH QUESTION: Are SOFA scores elevated among Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients hospitalized with COVID-19, compared to Non-Hispanic White patients? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study conducted in Yale New Haven Health System, including 5 hospitals with total of 2681 beds. Study population drawn from consecutive patients aged ≥18 admitted with COVID-19 from March 29th to August 1st, 2020. Patients excluded from the analysis if not their first admission with COVID-19, if they did not have SOFA score recorded within 24 hours of admission, if race and ethnicity data were not Non-Hispanic Black, Non-Hispanic White, or Hispanic, or if they had other missing data. The primary outcome was SOFA score, with peak score within 24 hours of admission dichotomized as <6 or ≥6. RESULTS: Of 2982 patients admitted with COVID-19, 2320 met inclusion criteria and were analyzed, of whom 1058 (45.6%) were Non-Hispanic White, 645 (27.8%) were Hispanic, and 617 (26.6%) were Non-Hispanic Black. Median age was 65.0 and 1226 (52.8%) were female. In univariate logistic screen and in full multivariate model, Non-Hispanic Black patients but not Hispanic patients had greater odds of an elevated SOFA score ≥6 when compared to Non-Hispanic White patients (OR 1.49, 95%CI 1.11-1.99). INTERPRETATION: Given current unequal patterns in social determinants of health, US crisis standards of care utilizing the SOFA score to allocate medical resources would be more likely to deny these resources to Non-Hispanic Black patients.

The potential impact of triage protocols on racial disparities in clinical outcomes among COVID-positive patients in a large academic healthcare system.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact in the United States, particularly for Black populations, and has heavily burdened the healthcare system. Hospitals have created protocols to allocate limited resources, but there is concern that these protocols will exacerbate disparities. The sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score is a tool often used in triage protocols. In these protocols, patients with higher SOFA scores are denied resources based on the assumption that they have worse clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to assess whether using SOFA score as a triage tool among COVID-positive patients would exacerbate racial disparities in clinical outcomes. METHODS: We analyzed data from a retrospective cohort of hospitalized COVID-positive patients in the Yale-New Haven Health System. We examined associations between race/ethnicity and peak overall/24-hour SOFA score, in-hospital mortality, and ICU admission. Other predictors of interest were age, sex, primary language, and insurance status. We used one-way ANOVA and chi-square tests to assess differences in SOFA score across racial/ethnic groups and linear and logistic regression to assess differences in clinical outcomes by sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Our final sample included 2,554 patients. Black patients had higher SOFA scores compared to patients of other races. However, Black patients did not have significantly greater in-hospital mortality or ICU admission compared to patients of other races. CONCLUSION: While Black patients in this sample of hospitalized COVID-positive patients had higher SOFA scores compared to patients of other races, this did not translate to higher in-hospital mortality or ICU admission. Results demonstrate that if SOFA score had been used to allocate care, Black COVID patients would have been denied care despite having similar clinical outcomes to white patients. Therefore, using SOFA score to allocate resources has the potential to exacerbate racial inequities by disproportionately denying care to Black patients and should not be used to determine access to care. Healthcare systems must develop and use COVID-19 triage protocols that prioritize equity.