Addressing disparities in speech-language pathology and laryngology services with telehealth.

The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected the health and well-being of marginalized communities, and it brought greater awareness to disparities in health care access and utilization. Addressing these disparities is difficult because of their multidimensional nature. Predisposing factors (demographic information, social structure, and beliefs), enabling factors (family and community) and illness levels (perceived and evaluated illness) are thought to jointly contribute to such disparities. Research has demonstrated that disparities in access and utilization of speech-language pathology and laryngology services are the result of racial and ethnic differences, geographic factors, sex, gender, educational background, income level and insurance status. For example, persons from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds have been found to be less likely to attend or adhere to voice rehabilitation, and they are more likely to delay health care due to language barriers, longer wait times, a lack of transportation and difficulties contacting their physician. The purpose of this paper is to summarize existing research on telehealth, discuss how telehealth offers the potential to eliminate some disparities in the access and utilization of voice care, review its limitations, and encourage continued research in this area. A clinical perspective from a large volume laryngology clinic in a major city in northeastern United States highlights the use of telehealth in the provision of voice care by a laryngologist and speech-language pathologist during and after the COVID19 pandemic.

The Role of Neurosurgery in Worldwide Health Care and Its Disparities: An Overview

Neurosurgery is a relatively new branch of surgery that is increasingly important in global health. Neurosurgery has benefited from many recent technological improvements that have significantly increased the number of common conditions that can be effectively treated. Unfortunately, access to neurosurgeons is disproportionately concentrated in high-income countries, while many low- and middle-income countries have a drastic lack of neurosurgical workforce. This leads to extreme health disparities in the absence of urgently needed neurosurgical procedures. Access to current information can be improved by including LMICs in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and by using the consensus conference method approach when RCT-derived evidence-based clinical guidelines are not applicable to LMICs. HICs must also contribute to meet the equipment needs of LMICs as well as share knowledge on how low-cost devices may be appropriately used in resource-constrained clinical environments. Finally, efforts to reduce disparities can benefit from the many new, more inclusive methods of communication we have learned to use effectively during the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022.

The Evolution of Primary Care Telehealth Disparities During COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth has become widely used as a novel way to provide outpatient care during the COVID-19 pandemic, but data about telehealth use in primary care remain limited. Studies in other specialties raise concerns that telehealth may be widening existing health care disparities, requiring further scrutiny of trends in telehealth use. OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to further characterize sociodemographic differences in primary care via telehealth compared to in-person office visits before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and determine if these disparities changed throughout 2020. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a large US academic center with 46 primary care practices from April-December 2019 to April-December 2020. Data were subdivided into calendar quarters and compared to determine evolving disparities throughout the year. We queried and compared billed outpatient encounters in General Internal Medicine and Family Medicine via binary logic mixed effects regression model and estimated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs. We used sex, race, and ethnicity of the patient attending each encounter as fixed effects. We analyzed socioeconomic status of patients in the institution's primary county based on the patient's residence zip code. RESULTS: A total of 81,822 encounters in the pre-COVID-19 time frame and 47,994 encounters in the intra-COVID-19 time frame were analyzed; in the intra-COVID-19 time frame, a total of 5322 (11.1%) of encounters were telehealth encounters. Patients living in zip code areas with high utilization rate of supplemental nutrition assistance were less likely to use primary care in the intra-COVID-19 time frame (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98; P=.006). Encounters with the following patients were less likely to be via telehealth compared to in-person office visits: patients who self-identified as Asian (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.86) and Nepali (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.19-0.72), patients insured by Medicare (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.88), and patients living in zip code areas with high utilization rate of supplemental nutrition assistance (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.99). Many of these disparities persisted throughout the year. Although there was no statistically significant difference in telehealth use for patients insured by Medicaid throughout the whole year, subanalysis of quarter 4 found encounters with patients insured by Medicaid were less likely to be via telehealth (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55-0.97; P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth was not used equally by all patients within primary care throughout the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically by patients who self-identified as Asian and Nepali, insured by Medicare, and living in zip code areas with low socioeconomic status. As the COVID-19 pandemic and telehealth infrastructure change, it is critical we continue to reassess the use of telehealth. Institutions should continue to monitor disparities in telehealth access and advocate for policy changes that may improve equity.

Pulmonary Sequelae of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the infectious agent that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), can infect multiple organ systems triggering an inflammatory response resulting in abnormalities in cellular and organ function. This can result in multiple symptoms and associated functional limitations. Respiratory symptoms in acute COVID-19 and in post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) are common and can range from mild and intermittent to severe and persistent, correlating with functional limitations. Although the long-term pulmonary sequelae of COVID-19 infection and PASC are not known, a considered rehabilitative approach is recommended to yield optimal functional outcomes with a return to pre-morbid functional, avocational, and vocational status.

Mapping Inequities in Digital Health Technology Within the World Health Organization's European Region Using PROGRESS PLUS: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: The use of digital technologies within health care rapidly increased as services transferred to web-based platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inequalities in digital health across the domains of equity are not routinely examined; yet, the long-term integration of digitally delivered services needs to consider such inequalities to ensure equitable benefits. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aimed to map inequities in access, use, and engagement with digital health technologies across equity domains. METHODS: We searched 4 electronic databases (MEDLINE, ASSIA, PsycINFO, and Scopus) for quantitative and mixed methods reviews and meta-analyses published between January 2016 and May 2022. Reviews were limited to those that included studies from the World Health Organization's European region. Extracted data were mapped against Cochrane's PROGRESS PLUS (place of residence, race, ethnicity, culture, and language, occupation, gender and sex, religion, education, socioeconomic status, social capital, and other characteristics) dimensions of equity. RESULTS: In total, 404 unique citations were identified from the searches, and 2 citations were identified from other sources. After eligibility assessment, 22 reviews were included. Consistent evidence was found showing higher access to digital health technologies among patients who were of White ethnicity, were English speaking, and had no disability. There were no reviews that explored differences in access to digital health care by age, gender and sex, occupation, education, or homeless or substance misuse. Higher use of digital health technologies was observed among populations that were White, English speaking, younger, with a higher level of education, of higher economic status, and residents in urban areas. No clear evidence of differences in the use of digital technologies by occupation, gender and sex, disability, or homeless or substance misuse was found, nor was clear evidence found in the included reviews on inequalities in the engagement with digital technologies. Finally, no reviews were identified that explored differences by place of residence. CONCLUSIONS: Despite awareness of the potential impact of inequalities in digital health, there are important evidence gaps across multiple equity domains. The development of a common framework for evaluating digital health equity in new health initiatives and consistency in reporting findings is needed.

Impact of the Covid-19 epidemic on a US sample of patients with myasthenia gravis.

Introduction: The Covid-19 pandemic has devastated the world and demonstrated the inadequacy of health care in the United States. To assess its impact, the Rare Disease Clinical Research Network conducted a survey to assess the pandemic on the rare disease community of patients, including those with myasthenia gravis (MG). Methods: A cross-sectional survey was designed to target people or their care givers who live in the United States, have a rare disease, and are under 90 years of age. Respondents logged onto a dedicated web page and completed the survey online, which requested demographic, disease-specific, drug treatment, and symptom information as well as assessment of Covid-19 impact on them. The survey was open from May 2020 to December 2020. Results: Five hundred ninety-four with self-reported myasthenia gravis completed the survey, which was the largest number of respondents. Sixty percent of respondents were women with a mean age of 60 years. Eighty-nine percent identified as White. Respondents did not appreciate a worsening of symptoms after the pandemic. Only 7 respondents reported the diagnosis of Covid-19 but 11% indicated they had difficulty accessing care at the time of the survey. Discussion and Conclusion: Patients with MG complained of worse access to medical care during the early months of the pandemic, including challenges in diagnosis of suspected Covid-19 infection. A major limitation of the survey is its inability to access minority populations. Nevertheless, the results of the Rare Disease Clinical Research Network (RCDRN) survey of patients with MG provide clear evidence that the pandemic has demonstrated the deficiencies in US healthcare.

Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on Patients with Myasthenia Gravis Deeper understanding of the consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic on people with rare diseases is critically important in order to enhance health care in the future. The Rare Disease Clinical Research Network (RDCRN) performed a web-based survey of individuals with rare diseases in the first year of the pandemic utilizing questions to assess the impact of the pandemic on their symptoms, access to healthcare, and medication use. Five hundred and ninety-four respondents reported having myasthenia gravis (MG). The average age was 60 years and 60% were women. Nearly ninety percent were White. A large minority indicated difficulty accessing health care and nearly a third used telemedicine. Only seven respondents indicated a diagnosis of Covid-19 but many more had symptoms consistent with infection. Overall, there was no increase in symptoms of MG after the beginning of the pandemic. The pandemic has demonstrated the deficiencies in US healthcare, and these are appreciated in the results of the RCDRN survey of patients with MG. The RDCRN will continue to survey the rare disease community to understand the ongoing impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Students' perceptions on shadowing during COVID-19 and an exploration of innovative solutions for clinical exposure.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: The objective of this project was to evaluate the perceptions of predental students' shadowing experiences during a pandemic and further, explore innovative solutions that can be implemented to ensure that shadowing opportunities are equitable and accessible. METHODS: Data was collected via the Web 2.0 social media platform, Instagram (owned by Meta Platforms, Inc.) from 122 participants attending college in North America and are on the predental track: freshman (N = 11), sophomores (N = 25), juniors (N = 30), seniors (N = 34) and recent college graduates (N = 22). Participants completed a survey consisting of 20 questions. RESULTS: Results showed that the pandemic disrupted traditional shadowing methods; students turned to various virtual platforms, such as YouTube and Zoom, to obtain shadowing experiences. There was an increase in the number of students who shadowed virtually during the pandemic versus pre-COVID-19. The majority of the respondents (80%) agreed that dental schools have not provided sufficient guidance on how to approach shadowing during a pandemic. CONCLUSION: Innovative shadowing platforms should be implemented in order to help college students explore careers within dentistry and beyond. The development of a standardized virtual shadowing program with clear guidelines can increase equity and accessibility.

Recent Telehealth Utilization at a Large Federally Qualified Health Center System: Evidence of Disparities Even Within Telehealth Modalities.

Objective: To explore overall trends as well as racial/ethnic disparities in utilization of different telehealth modalities (telephone vs. televideo) at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Using electronic health record data from a large New York-based FQHC system, we aggregated (separately) Behavioral Health and Family Practice visits per month occurring in-person, by telephone, or by televideo and graphed monthly trends in visits across the pre-pandemic, peak-pandemic, and post-peak-pandemic periods. We calculated fractions of visits conducted by modality for each patient demographic (race/ethnicity, primary language, age, gender, insurance type, and geography) and conducted bivariate assessments to test relationships between patient characteristics and modality. Results: Our data contained 121,072 unique patients and 811,105 visits overall. Telehealth use peaked in April 2020 but continued to account for a significant fraction of FQHC visits-nearly 25% (N = 4,908) of monthly Family Practice visits and a massive 98% (N = 14,173) of Behavioral Health visits as late as June 2021. Of all telehealth visits, nearly half were by telephone. Moreover, demographic factors differed between FQHC patients using telephone visits versus those using televideo: Black, non-English speaking, older, and Medicaid patients had significantly higher utilization of telephone visits than televideo visits (e.g., 25.9% of all Black patients' visits were via telephone vs. 17.1% via televideo; p < 0.001). In contrast, younger, Asian, and privately insured patients had significantly higher televideo visits. Conclusions: Our results suggest that telephone visits remain critical to the provision of health care for FQHC patients. They also suggest that disparities extend beyond the telehealth versus in-person dichotomy and inequities exist even within the type of telehealth used. This has implications for patient health, FQHC quality outcomes, as well as optimal Medicaid telehealth reimbursement policy.

Feasibility of Single - Encounter Telemedicine Lung Cancer Screening: A Retrospective Cohort Study in an Underserved Population.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 forced a delay of non-essential health services, including lung cancer screening. Our institution developed a single-encounter, telemedicine (SET) lung cancer screening whereby patients receive low-dose CT in-person, but counseling regarding results, coordination of follow-up care and smoking cessation is delivered using telemedicine. This study compares outcomes of SET lung cancer screening to our pre-COVID, single-visit, in-person (SIP) lung cancer screening. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed we recorded independent variables of gender, race/ethnicity, age, educational attainment, smoking status and dependent variables including cancer diagnosis, stage and treatment between March 2019 to July 2021. Using retrospective analysis, we compared outcomes of SIP lung cancer screening before COVID-19 and SET lung cancer screening amid COVID-19. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in number of patients screened pre- and amid COVID-19.673 people were screened via SIP, while only 440 were screened via SET. SIP screening consisted of 52.5% Black/African American patients, which decreased to 37% with SET lung cancer screening. There was no significant difference in gender, age, or educational attainment. There was also no significant difference in Lung-RADS score between the 2 methods of screening or diagnostic procedures performed. Ultimately telemedicine based screening diagnosed fewer cancers, 1.6% diagnosed via telemedicine vs 3.3% screened by in person. CONCLUSION: We implemented SET lung cancer screening to continue lung cancer screening during a global pandemic. Our study established feasibility of telemedicine-based lung cancer screening among our predominantly African American/Black population, though fewer patients were screened. We found no difference in distribution between age, or educational attainment suggesting other factors discouraging lung cancer screening amid COVID-19.

Contraceptive care service provision via telehealth early in the COVID-19 pandemic at rural and urban federally qualified health centers in 2 southeastern states.

PURPOSE: To investigate telehealth use for contraceptive service provision among rural and urban federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Alabama (AL) and South Carolina (SC) during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This is a mixed-methods study using data from the FQHC Contraceptive Care Survey and key informant interviews with FQHC staff in AL and SC conducted in 2020. Differences between rural and urban clinics in telehealth use for contraceptive service provision were assessed with a chi-square test of independence. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and coded to identify facilitators and barriers to telehealth. FINDINGS: Telehealth for contraceptive care increased during the early months of the pandemic relative to prepandemic. Fewer rural clinics than urban clinics provided telehealth for contraceptive counseling (16.3% vs 50.6%) (P = .0002), emergency contraception (0.0% vs 16.1%) (P = .004), and sexually transmitted infection care (16.3% vs 34.6%) (P = .031). Key facilitators of telehealth were reimbursement policy, electronic infrastructure and technology, and funding for technology. Barriers included challenges with funding for telehealth, limited electronic infrastructure, and reduced staffing capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in telehealth service provision for contraceptive care between rural and urban FQHCs highlight the need for supportive strategies to increase access to care for low-income rural populations, particularly in AL and SC. It is essential for public and private entities to support the implementation and continuation of telehealth among rural clinics, particularly, investing in widespread and clinic-level electronic infrastructure and technology for telehealth, such as broadband and electronic health record systems compatible with telehealth technology.

Neither Race nor Ethnicity Impact the Mortality of Residents of Veterans Affairs Community Living Center With COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 disproportionately affected nursing home residents and people from racial and ethnic minorities in the United States. Nursing homes in the Veterans Affairs (VA) system, termed Community Living Centers (CLCs), belong to a national managed care system. In the period prior to the availability of vaccines, we examined whether residents from racial and ethnic minorities experienced disparities in COVID-19 related mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Residents at 134 VA CLCs from April 14 to December 10, 2020. METHODS: We used the VA Corporate Data Warehouse to identify VA CLC residents with a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test during or 2 days prior to their admission and without a prior case of COVID-19. We assessed age, self-reported race/ethnicity, frailty, chronic medical conditions, Charlson comorbidity index, the annual quarter of the infection, and all-cause 30-day mortality. We estimated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of all-cause 30-day mortality using a mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: During the study period, 1133 CLC residents had an index positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Mortality at 30 days was 23% for White non-Hispanic residents, 15% for Black non-Hispanic residents, 10% for Hispanic residents, and 16% for other residents. Factors associated with increased 30-day mortality were age ≥70 years, Charlson comorbidity index ≥6, and a positive SARS-CoV-2 test between April 14 and June 30, 2020. Frailty, Black race, and Hispanic ethnicity were not independently associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Among a national cohort of VA CLC residents with COVID-19, neither Black race nor Hispanic ethnicity had a negative impact on survival. Further research is needed to determine factors within the VA health care system that mitigate the influence of systemic racism on COVID-19 outcomes in US nursing homes.

Toward a More Just System of Care in Molecular Pathology.

Policy Points American health care policy must be critically assessed to establish the role it plays in sustaining and alleviating the health disparities that currently exist in molecular genetic testing. It is critical to understand the economic and sociocultural influences that drive patients to undergo or forgo molecular testing, especially in marginalized patient populations. A multipronged solution with actions necessary from multiple stakeholders is required to reduce the cost of health care, rebalance regional disparities, encourage physician engagement, reduce data bias, and earn patients' trust. CONTEXT: The health status of a population is greatly influenced by both biological processes and external factors. For years, minority and low socioeconomic patient populations have faced worse outcomes and poorer health in the United States. Experts have worked extensively to understand the issues and find solutions to alleviate this disproportionate burden of disease. As a result, there have been some improvements and successes, but wide gaps still exist. Diagnostic molecular genetic testing and so-called personalized medicine are just now being integrated into the current American health care system. The way in which these tests are integrated can either exacerbate or reduce health disparities. METHODS: We provide case scenarios-loosely based on real-life patients-so that nonexperts can see the impacts of complex policy decisions and unintentional biases in technology without needing to understand all the intricacies. We use data to explain these findings from an extensive literature search examining both peer-reviewed and gray literature. FINDINGS: Access to diagnostic molecular genetic testing is not equitable or sufficient, owing to at least five major factors: (1) cost to the patient, (2) location, (3) lack of provider buy-in, (4) data-set bias, and (5) lack of public trust. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular genetic pathology can be made more equitable with the concerted efforts of multiple stakeholders. Confronting the five major factors identified here may help us usher in a new era of precision medicine without its discriminatory counterpart.

Real-World Disparities in Remote Follow-Up of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Single-Center Experience.

Background Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices has been shown to improve cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. To date, no studies have investigated disparities in use and delivery of RM. This study was performed to investigate if racial and socioeconomic disparities are present in cardiac implantable electronic device RM. Methods and Results This was a retrospective observational cohort study at a single tertiary care center in the United States. Patients who received a newly implanted cardiac implantable electronic device or device upgrade between January 2017 and December 2020 were included. Patients were classified as RM positive (RM+) when they underwent at least ≥2 remote interrogations per year during follow-up. Of all eligible patients, 2520 patients were included, and 34% were women. The mean follow-up was 25 months. Mean age was 71±14 years. Pacemakers constituted 66% of implanted devices, whereas 26% were implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, and 8% were cardiac resynchronization therapy with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Most patients (83%) were of European American ancestry. During follow-up, 66% of patients were classified as RM+. Patients who were younger, European American, college-educated, lived in a county with higher median household income, and were active on the hospital's patient portals were more frequently RM+. In an adjusted regression model, RM+ remained associated with the use of the online patient portal (odds ratio [OR], 2.889 [95% CI, 2.387-3.497]), presence of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (OR, 1.489 [95% CI, 1.207-1.835]), advanced college degree (OR, 1.244 [95% CI, 1.014-1.527]), and lastly with European American ancestry (P<0.05). During the years of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of RM+ patients increased, whereas the association with ancestry and ethnicity decreased. Conclusions Despite being offered to all patients at implantation, significant disparities were present in cardiovascular implantable electronic device RM in this cohort. Disparities were partly reversed during COVID-19. Further studies are needed to examine health center- and patient-specific factors to overcome these barriers, and to facilitate equal opportunities to participate in RM.

Meeting them where they are on the web: addressing structural barriers for Latinos in telehealth care.

As we enter an era of health care that incorporates telehealth for routine provision of care, we can build a system that consciously and proactively includes vulnerable patients, thereby avoiding further exacerbation of health disparities. A practical way to reach out to Latino patients is to use media they already widely use. Rather than expect patients to adapt to suboptimal systems of telehealth care, we can improve telehealth for Latinos by using platforms already familiar to them and thereby refocus telehealth delivery systems to provide patient-centered care. Such care is responsive to patients' needs and preferences; for Latinos, this includes using digital devices that they actually own (ie, smartphones). Equity-centered telehealth is accessible for all, regardless of linguistic, literacy, and socioeconomic barriers.

Social and demographic patterns of influenza vaccination coverage in Norway, influenza seasons 2014/15 to 2020/21.

AIMS: To examine influenza vaccination coverage among risk groups (RG) and health care workers (HCW), and study social and demographic patterns of vaccination coverage over time. METHODS: Vaccination coverage was estimated by self-report in a nationally representative telephone survey among 14919 individuals aged 18-79 years over seven influenza seasons from 2014/15 to 2020/21. We explored whether belonging to an influenza RG (being >=65 years of age and/or having >=1 medical risk factor), being a HCW or educational attainment was associated with vaccination status using logistic regression. RESULTS: Vaccination coverage increased from 27 % to 66 % among individuals 65-79 years, from 13 % to 33 % among individuals 18-64 years with >=1 risk factor, and from 9 % to 51 % among HCWs during the study period. Being older, having a risk factor or being a HCW were significantly associated with higher coverage in all multivariable logistic regression analyses. Higher education was also consistently associated with higher coverage, but the difference did not reach significance in all influenza seasons. Educational attainment was not significantly associated with coverage while coverage was at its lowest (2014/15-2017/18), but as coverage increased, so did the differences. Individuals with intermediate or lower education were less likely to report vaccination than those with higher education in season 2018/19, OR = 0.61 (95 % CI 0.46-0.80) and OR = 0.58 (95 % CI 0.41-0.83), respectively, and in season 2019/20, OR = 0.69 (95 % CI 0.55-0.88) and OR = 0.71 (95 % CI 0.53-0.95), respectively. When the vaccine was funded in the COVID-19 pandemic winter of 2020/21, educational differences diminished again and were no longer significant. CONCLUSIONS: We observed widening educational differences in influenza vaccination coverage as coverage increased from 2014/15 to 2019/20. When influenza vaccination was funded in 2020/21, differences in coverage by educational attainment diminished. These findings indicate that economic barriers influence influenza vaccination decisions among risk groups in Norway.

Prevalence and Outcomes of COVID-19 among Hematology/Oncology Patients and Providers of a Community-Facing Health System during the B1.1.529 ("Omicron") SARS-CoV-2 Variant Wave.

(1) Background: the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic continues, and patients actively receiving chemotherapy are known to be at enhanced risk for developing symptomatic disease with poorer outcomes. Our study evaluated the prevalence of COVID-19 among patients and providers of our community-facing county health system during the B1.1.529 ("Omicron") COVID-19 variant wave. (2) Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients that received care and clinical providers whom worked at the Jackson Memorial Hospital Hematology/Oncology clinic in Miami, Florida, USA, from 1 December 2021 through 30 April 2022. We assessed demographic variables and quality outcomes among patients. (3) Results: 1031 patients and 18 providers were retrospectively analyzed. 90 patients tested positive for COVID-19 (8.73%), while 6 providers tested positive (33.3%) (p = 0.038). There were 4 (10.3%) COVID-19-related deaths (and another outside our study timeframe) and 39 non-COVID-19-related deaths (89.7%) in the patient population (p = 0.77). COVID-19 accounted for 4.44% of our clinic's total mortality, and delayed care in 64.4% of patients. (4) Conclusions: The prevalence of COVID-19 positivity in our patient cohort mirrored local, state, and national trends, however a statistically significant greater proportion of our providers tested positive. Almost two-thirds of patients experienced a cancer treatment delay, significantly impacting oncologic care.

The Disparities in Patient Portal Use Among Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases: Retrospective Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the shift to virtual care became essential for the continued care of patients. Individuals with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) especially require frequent provider visits and close monitoring. To date, there have been limited studies examining inequities in health technology use among patients with RMDs. OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to identify characteristics associated with patient portal use before and after the COVID-19 pandemic in a convenience sample of patients with RMDs from a large academic medical center. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, Epic electronic medical record data were queried to identify established patients of the University of North Carolina Hospitals adult rheumatology clinic between November 1, 2017, through November 30, 2019. Demographic and clinical data were collected to compare MyChart (Epic's patient portal) users with nonusers before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. MyChart activation and use were modeled using logistic regression and adjusted odds ratios, and confidence intervals were estimated. RESULTS: We identified 5075 established patients with RMDs who met the inclusion criteria. Prior to the pandemic, we found that younger age (P<.001), suburban residence (P=.05), commercial/state insurance (P<.001), military insurance (P=.05), and median income >US $50,000 (P<.001) were associated with significantly higher odds of MyChart activation. Male sex (P<.001), being of Black or African American (P<.001) or "other" race (P<.001), Spanish as a primary language (P<.001), rural residence (P=.007), Medicaid insurance (P<.001), and median income of

Coronavirus Disease 2019-Related Health Disparities in Ophthalmology with a Retrospective Analysis at a Large Academic Public Hospital.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has disproportionately affected racial and ethnic minorities in the United States. Although recent meta-analyses have identified the prevalence of ocular manifestations in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, no studies with these potential findings have been implemented in examining ophthalmic disparities in racial and ethnic minorities. It is additionally clear that patient access to eye care from coronavirus disease 2019 has been disproportionate in underserved communities. Large public hospitals and urban academic medical centers provide a unique opportunity to further study ocular disease presentation and health disparities from coronavirus disease 2019 in these populations.

The association of strained ICU capacity with hospital patient racial and ethnic composition and federal relief during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the association between strained intensive care unit (ICU) capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic and hospital racial and ethnic patient composition, federal pandemic relief, and other hospital characteristics. DATA SOURCES: We used government data on hospital capacity during the pandemic and Provider Relief Fund (PRF) allocations, Medicare claims and enrollment data, hospital cost reports, and Social Vulnerability Index data. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted cross-sectional bivariate analyses relating strained capacity and PRF award per hospital bed with hospital patient composition and other characteristics, with and without adjustment for hospital referral region (HRR). DATA COLLECTION: We linked PRF data to CMS Certification Numbers based on hospital name and location. We used measures of racial and ethnic composition generated from Medicare claims and enrollment data. Our sample period includes the weeks of September 18, 2020 through November 5, 2021, and we restricted our analysis to short-term, general hospitals with at least one intensive care unit (ICU) bed. We defined "ICU strain share" as the proportion of ICU days occurring while a given hospital had an ICU occupancy rate ≥ 90%. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: After adjusting for HRR, hospitals in the top tercile of Black patient shares had higher ICU strain shares than did hospitals in the bottom tercile (30% vs. 22%, p < 0.05) and received greater PRF amounts per bed ($118,864 vs. $92,407, p < 0.05). Having high versus low ICU occupancy relative to pre-pandemic capacity was associated with a modest increase in PRF amounts per bed after adjusting for HRR ($107,319 vs. $96,627, p < 0.05), but there were no statistically significant differences when comparing hospitals with high versus low ICU occupancy relative to contemporaneous capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals with large Black patient shares experienced greater strain during the pandemic. Although these hospitals received more federal relief, funding was not targeted overall toward hospitals with high ICU occupancy rates.

Socioeconomic and Clinical Demography of Dental Missed Care Opportunities.

INTRODUCTION: Missed care opportunities (MCOs) contribute to poor health outcomes, and pediatric dental patients are particularly vulnerable; identifying associated patient characteristics will help inform development of targeted interventional programs. OBJECTIVE: To assess socioeconomic and demographic disparities associated with MCOs among children in an urban pediatric hospital's dental clinic. MCOs lead to a lack of continuous care and increased emergent needs, so understanding MCOs is required to achieve equitable pediatric dental health. METHODS: A retrospective 2-y (2019-2020) cohort of MCOs in children 1 to 17 y old, with scheduled dental visits. MCOs were defined as appointments not attended or canceled and not rescheduled prior to initial scheduled visit. Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression models with patient-level clustering assessed the associations of demographics, neighborhood-level socioeconomic factors (using social vulnerability index [SVI]), and clinic characteristics with MCOs. RESULTS: Of 30,095 visits, 30.9% were MCOs. Multivariable logistic regression estimated increased likelihood of MCOs in Black/non-Hispanic (odds ratio [OR], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.32) and Hispanic (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.06-1.31) patients, patients with public insurance (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.15-1.36) or no insurance (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.15-1.85), patients with complex chronic conditions (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19), visits scheduled during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR, 9.48; 95% CI, 8.89-10.11), appointments with wait days over 21 d (OR, 4.07; 95% CI, 3.49-4.74), and children from neighborhoods of high social vulnerability (75th percentile SVI) (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.16). CONCLUSIONS: Children with highest dental MCOs were from neighborhoods with high SVI, had public insurance, and were from marginalized populations. MCOs contribute to inequities in overall health; hence, interventions that address barriers related to characteristics associated with pediatric dental MCOs are needed. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT: Missed care opportunities contribute to poor health outcomes; identifying associated patient characteristics will help inform development of targeted interventional programs. Providing these findings to stakeholders will better impart understanding access barriers and drive research and program development. Dissemination of this information in the form of altering appointment practices will better accommodate specific patient population needs.