The Structural Violence Trap: Disparities in Homicide, Chronic Disease Death, and Social Factors Across San Francisco Neighborhoods.

BACKGROUND: On average, a person living in San Francisco can expect to live 83 years. This number conceals significant variation by sex, race, and place of residence. We examined deaths and area-based social factors by San Francisco neighborhood, hypothesizing that socially disadvantaged neighborhoods shoulder a disproportionate mortality burden across generations, especially deaths attributable to violence and chronic disease. These data will inform targeted interventions and guide further research into effective solutions for San Francisco's marginalized communities. STUDY DESIGN: The San Francisco Department of Public Health provided data for the 2010-2014 top 20 causes of premature death by San Francisco neighborhood. Population-level demographic data were obtained from the US American Community Survey 2015 5-year estimate (2011-2015). The primary outcome was the association between years of life loss (YLL) and adjusted years of life lost (AYLL) for the top 20 causes of death in San Francisco and select social factors by neighborhood via linear regression analysis and heatmaps. RESULTS: The top 20 causes accounted for N = 15,687 San Francisco resident deaths from 2010-2014. Eight neighborhoods (21.0%) accounted for 47.9% of city-wide YLLs, with 6 falling below the city-wide median household income and many having a higher percent population Black, and lower education and higher unemployment levels. For chronic diseases and homicides, AYLLs increased as a neighborhood's percent Black, below poverty level, unemployment, and below high school education increased. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the mortality inequity burdening socially disadvantaged San Francisco neighborhoods, which align with areas subjected to historical discriminatory policies like redlining. These data emphasize the need to address past injustices and move toward equal access to wealth and health for all San Franciscans.

The effect of cirrhosis on trauma outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The negative effect of cirrhosis on mortality following traumatic injury has been quantified in multiple observational studies. However, to our knowledge, the information contained in these studies has never been synthesized. The aims of this study were: (1) to determine the magnitude of the effect of liver cirrhosis on mortality, morbidity, and hospital course among trauma patients and (2) to analyze sources of study heterogeneity that may lead to differing estimates in the observed mortality rate among patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: A systematic search of EMBASE and PubMed was conducted. Data were extracted from eligible studies and analyzed using a random-effects model to compare trauma outcomes in cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients (PROSPERO Registration CRD42018088464). Mortality was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included complication rate, length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay, and mechanical ventilation days. RESULTS: Title and abstract review of 15,958 articles led to the identification of 31 relevant articles. Ultimately, 18 observational studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled effect sizes for mortality (odds ratio [OR], 4.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.13-6.54) and complication rate (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.30-2.85) were higher in the cirrhotic group than the noncirrhotic group. Trauma patients with cirrhosis also incurred longer hospital stays (mean difference, 3.81 days; 95% CI, 1.22-6.41) and longer ICU stays (mean difference, 2.40 days; 95% CI, 0.65-4.15). There was no difference in days spent on mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSION: Preexisting liver cirrhosis is associated with increased mortality rate, complication rate, and length of hospitalization among trauma patients, even after adjusting for confounding factors and potential sources of between-study heterogeneity. Trauma patients with cirrhosis would benefit from heightened surveillance and injury prevention interventions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, level III.