Patient Race/Ethnicity and Diagnostic Imaging Utilization in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review

Racial difference in receiving computed tomography for head injury patients in emergency departments

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Prior studies have suggested potential racial differences in receiving imaging tests in emergency departments (EDs), but the results remain inconclusive. In addition, most prior studies may only have limited racial groups for minority patients. This study aimed to investigate racial differences in head computed tomography (CT) administration rates in EDs among patients with head injuries.

METHODS

Patients with head injuries who visited EDs were examined. The primary outcome was patients receiving head CT during ED visits, and the primary exposure was patient race/ethnicity, including Asian, Hispanic, Non-Hispanic Black (Black), and Non-Hispanic White (White). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed using the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey database, adjusting for patients and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 6130 patients, 51.9% received a head CT scan. Asian head injury patients were more likely to receive head CT than White patients (59.1% versus 54.0%, difference 5.1%, p < 0.001). This difference persisted in adjusted results (odds ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.06-2.16, p = 0.022). In contrast, Black and Hispanic patients have no significant difference in receiving head CT than White patients after the adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

Asian head injury patients were more likely to receive head CT than White patients. This difference may be attributed to the limited English proficiency among Asian individuals and the fact that there is a wide variety of different languages spoken by Asian patients. Future studies should examine rates of receiving other diagnostic imaging modalities among different racial groups and possible interventions to address this difference.

Race and Ethnicity and Diagnostic Testing for Common Conditions in the Acute Care Setting

Importance

Overuse of diagnostic testing is pervasive, but the extent to which it varies by race and ethnicity in the acute care setting is poorly understood.

Objective

To use a previously validated diagnostic intensity index to evaluate differences in diagnostic testing rates by race and ethnicity in the acute care setting, which may serve as a surrogate for diagnostic test overuse.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a cross-sectional study of emergency department (ED) discharges, hospital observation stays, and hospital admissions using administrative claims among EDs and acute care hospitals in Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, and New Jersey, from 2016 through 2018. The diagnostic intensity index pairs nonspecific principal discharge diagnoses (nausea and vomiting, abdominal pain, chest pain, and syncope) with related diagnostic tests to estimate rates of nondiagnostic testing. Adults with an acute care encounter with a principal discharge diagnosis of interest were included. Data were analyzed from January to February 2024.

Exposure

Race and ethnicity (Asian, Black, Hispanic, White, other [including American Indian, multiracial, and multiethnic], and missing).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Receipt of a diagnostic test. Generalized linear models with a hospital-specific indicator variable were estimated to calculate the adjusted odds ratio of receiving a test related to the principal discharge diagnosis by race and ethnicity, controlling for primary payer and zip code income quartile.

Results

Of 3 683 055 encounters (1 055 575 encounters [28.7%] for Black, 300 333 encounters [8.2%] for Hispanic, and 2 140 335 encounters [58.1%] for White patients; mean [SD] age of patients with encounters, 47.3 [18.8] years; 2 233 024 encounters among females [60.6%]), most (2 969 974 encounters [80.6%]) were ED discharges. Black compared with White patients discharged from the ED with a diagnosis of interest had an adjusted odds ratio of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.72-0.75) of having related diagnostic testing. No other racial or ethnic disparities of a similar magnitude were observed in any acute care settings.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, White patients discharged from the ED with a nonspecific diagnosis of interest were significantly more likely than Black patients to receive related diagnostic testing. The extent to which this represents diagnostic test overuse in White patients vs undertesting and missed diagnoses in Black patients deserves further study.

Healthcare utilization is increased in children living in urban areas, with ethnicity-related disparities: A big data analysis study

This study aimed to investigate differences in pediatric healthcare utilization in Israel over 10 years by examining differences across populations defined by living environment and ethnicity. Data was obtained from the Clalit Health Care data warehouse, covering over 250,000 children residing in Haifa and Western Galilee districts. The population groups were categorized based on ethnicity (Jewish vs Arab) and residential settings (urban vs rural). Healthcare utilization was consistently higher among Jewish than Arab children, irrespective of the specific dimension analyzed. Additionally, urban-dwelling children exhibited higher usage rates than those residing in rural areas in all investigated dimensions. However, Jewish children showed significantly about 18% lower hospitalization rates than Arab children across all years (P < 0.001). No significant differences in hospitalizations were observed between urban and rural children (RR 0.999, CI (0.987-1.011)). Notably, the study revealed reduced antibiotic consumption and hospitalizations over the years for all populations. Additionally, we found that Arab children and those living in rural areas had reduced access to healthcare, as evidenced by 10-40% fewer physician visits, laboratory tests, and imaging (P < 0.001).    Conclusion: This study highlights the substantial population-based disparities in healthcare utilization among children in Israel despite the equalizing effect of the national health insurance law. Rural and low socioeconomic populations seem to have reduced healthcare access, showing decreased healthcare utilization. Consequently, it is imperative to address these disparities and implement targeted interventions to enhance healthcare access for Arab children and rural communities. The decline in antibiotic usage and hospitalizations suggests positive trends in pediatric health care, necessitating ongoing efforts to ensure equitable access and quality of care for all populations. What is Known: • Healthcare systems worldwide vary in coverage and accessibility, including Israel, which stands out for its diverse population. • Existing research primarily focuses on healthcare utilization among adults, leaving a need for comprehensive data on children's healthcare patterns globally. What is New: • Investigating over 250,000 children, this study reveals higher healthcare utilization among Jewish and urban children across all dimensions. • Despite Israel's national health insurance law, the study underscores the significant population-based disparities in healthcare utilization.

Racial Disparities in Opioid Administration Practices Among Undifferentiated Abdominal Pain Patients in the Emergency Department

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to examine racial disparities in opioid prescribing practices for patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with a common chief complaint of abdominal pain.

METHODS

Treatment outcomes were compared for non-Hispanic White (NH White), non-Hispanic Black (NH Black), and Hispanic patients seen over 12 months in three emergency departments in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to measure the associations between race/ethnicity and outcomes of opioid administration during ED visits and discharge opioid prescriptions.

RESULTS

A total of 7309 encounters were included in the analysis. NH Black (n = 1988) and Hispanic patients (n = 602) were more likely than NH White patients (n = 4179) to be in the 18-39 age group (p < 0. 001). NH Black patients were more likely to report public insurance than NH White or Hispanic patients (p < 0.001). After adjusting for confounders, patients who identified as NH Black (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.56-0.74) or Hispanic (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.61-0.98) were less likely to be given opioids during their ED encounter when compared to NH White patients. Similarly, NH Black patients (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.52-0.75) and Hispanic patients (OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49-0.88) were less likely to receive a discharge opioid prescription.

CONCLUSIONS

These results confirm that racial disparities exist in the ED opioid administration within the department as well as at discharge. Future studies should continue to examine systemic racism as well as interventions to alleviate these health inequities.

Race and Ethnicity and Primary Language in Emergency Department Triage

Importance

Emergency department (ED) triage substantially affects how long patients wait for care but triage scoring relies on few objective criteria. Prior studies suggest that Black and Hispanic patients receive unequal triage scores, paralleled by disparities in the depth of physician evaluations.

Objectives

To examine whether racial disparities in triage scores and physician evaluations are present across a multicenter network of academic and community hospitals and evaluate whether patients who do not speak English face similar disparities.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a cross-sectional, multicenter study examining adults presenting between February 28, 2019, and January 1, 2023, across the Mass General Brigham Integrated Health Care System, encompassing 7 EDs: 2 urban academic hospitals and 5 community hospitals. Analysis included all patients presenting with 1 of 5 common chief symptoms.

Exposures

Emergency department nurse-led triage and physician evaluation.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Average Triage Emergency Severity Index [ESI] score and average visit work relative value units [wRVUs] were compared across symptoms and between individual minority racial and ethnic groups and White patients.

Results

There were 249 829 visits (149 861 female [60%], American Indian or Alaska Native 0.2%, Asian 3.3%, Black 11.8%, Hispanic 18.8%, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander <0.1%, White 60.8%, and patients identifying as Other race or ethnicity 5.1%). Median age was 48 (IQR, 29-66) years. White patients had more acute ESI scores than Hispanic or Other patients across all symptoms (eg, chest pain: Hispanic, 2.68 [95% CI, 2.67-2.69]; White, 2.55 [95% CI, 2.55-2.56]; Other, 2.66 [95% CI, 2.64-2.68]; P < .001) and Black patients across most symptoms (nausea/vomiting: Black, 2.97 [95% CI, 2.96-2.99]; White: 2.90 [95% CI, 2.89-2.91]; P < .001). These differences were reversed for wRVUs (chest pain: Black, 4.32 [95% CI, 4.25-4.39]; Hispanic, 4.13 [95% CI, 4.08-4.18]; White 3.55 [95% CI, 3.52-3.58]; Other 3.96 [95% CI, 3.84-4.08]; P < .001). Similar patterns were seen for patients whose primary language was not English.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study, patients who identified as Black, Hispanic, and Other race and ethnicity were assigned less acute ESI scores than their White peers despite having received more involved physician workups, suggesting some degree of mistriage. Clinical decision support systems might reduce these disparities but would require careful calibration to avoid replicating bias.

AI pitfalls and what not to do: mitigating bias in AI

Various forms of artificial intelligence (AI) applications are being deployed and used in many healthcare systems. As the use of these applications increases, we are learning the failures of these models and how they can perpetuate bias. With these new lessons, we need to prioritize bias evaluation and mitigation for radiology applications; all the while not ignoring the impact of changes in the larger enterprise AI deployment which may have downstream impact on performance of AI models. In this paper, we provide an updated review of known pitfalls causing AI bias and discuss strategies for mitigating these biases within the context of AI deployment in the larger healthcare enterprise. We describe these pitfalls by framing them in the larger AI lifecycle from problem definition, data set selection and curation, model training and deployment emphasizing that bias exists across a spectrum and is a sequela of a combination of both human and machine factors.

"Shortcuts" Causing Bias in Radiology Artificial Intelligence: Causes, Evaluation, and Mitigation

Despite the expert-level performance of artificial intelligence (AI) models for various medical imaging tasks, real-world performance failures with disparate outputs for various subgroups limit the usefulness of AI in improving patients' lives. Many definitions of fairness have been proposed, with discussions of various tensions that arise in the choice of an appropriate metric to use to evaluate bias; for example, should one aim for individual or group fairness? One central observation is that AI models apply "shortcut learning" whereby spurious features (such as chest tubes and portable radiographic markers on intensive care unit chest radiography) on medical images are used for prediction instead of identifying true pathology. Moreover, AI has been shown to have a remarkable ability to detect protected attributes of age, sex, and race, while the same models demonstrate bias against historically underserved subgroups of age, sex, and race in disease diagnosis. Therefore, an AI model may take shortcut predictions from these correlations and subsequently generate an outcome that is biased toward certain subgroups even when protected attributes are not explicitly used as inputs into the model. As a result, these subgroups became nonprivileged subgroups. In this review, the authors discuss the various types of bias from shortcut learning that may occur at different phases of AI model development, including data bias, modeling bias, and inference bias. The authors thereafter summarize various tool kits that can be used to evaluate and mitigate bias and note that these have largely been applied to nonmedical domains and require more evaluation for medical AI. The authors then summarize current techniques for mitigating bias from preprocessing (data-centric solutions) and during model development (computational solutions) and postprocessing (recalibration of learning). Ongoing legal changes where the use of a biased model will be penalized highlight the necessity of understanding, detecting, and mitigating biases from shortcut learning and will require diverse research teams looking at the whole AI pipeline.

Time ratio disparities among ED patients undergoing head CT

PURPOSE

To assess if patients who underwent head computed tomography (CT) experienced disparities in the emergency department (ED) and if the indication for head CT affected disparities.

METHODS

This study employed a retrospective, IRB-approved cohort design encompassing four hospitals. All ED patients between January 2016 and September 2020 who underwent non-contrast head CTs were included. Furthermore, key time intervals including ED length of stay (LOS), ED assessment time, image acquisition time, and image interpretation time were calculated. Time ratio (TR) was used to compare these time intervals between the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 45,177 ED visits comprising 4730 trauma cases, 5475 altered mental status cases, 11,925 cases with head pain, and 23,047 cases with other indications were included. Females had significantly longer ED LOS, ED assessment time, and image acquisition time (TR = 1.012, 1.051, 1.018, respectively, P-value < 0.05). This disparity was more pronounced in female patients with head pain complaints compared to their male counterparts (TR = 1.036, 1.059, and 1.047, respectively, P-value < 0.05). Black patients experienced significantly longer ED LOS, image acquisition time, and image assessment time (TR = 1.226, 1.349, and 1.190, respectively, P-value < 0.05). These disparities persisted regardless of head CT indications. Furthermore, patients with Medicare/Medicaid insurance also faced longer wait times in all the time intervals (TR > 1, P-value < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Wait times for ED head CT completion were longer for Black patients and Medicaid/Medicare insurance holders. Additionally, females experienced extended wait times, particularly when presented with head pain complaints. Our findings underscore the importance of exploring and addressing the contributing factors to ensure equitable and timely access to imaging services in the ED.

The Association of Emergency Severity Index Score and Patient and Family Experience in a Pediatric Emergency Department

The study aim was to determine the relationship between a patient's Emergency Severity Index (ESI) score and their or their family's response to the key performance indicator (KPI) question on the post-visit patient and family experience (PFE) survey. Retrospective review of patients presenting to the Pediatric Emergency Department between July 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022, who completed the KPI question on an associated post-visit survey. We performed univariate analyses on all candidate variables; multivariable linear regression identified independent predictors of KPI on the PFE survey. A total of 8136 patients were included in the study. Although ESI score was significantly associated with PFE in univariate analysis, this association was lost in the multivariable model. Independent associations were appreciated with race/ethnicity, time to provider, length of stay, and procedure performance during the visit. Although ESI is not independently associated with PFE in this study, its interaction with factors such as time to provider, length of stay, and procedure performance may be important for emergency department providers creating interventions to impact experience during low acuity visits.

Racial and ethnic disparities in emergency department-initiated buprenorphine across five health care systems

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose deaths have disproportionately impacted Black and Hispanic populations, in part due to disparities in treatment access. Emergency departments (EDs) serve as a resource for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), many of whom have difficulty accessing outpatient addiction programs. However, inequities in ED treatment for OUD remain poorly understood.

METHODS

This secondary analysis examined racial and ethnic differences in buprenorphine access using data from EMBED, a study of 21 EDs across five health care systems evaluating a clinical decision support system for initiating ED buprenorphine. The primary outcome was receipt of buprenorphine, ED administered or prescribed. Hospital type (academic vs. community) was evaluated as an effect modifier. Hierarchical models with cluster effects for site and clinician were used to assess buprenorphine receipt by race and ethnicity.

RESULTS

Black patients were less likely to receive buprenorphine (6.4% [51/801] vs. White patients 8.5% [268/3154], odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.78). This association persisted after adjusting for age, insurance, gender, clinician X-waiver, hospital type, and urbanicity (adjusted OR [aOR] 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.84) but not when discharge diagnosis was included (aOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56-1.02). Hispanic patients were more likely to receive buprenorphine (14.8% [122/822] vs. non-Hispanic patients, 11.6% [475/4098]) in unadjusted (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.09-1.83) and adjusted models (aOR 1.41, 95% CI 1.08-1.83) but not including discharge diagnosis (aOR 1.32, 95% CI 0.99-1.77). Odds of buprenorphine were similar in academic and community EDs by race (interaction p = 0.97) and ethnicity (interaction p = 0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

Black patients with OUD were less likely to receive buprenorphine whereas Hispanic patients were more likely to receive buprenorphine in academic and community EDs. Differences were attenuated with discharge diagnosis, as fewer Black and non-Hispanic patients were diagnosed with opioid withdrawal. Barriers to medication treatment are heterogenous among patients with OUD; research must continue to address the multiple drivers of health inequities at the patient, clinician, and community level.

Management of low back pain in Australian emergency departments for culturally and linguistically diverse populations from 2016 to 2021

BACKGROUND

Disparate care in the ED for minority populations with low back pain is a long-standing issue reported in the USA. Our objective was to compare care delivery for low back pain in Australian EDs between culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) and non-CALD patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of medical records of the ED of three public hospitals in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia from January 2016 to October 2021. We included adult patients diagnosed with non-serious low back pain at ED discharge. CALD status was defined by country of birth, preferred language and use of interpreter service. The main outcome measures were ambulance transport, lumbar imaging, opioid administration and hospital admission.

RESULTS

Of the 14 642 included presentations, 7656 patients (52.7%) were born overseas, 3695 (25.2%) preferred communicating in a non-English language and 1224 (8.4%) required an interpreter. Patients born overseas were less likely to arrive by ambulance (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.68, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.73) than Australian-born patients. Patients who preferred a non-English language were also less likely to arrive by ambulance (aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.90), yet more likely to be imaged (aOR 1.12, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.23) or be admitted to hospital (aOR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.29) than Native-English-speaking patients. Patients who required an interpreter were more likely to receive imaging (aOR 1.43, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.64) or be admitted (aOR 1.49, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.73) compared with those who communicated independently. CALD patients were generally less likely to receive weak opioids than non-CALD patients (aOR range 0.76-0.87), yet no difference was found in the use of any opioid or strong opioids.

CONCLUSION

Patients with low back pain from a CALD background, especially those lacking English proficiency, are significantly more likely to be imaged and admitted in Australian EDs. Future interventions improving the quality of ED care for low back pain should give special consideration to CALD patients.

Racial and ethnic differences in the use of lumbar imaging, opioid analgesics and spinal surgery for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

There is a substantial gap between evidence and clinical care for low back pain (LBP) worldwide despite recommendations of best practice specified in clinical practice guidelines. The aim of this systematic review was to identify disparities associated with race or ethnicity in the use of lumbar imaging, opioid analgesics, and spinal surgery in people with LBP.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

We included observational studies which compared the use of lumbar imaging, opioid analgesics, and spinal surgery for the management of non-serious LBP between people from different racial/ethnic populations. We searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL from January 2000 to June 2021. Risk of bias of included studies was appraised in six domains. For each type of care, we pooled data stratified by race and ethnicity using random effects models.

RESULTS

We identified 13 eligible studies; all conducted in the United States. Hispanic/Latino (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.49-0.96) and Black/African American (OR 0.59, 95%CI 0.46-0.75) people with LBP were less likely to be prescribed opioid analgesics than White people. Black/African Americans were less likely to undergo or be recommended spinal surgery for LBP (OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.33-0.67) than White people. There was a lack of high certainty evidence on racial/ethnic disparities in the use of lumbar imaging.

CONCLUSION

This review reveals lower rate of the use of guideline-discordant care, especially opioid prescription and spinal surgery, in racial/ethnic minority populations with LBP in the United States. Future studies in other countries evaluating care equity for LBP are warranted. PROSPERO Registration ID: CRD42021260668.

SIGNIFICANCE

This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that people with low back pain from the minority racial/ethnic backgrounds were less likely to be prescribed opioid analgesics and undergo spinal surgery than the majority counterparts. Strategic interventions to improve the access to, and the value of, clinical care for minority populations with low back pain are warranted.

Association of Race and Ethnicity With Triage Emergency Severity Index Scores and Total Visit Work Relative Value Units for Emergency Department Patients

This cross-sectional study evaluates the association of race and ethnicity with triage Emergency Severity Index scores and total work relative value units for emergency department (ED) patients.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Ondansetron Use for Acute Gastroenteritis in Children

OBJECTIVES

There is limited research examining racial/ethnic disparities in antiemetic use for acute gastroenteritis (AGE). We assessed racial/ethnic differences in the care of children with AGE.

METHODS

The Pediatric Health Information System was used to conduct a retrospective cohort study of children 6 months to 6 years old with AGE seen in participating emergency departments from 2016 to 2018. Cases were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes. The primary outcome was administration of ondansetron, secondary outcomes were administration of intravenous (IV) fluids and hospitalization, and primary predictor was race/ethnicity. Multivariable logistic regression followed by a mixed model adjusted for sex, age, insurance, and hospital to examine the association of race/ethnicity with each outcome.

RESULTS

There were 78,019 encounters included; 24.8% of patients were non-Hispanic White (NHW), 29.0% non-Hispanic Black (NHB), 37.3% Hispanic, and 8.9% other non-Hispanic (NH) race/ethnicity. Compared with NHW patients, minority children were more likely to receive ondansetron (NHB: adjusted odds ratio, 1.36 [95% confidence interval, 1.2-1.55]; Hispanic: 1.26 [1.1-1.44]; other NH: 1.22 [1.07-1.4]). However, minority children were less likely to receive IV fluids (NHB: 0.38 [0.33-0.43]; Hispanic: 0.44 [0.36-0.53]; other NH: 0.51 [0.44-0.61]) or hospital admission (NHB: 0.37 [0.29-0.48]; Hispanic: 0.41 [0.33-0.5]; other NH: 0.52 [0.41-0.66]). Ondansetron use by hospital ranged from 73% to 95%.

CONCLUSIONS

This large database analysis of emergency departments around the nation found that NHW patients were less likely to receive ondansetron but more likely to receive IV fluids and hospital admission than minority patients. These findings are likely multifactorial and may represent bias, social determinants of health, access to care, or illness severity among other possible causes.

Guidelines for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department 2 (GRACE-2): Low-risk, recurrent abdominal pain in the emergency department

This second Guideline for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE-2) from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine is on the topic "low-risk, recurrent abdominal pain in the emergency department." The multidisciplinary guideline panel applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations regarding four priority questions for adult emergency department patients with low-risk, recurrent, undifferentiated abdominal pain. The intended population includes adults with multiple similar presentations of abdominal signs and symptoms recurring over a period of months or years. The panel reached the following recommendations: (1) if a prior negative computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis (CTAP) has been performed within 12 months, there is insufficient evidence to accurately identify populations in whom repeat CTAP imaging can be safely avoided or routinely recommended; (2) if CTAP with IV contrast is negative, we suggest against ultrasound unless there is concern for pelvic or biliary pathology; (3) we suggest that screening for depression and/or anxiety may be performed during the ED evaluation; and (4) we suggest an opioid-minimizing strategy for pain control. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The GRACE-2 writing group developed clinically relevant questions to address the care of adult patients with low-risk, recurrent, previously undifferentiated abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED). Four patient-intervention-comparison-outcome-time (PICOT) questions were developed by consensus of the writing group, who performed a systematic review of the literature and then synthesized direct and indirect evidence to formulate recommendations, following GRADE methodology. The writing group found that despite the commonality and relevance of these questions in emergency care, the quantity and quality of evidence were very limited, and even fundamental definitions of the population and outcomes of interest are lacking. Future research opportunities include developing precise and clinically relevant definitions of low-risk, recurrent, undifferentiated abdominal pain and determining the scope of the existing populations in terms of annual national ED visits for this complaint, costs of care, and patient and provider preferences.

Patient Race or Ethnicity and the Use of Diagnostic Imaging: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the existing literature evaluating differences in imaging use based on patient race and ethnicity.

METHODS

The authors performed a structured search of four databases for the dates January 1, 2000, to April 13, 2021, using key words and derivatives focused on imaging and patient race. Retrieved citations were reviewed by abstract and then full text to identify articles that evaluated the likelihood of imaging use by patient race or ethnicity controlling for sociodemographic factors. Data regarding publication characteristics, study population, clinical setting, and results was extracted and summarized.

RESULTS

The structured search identified 2,938 articles of which 206 met inclusion criteria. Most studies (87%, 179 of 206) were conducted in the United States, and the majority (72%, 149 of 206) found decreased or inappropriate imaging use in minority groups. Breast cancer screening was the most common clinical setting (50%, 104 of 206), followed by cancer care (10%, 21 of 206) and general imaging use (9%, 19 of 206). Government-administered surveys were the most common data source (40%, 82 of 206). Only a small minority of studies (8%, 17 of 206) evaluated strategies to mitigate the unequal use of imaging based on patient race and ethnicity.

DISCUSSION

The existing literature shows decreased or inappropriate use of diagnostic imaging for minority patients across a wide variety of clinical settings. Although the number of articles on the topic is large, the majority are clustered around specific topics, and few articles evaluate potential strategies to reduce the inequitable use of diagnostic imaging.

Addressing ethnic disparities in imaging utilization and clinical outcomes for COVID-19

Purpose

Racial and ethnic disparities have exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic as the healthcare system is overwhelmed. While Hispanics are disproportionately affected by COVID-19, little is known about ethnic disparities in the hospital settings. This study investigates imaging utilization and clinical outcomes between Hispanic and non-Hispanic COVID-19 patients in the Emergency Department (ED) and during hospitalization.

Methods

Through retrospective chart review, we included 331 symptomatic COVID-19 patients (mean age 53.2 years) at a metropolitan healthcare system from March to June 2020. Poisson regression was used to compare diagnostic imaging utilization and clinical outcomes between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients.

Results

After adjusting for confounders, no statistically significant difference was found between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients for the number of weekly chest X-rays. Results were categorized into four clinical outcomes: ED management (0.16 ± 0.05 vs. 0.14 ± 0.8, p:0.79); requiring inpatient management (1.31 ± 0.11 vs. 1.46 ± 0.16, p:0.43); ICU admission without invasive ventilation (1.4 ± 0.17 vs. 1.35 ± 0.26, p:0.86); and ICU admission and ventilator support (3.29 ± 0.22 vs. 3.59 ± 0.37, p:0.38). There were no statistically significant relative differences in adjusted prevalence rate between ethnic groups for all clinical outcomes (p > 0.05). There was a statistically significant longer adjusted length of stay (days) in non-Hispanics for two subcohorts: inpatient management (8.16 ± 0.31 vs. 9.72 ± 0.5, p < 0.01) and ICU admission without invasive ventilation (10.39 ± 0.57 vs. 13.45 ± 1.13, p < 0.01).

Conclusions

For Hispanic and non-Hispanic COVID-19 patients in the ED or hospitalized, there were no statistically significant differences in imaging utilization and clinical outcomes.