Association between racial discrimination and delayed or forgone care amid the COVID-19 pandemic

Disparities in group-based medical mistrust and associations with mental health symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Racial/ethnic disparities in health-related outcomes were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Individuals from racial/ethnic minority groups or with a history of alcohol use disorder (AUD) may have greater medical mistrust. We examined racial/ethnic and AUD-related disparities in group-based medical mistrust during the pandemic and tested whether medical mistrust dimensions were associated with mental health symptoms.

METHODS

Two hundred and fifty participants from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Alcohol Study completed an online survey between April and July of 2022. Exploratory factor analysis and path analysis were conducted.

RESULTS

Group-based medical mistrust scores were elevated among participants who identified as Non-Hispanic Black and those with a history of AUD. Two medical mistrust dimensions were found: (1) Suspicion and Lack of Provider Support, and (2) Group Disparities in Health Care. Compared to Non-Hispanic White participants, Non-Hispanic Black participants reported higher scores on the Suspicion and Lack of Provider Support dimension of medical mistrust, which was associated with higher mental health symptoms. This medical mistrust dimension was also a significant mediator of the observed group differences in mental health symptoms.

LIMITATIONS

Cross-sectional data, aggregation of racial/ethnic groups with small sample sizes, and nonrepresentative sample.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-Hispanic Black individuals and individuals with AUD may be more vulnerable to mental health symptoms due to higher suspicion toward medical professionals and healthcare systems and lack of support from healthcare providers. Increased awareness among healthcare providers may help address medical mistrust, encourage help-seeking behaviors, and alleviate mental health symptoms.

Changes in Breast Cancer Screening Prevalence in the United States during the COVID-19 Pandemic, 2018 to 2022

BACKGROUND

Annual mammography screening declined year-on-year during the COVID-19 pandemic through 2021. This study examined changes in 2022 compared with 2018 in the national prevalence of self-reported up-to-date mammography.

METHODS

Using 2018 to 2022 data from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we assess relative changes defined as annual prevalence ratios (aPR) in the SR receipt of past-year and up-to-date (UTD) breast cancer screening (biannual mammography in women of ages 50-74 years) during the third year of the COVID-19 pandemic overall and by sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

UTD breast cancer screening declined for the first time since 2018 [2018 compared with 2022, from 78.7%-76.6%; aPR, 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96-0.98] despite a small increase in past-year breast cancer screening from 2020 to 2022 (57.9%-59.6%; aPR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05). This translated to 747,791 fewer women reporting UTD with recommended breast cancer screening in 2022 versus 2018. UTD breast cancer screening declines between 2018 and 2022 were largest for American Indian/Alaska Native women (74.8%-62.2%; aPR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.93), women with less formal educational attainment (< high school: 73.1%-65.5%; aPR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95), and women without a usual source of care (48%-42.9%; aPR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Previously noted pandemic-related declines in past-year breast cancer screening now reflect in women reporting being UTD, with the largest declines in American Indian/Alaska Native women and those with lower socioeconomic status.

IMPACT

Future studies should monitor screening prevalence in relation to breast cancer diagnostic stage overall and by sociodemographic groups.

COVID-Related Discrimination and Health Care Access among a Nationally Representative, Diverse Sample of US Adults

BACKGROUND

In the United States, COVID-related discrimination towards racial and ethnic minority populations is well documented; however, its impact on healthcare access during the pandemic has not been assessed.

METHODS

We used data from our nationally representative, online survey of 5,500 American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN), Asian, Black, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Latino, White, and multiracial adults conducted between 12/2020-2/2021 (baseline) and 8/2021-9/2021 (6-month follow-up; 35.1% response rate). At baseline, participants were asked how often they experienced discriminatory behaviors "because they think you might have COVID-19" (modified Everyday Discrimination Scale). Participants were asked if they were unable to get needed health care (e.g., cancer screening), or COVID-19 testing at both time-points. Vaccine willingness was assessed at baseline and uptake at follow-up.

RESULTS

Experiencing COVID-related discrimination was associated with not being able to get health care at baseline (OR = 3.66, 95% CI = 2.91-4.59) and follow-up (OR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.16-2.97) and not being able to get a COVID-19 test at baseline (OR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.68-2.65) and follow-up (OR = 4.12, 95% CI = 2.20-7.72). Experiencing discrimination was also associated with being less likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccine (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.30-0.90), despite individuals who experienced discrimination being more willing to vaccinate at baseline (OR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.10-2.22).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-related discrimination was associated with an increased likelihood of being unable to get health care across all racial and ethnic populations, although associations were strongest among Asian, AIAN, and Latino adults. Healthcare providers should be aware of the impact of discrimination on healthcare utilization, delays, and health-seeking behaviors, especially among racial and ethnic minorities.

Use of calibration to improve the precision of estimates obtained from All of Us data

OBJECTIVES

To highlight the use of calibration weighting to improve the precision of estimates obtained from All of Us data and increase the return of value to communities from the All of Us Research Program.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used All of Us (2017-2022) data and raking to obtain prevalence estimates in two examples: discrimination in medical settings (N = 41 875) and food insecurity (N = 82 266). Weights were constructed using known population proportions (age, sex, race/ethnicity, region of residence, annual household income, and home ownership) from the 2020 National Health Interview Survey.

RESULTS

About 37% of adults experienced discrimination in a medical setting. About 20% of adults who had not seen a doctor reported being food insecure compared with 14% of adults who regularly saw a doctor.

CONCLUSIONS

Calibration using raking is cost-effective and may lead to more precise estimates when analyzing All of Us data.

Discrimination in Medical Settings across Populations: Evidence From the All of Us Research Program

INTRODUCTION

Discrimination in medical settings (DMS) contributes to healthcare disparities in the United States, but few studies have determined the extent of DMS in a large national sample and across different populations. This study estimated the national prevalence of DMS and described demographic and health-related characteristics associated with experiencing DMS in seven different situations.

METHODS

Survey data from 41,875 adults participating in the All of Us Research Program collected in 2021-2022 and logistic regression were used to examine the association between sociodemographic and health-related characteristics and self-reported DMS among adults engaged with a healthcare provider within the past 12 months. Statistical analysis was performed in 2023-2024.

RESULTS

About 36.89% of adults reported having experienced at least one DMS situation. Adults with relative social and medical disadvantages had higher prevalence of experiencing DMS. Compared to their counterparts, respondents with higher odds of experiencing DMS in at least one situation identified as female, non-Hispanic Black, having at least some college, living in the South, renter, having other living arrangement, being publicly insured, not having a usual source of care, having multiple chronic conditions, having any disability, and reporting fair or poor health, p<0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate a high prevalence of DMS, particularly among some population groups. Characterizing DMS may be a valuable tool for identifying populations at risk within the healthcare system and optimizing the overall patient care experience. Implementing relevant policies remains an essential strategy for mitigating the prevalence of DMS and reducing healthcare disparities.

Preventive health behaviour differences across racial groups during the early stages of COVID-19

Background

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the practice of preventative health behaviours had been used disparately across different racial groups. This study seeks to identify any differences in preventative health behaviours across racial groups, controlling for other socio-demographic factors.

Methods

A US national survey study was electronically conducted from July through November 2020, to measure racial/ethnic differences in health preventive behaviours about COVID-19. We performed 2-part regression models to assess whether preventive health behaviours differed by race and ethnicity. Specifically, we employed generalized logistic regressions for investigating the predictors of the use of complementary or alternative medicine (CAM), or stay-at-home strategy, then performed ordinal logistic regression to examine the predictors of social distancing, face mask wearing, and hand hygiene strategy practice.

Results

The results show that non-White respondents were more likely to practice social distancing, mask wearing, and hand hygiene strategy to prevent COVID-19, compared to their White counterparts. Additionally, the findings indicate that individuals who experienced COVID-19-related racial abuse or depression had a higher likelihood of practicing preventive health behaviours.

Discussion

We found ethnicity can be a predictor of health preventive behaviours, in accordance with previous research. The causes of these disparities will require further investigation in order to be addressed.

Delayed Access to Medical Care and Psychological Distress among Chinese Immigrants in Canada during the Pandemic

The psychological impact of medical care accessibility during the pandemic has been widely studied, but little attention has been given to Asian immigrants in Canada. This study aimed to fill this literature gap by using a cross-sectional survey, which aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Chinese immigrants in North America during the second wave of the pandemic. The study focused on Chinese immigrants aged 16 or older in Canada. Covariates included sociodemographic variables, delayed access to medical care (i.e., treatment or health assessment), and other COVID-19 related variables. We used logistic LASSO regression for model selection and multivariate logistic regression models to evaluate the association between delayed access to treatment/health assessment and psychological distress outcome, as measured by the COVID-19 Peritraumatic Distress Index (CPDI). Missing data were handled using multiple imputation. Our study included 746 respondents, with 47.18% in the normal CPDI group and 36.82% in the mild-to-severe CPDI group. Most respondents were originally from Mainland China and residing in Ontario. Over half have stayed in Canada for at least 15 years. The multivariate logistic regression models identified significant risk predictors of psychological distress status: delayed access to medical care (OR = 1.362, 95% CI: 1.078-1.720, p = 0.0095), fear of COVID-19 (OR = 1.604, 95% CI: 1.293-1.989, p < 0.0001), and social loneliness (OR = 1.408, 95%CI: 1.314-1.508, p < 0.0001). Sociodemographic variables and other COVID-19-related variates did not significantly impact the study's outcome. Our findings shed light on the importance of timely medical care access to psychological well-being among Chinese Canadians. Reliable health information, mental health support, and virtual care tailored to immigrants should be considered to mitigate this impact and promote their overall health and well-being.

An evaluation of the impact of social and structural determinants of health on forgone care during the COVID-19 pandemic in Baltimore, Maryland

Evidence suggests that reductions in healthcare utilization, including forgone care, during the COVID-19 pandemic may be contributing towards excess morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to describe individual and community-level correlates of forgone care during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a cross-sectional, secondary data analysis of participants (n = 2,003) who reported needing healthcare in two population-representative surveys conducted in Baltimore, MD in 2021 and 2021-2022. Abstracted data included the experience of forgone care, socio-demographic data, comorbidities, financial strain, and community of residence. Participant's community of residence were linked with data acquired from the Baltimore Neighborhood Indicators Alliance relevant to healthcare access and utilization, including walkability and internet access, among others. The data were analyzed using weighted random effects logistic regression. Individual-level factors found to be associated with increased odds for forgone care included individuals age 35-49 (compared to 18-34), female sex, experiencing housing insecurity during the pandemic, and the presence of functional limitations and mental illness. Black/African American individuals were found to have reduced odds of forgone care, compared to any other race. No community-level factors were significant in the multilevel analyses. Moving forward, it will be critical that health systems identify ways to address any barriers to care that populations might be experiencing, such as the use of mobile health services or telemedicine platforms. Additionally, public health emergency preparedness planning efforts must account for the unique needs of communities during future crises, to ensure that their health needs can continue to be met. Finally, additional research is needed to better understand how healthcare access and utilization practices have changed during versus before the pandemic.

Does the COVID-19 Pandemic Increase or Decrease the Global Cyberbullying Behaviors? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Although cyberbullying is an emerging public health problem, it is unclear how the COVID-19 pandemic affects cyberbullying. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on cyberbullying, to estimate the global cyberbullying prevalence and to explore factors related to cyberbullying during the COVID-19 pandemic. We searched the Medline, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Eric, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, Chinese CNKI, and EBSCO databases to identify relevant empirical studies published between 2019 and 2022. A total of 36 studies were included. Quality assessment, meta-analyses, and subgroup analyses were conducted. The pooled prevalences were 16% for overall cyberbullying, 18% for victimization and 11% for perpetration during the COVID-19 pandemic, which were lower than before the COVID-19 pandemic. The pooled prevalence of postpandemic cyberbullying perpetration is lower in children than in adults. In addition, both virus- and lockdown-related stressors were the main factors contributing to cyberbullying. The COVID-19 crisis may reduce cyberbullying, and the pooled prevalence of cyberbullying during the pandemic in adults is higher than in children and adolescents. In addition, the transient-enduring factor model of postpandemic cyberbullying built in this review could help identify people at high risk of cyberbullying during public health emergencies.

Discriminatory Healthcare Experiences and Medical Mistrust in Patients With Serious Illness

CONTEXT

Though discrimination in healthcare settings is increasingly recognized, the discriminatory experiences of patients with serious illness has not been well studied.

OBJECTIVES

Describe racial differences in patient-reported experiences with discrimination in the healthcare setting and examine its association with mistrust.

METHODS

We used surveys containing patient-reported frequency of discrimination using the Discrimination in Medical Setting (DMS) and Microaggressions in Health Care Settings (MHCS) scales, mistrust using the Group Based Medical Mistrust (GBMM) scale, and patient characteristics including patient-reported race, income, wealth, insurance status, and educational attainment. Univariable and multivariable linear regression models as well as risk ratios were used to examine associations between patient characteristics including self-reported race, and DMS, MHCS, and GBMM scores.

RESULTS

In 174 participants with serious illness, racially minoritized patients were more likely to report experiencing discrimination and microaggressions. In adjusted analyses, DMS scores were associated with elements of class and not with race. Black, Native American/Alaskan Native (NA/AN), and multiracial participants had higher MHCS scores compared to White participants with similar levels of income and education. Higher income was associated with lower GBMM scores in participants with similar DMS or MHCS scores, but Black and NA/AN participants still reported higher levels of mistrust.

CONCLUSION

In this cross-sectional study of patients with serious illness, discriminatory experiences were associated with worse mistrust in the medical system, particularly for Black and NA/AN participants. These findings suggest that race-conscious approaches are needed to address discrimination and mistrust in marginalized patients with serious illness and their families.

Substandard housing and the risk of COVID-19 infection and disease severity: A retrospective cohort study

In this study we examine associations between substandard housing and the risk of COVID-19 infection and severity during the first year of the pandemic by linking individual-level housing and clinical datasets. Residents of Chelsea, Massachusetts who were tested for COVID-19 at any Mass General Brigham testing site and who lived at a property that had received a city housing inspection were included (N = 2873). Chelsea is a densely populated city with a high prevalence of substandard housing. Inspected properties with housing code violations were considered substandard; inspected properties without violations were considered adequate. COVID-19 infection was defined as any positive PCR test, and severe disease defined as hospitalization with COVID-19. We used a propensity score design to match individuals on variables including age, race, sex, and income. In the severity model, we also matched on ten comorbidities. We estimated the risk of COVID-19 infection and severity associated with substandard housing using Cox Proportional Hazards models for lockdown, the first phase of reopening, and the full study period. In our sample, 32% (919/2873) of individuals tested positive for COVID-19 and 5.9% (135/2297) had severe disease. During lockdown, substandard housing was associated with a 48% increased risk of COVID-19 infection (95%CI 1.1-2.0, p = 0.006). Through Phase 1 reopening, substandard housing was associated with a 39% increased infection risk (95%CI 1.1-1.8, p = 0.020). The difference in risk attenuated over the full study period. There was no difference in severe disease risk between the two groups. The increased risk, observed only during lockdown and early reopening - when residents were most exposed to their housing - strengthens claims that substandard housing conveys higher infection risk. The results demonstrate the value of combining cross-sector datasets. Existing city housing data can be leveraged 1) to identify and prioritize high-risk areas for future pandemic response, and 2) for longer-term housing solutions.

Changes in Health Care Access and Preventive Health Screenings by Race and Ethnicity

Importance

The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented disruptions in health care. Little is known about whether health care access and preventive health screenings among US adults have recovered to prepandemic levels, and how patterns varied by race and ethnicity.

Objective

To evaluate health care access and preventive health screenings among eligible US adults in 2021 and 2022 compared with prepandemic year 2019, overall and by race and ethnicity.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used data from US adults aged 18 years or older who participated in the National Health Interview Survey in 2021 and 2022. Survey weights provided by the National Health Interview Survey were used to generate nationally representative estimates. Data were analyzed from May 23 to November 13, 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Measures of health care access included the proportion of adults with a usual place for care, those with a wellness visit, and those who delayed or did not receive medical care due to cost within the past year. Preventive health screening measures included eligible adults who received blood pressure, cholesterol, or blood glucose screening within the past year (2021), as well as colorectal, cervical, breast, and prostate cancer screenings based on US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines.

Results

The unweighted study population included 89 130 US adults. The weighted population included 51.6% females; 16.8% Hispanic, 5.9% non-Hispanic Asian (hereafter, Asian), 11.8% non-Hispanic Black (hereafter, Black), 62.8% non-Hispanic White (hereafter, White) individuals; and 2.9% individuals of other races and ethnicities (including American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, or multiracial). After adjusting for age and sex, having a usual place for health care did not differ among adults in 2021 or 2022 vs 2019 (adjusted rate ratio [ARR] for each year, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.99-1.01). However, fewer participants had wellness visits in 2022 compared with 2019 (ARR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99), with the most pronounced decline among Asian adults (ARR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92-0.98). In addition, adults were less likely to delay medical care (ARR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.73-0.87) or to not receive care (ARR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69-0.83) due to cost in 2022 vs 2019. Preventive health screenings in 2021 remained below 2019 levels (blood pressure: ARR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.94-0.96]; blood glucose: ARR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.93-0.96]; and cholesterol: ARR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.92-0.94]). Eligible adults were also significantly less likely to receive colorectal cancer screening (ARR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.81-0.94), cervical cancer screening (ARR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.89), breast cancer screening (ARR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.97), and prostate cancer screening (ARR, 0.86 [0.78-0.94]) in 2021 vs 2019. Asian adults experienced the largest relative decreases across most preventive screenings, while Black and Hispanic adults experienced large declines in colorectal cancer screening (ARR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.91) and breast cancer screening (ARR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.91), respectively. Differences in preventive screening rates across years persisted after additional adjustment for socioeconomic factors (income, employment status, and insurance coverage).

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this cohort study suggest that, in the US, wellness visits and preventive health screenings have not returned to prepandemic levels. These findings support the need for public health efforts to increase the use of preventive health screenings among eligible US adults.

Lessons Learned About Trauma Related to Racial Discrimination During COVID-19 in the United States

Race scholars have discussed how the pandemic has disproportionately burdened marginalized communities and exacerbated pre-existing inequities, particularly for Black Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) in the United States (U.S.). One glaring social determinant during the time of the COVID-19 is racial discrimination. This chapter will discuss lessons learned regarding the negative impact of discrimination on BIPOC, especially as it pertains to their experiences of trauma. Some of these lessons include (1) the need for clinical psychologist to improve access to treatment through increased research on culturally adaptive interventions, (2) increased research on the effects of race-based trauma on mental health symptomatology, (3) policy and institutional changes that reduce disparities in access to care, and (4) increased education for psychologists around billing procedures for individuals with race-based stress.

Development and validation of a questionnaire to evaluate attitudes and beliefs of discrimination by nursing staff

OBJECTIVE

Aim: The purpose of this study is to report on the development and initial psychometric testing of a questionnaire to investigate nurses' discrimination attitudes and beliefs towards people of dif f erent ethnic origins.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and Methods: The initial stage involved the selection of the questions of the tool after a comprehensive evaluation of the relevant international literature and the tools used in previous related studies. The reliability (forward-backward translation) of the questions was assessed, along with the content, face, and structure. To conduct the study, which was carried out from 07/2021 to 01/2022 a sample consisting of 30 and 2,034 nurses and their assistants was used for the pilot and the fi nal research, respectively.

RESULTS

Results: Given that the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) threshold value of 0.89 was achieved, the sample was considered sufficient and appropriate for factor analysis. A statistically signif i cant result (p<0.001) from Bartlett's test indicated a substantial connection between the questions and conf i rmed that the data were suitable for factor analysis. Twenty statements altogether, with seven possible answers ranging from "totally disagree" to "completely agree," were included in the questionnaire. For the questions, three distinct factors - communication, difficulties, and discrimination - were shown to account for 47.1% of the variability. Reliability analyzes showed satisfactory Cronbach alpha coefficient scores for all factors, ranging from 0.78 to 0.82.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: The current study demonstrates that the questionnaire we developed is a legitimate and trustworthy instrument for evaluating professional nurses' discriminatory attitudes and beliefs toward individuals from various ethnic backgrounds. The questionnaire can be used to help design interventions to end discrimination, guarantee equitable access to healthcare services, and provide high-quality care for individuals from diverse backgrounds. It can also be used to identify the factors that inf l uence nurses' attitudes and perceptions toward these patient populations.

The impact of COVID-19 on life expectancy among four Asian American subgroups

Background and objective

To date, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on life expectancy for the Asian American (AA) population has been reported in aggregate. This study provides estimates of life expectancy at birth before and during the pandemic, with a set of demographic, health, and socioeconomic risk factors for the four largest subgroups: Asian Indians, Chinese, Filipinos, and Vietnamese. These estimates are placed in context of the broader U.S. population.

Methods

This study uses age-specific all-cause mortality from CDC WONDER and population counts from the American Community Surveys. We apply methodologies to address variability in population sizes over time (smoothing) and data quality issues at older ages (Brass relational model life table system) to produce three sets of sex-specific life expectancy estimates by subgroup for 2019, 2020, and 2021.

Results

Almost all estimates show that the four AA subgroups experienced greater losses between 2019 and 2020 than Whites. These losses ranged from 1.1 to 3.9 years, with the largest drops among Chinese women (2.0-2.4) and Filipino men (3.5-3.9). Under all scenarios, losses in life expectancy were considerably smaller in 2021 than in 2020 among the four subgroups - with several subgroups experiencing a modest rebound - but these improvements did not compensate for the large increases in death rates in 2020. Filipino men had the largest decline in life expectancy from 2019 to 2021 among the four subgroups (3.4-4.2 years), and Vietnamese men and women experienced large losses which continued into the second year of the pandemic.

Conclusions

Despite high pre-pandemic life expectancies, AAs suffered a large, and rarely acknowledged, increase in mortality during the pandemic, with substantial heterogeneity across subgroups and between women and men. This variability is due in part to the pronounced differences in risk factors for infection and severity which have been documented within the AA population.

Change in testing for blood glucose during the COVID-19 pandemic, United States 2019-2021

AIM

This study assessed changes in testing for blood glucose in the United States (US) from 2019 to 2021.

METHODS

We conducted a serial cross-sectional analysis of the 2019-2021 National Health Interview Survey by including adults aged ≥ 18 years without reported diagnosed diabetes. We estimated the prevalence of testing for blood glucose within 12 months and the difference in the testing prevalence between 2019 and 2021.

RESULTS

The study sample included 82,594 respondents without diabetes in 2019--2021, with a mean age between 46.4 and 46.8 years. Overall, the prevalence of testing for blood glucose decreased significantly from 64.2 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 63.3 %, 65.1 %) in 2019 to 60.0 % (95 % CI 59.1 %, 60.9 %) in 2021. Among adults who met the United States Preventive Services Task Force's 2015 screening recommendation, the prevalence decreased from 73.4 % (95 % CI 72.2 %, 74.6 %) to 69.5 % (95 % CI 68.3 %, 70.6 %). Although decreases in testing were observed in most groups, the extent of the decline differed by subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Testing for blood glucose decreased in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic. This may have delayed diagnosis and treatment of prediabetes and diabetes, underscoring the importance of continued access to diabetes screening during pandemics.

Cancer Screening in the United States During the Second Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

To examine whether cancer screening prevalence in the United States during 2021 has returned to prepandemic levels using nationally representative data.

METHODS

Information on receipt of age-eligible screening for breast (women age 50-74 years), cervical (women without a hysterectomy age 21-65 years), prostate (men age 55-69 years), and colorectal cancer (men and women age 50-75 years) according to the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations was obtained from the 2019 and 2021 National Health Interview Survey. Past-year screening prevalence in 2019 and 2021 and adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs), 2021 versus 2019, with their 95% CIs were calculated using complex survey logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Between 2019 and 2021, past-year screening in the United States decreased from 59.9% to 57.1% (aPR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91 to 0.97) for breast cancer, from 45.3% to 39.0% (aPR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.89) for cervical cancer, and from 39.5% to 36.3% (aPR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.97) for prostate cancer. Declines were most notable for non-Hispanic Asian persons. Colorectal cancer screening prevalence remained unchanged because an increase in past-year stool testing (from 7.0% to 10.3%; aPR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.31 to 1.58) offset a decline in colonoscopy (from 15.5% to 13.8%; aPR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.95). The increase in stool testing was most pronounced in non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic populations and in persons with low socioeconomic status.

CONCLUSION

Past-year screening prevalence for breast, cervical, and prostate cancer among age-eligible adults in the United States continued to be lower than prepandemic levels in the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, reinforcing the importance of return to screening health system outreach and media campaigns. The large increase in stool testing emphasizes the role of home-based screening during health care system disruptions.

[Media: see text].

Changes in cancer diagnoses and stage distribution during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA: a cross-sectional nationwide assessment

BACKGROUND

The emergence of COVID-19 disrupted health care, with consequences for cancer diagnoses and outcomes, especially for early stage diagnoses, which generally have favourable prognoses. We aimed to examine nationwide changes in adult cancer diagnoses and stage distribution during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic by cancer type and key sociodemographic factors in the USA.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, adults (aged ≥18 years) newly diagnosed with a first primary malignant cancer between Jan 1, 2018, and Dec 31, 2020, were identified from the US National Cancer Database. We included individuals across 50 US states and the District of Columbia who were treated in hospitals that were Commission on Cancer-accredited during the study period. Individuals whose cancer stage was 0 (except for bladder cancer), occult, or without an applicable American Joint Committee on Cancer staging scheme were excluded. Our primary outcomes were the change in the number and the change in the stage distribution of new cancer diagnoses between 2019 (Jan 1 to Dec 31) and 2020 (Jan 1 to Dec 31). Monthly counts and stage distributions were calculated for all cancers combined and for major cancer types. We also calculated annual change in stage distribution from 2019 to 2020 and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) using multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for age group, sex, race and ethnicity, health insurance status, comorbidity score, US state, zip code-level social deprivation index, and county-level age-adjusted COVID-19 mortality in 2020. Separate models were stratified by sociodemographic and clinical factors.

FINDINGS

We identified 2 404 050 adults who were newly diagnosed with cancer during the study period (830 528 in 2018, 849 290 in 2019, and 724 232 in 2020). Mean age was 63·5 years (SD 13·5) and 1 287 049 (53·5%) individuals were women, 1 117 001 (46·5%) were men, and 1 814 082 (75·5%) were non-Hispanic White. The monthly number of new cancer diagnoses (all stages) decreased substantially after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March, 2020, although monthly counts returned to near pre-pandemic levels by the end of 2020. The decrease in diagnoses was largest for stage I disease, leading to lower odds of being diagnosed with stage I disease in 2020 than in 2019 (aOR 0·946 [95% CI 0·939-0·952] for stage I vs stage II-IV); whereas, the odds of being diagnosed with stage IV disease were higher in 2020 than in 2019 (1·074 [1·066-1·083] for stage IV vs stage I-III). This pattern was observed in most cancer types and sociodemographic groups, although was most prominent among Hispanic individuals (0·922 [0·899-0·946] for stage I; 1·110 [1·077-1·144] for stage IV), Asian American and Pacific Islander individuals (0·924 [0·892-0·956] for stage I; 1·096 [1·052-1·142] for stage IV), uninsured individuals (0·917 [0·875-0·961] for stage I; 1·102 [1·055-1·152] for stage IV), Medicare-insured adults younger than 65 years (0·909 [0·882-0·937] for stage I; 1·105 [1·068-1·144] for stage IV), and individuals living in the most socioeconomically deprived areas (0·931 [0·917-0·946] for stage I; 1·106 [1·087-1·125] for stage IV).

INTERPRETATION

Substantial cancer underdiagnosis and decreases in the proportion of early stage diagnoses occurred during 2020 in the USA, particularly among medically underserved individuals. Monitoring the long-term effects of the pandemic on morbidity, survival, and mortality is warranted.

FUNDING

None.

Pandemic distress associated with segregation and social stressors

Background

Racial/ethnic minorities are disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, as they are more likely to experience structural and interpersonal racial discrimination, and thus social marginalization. Based on this, we tested for associations between pandemic distress outcomes and four exposures: racial segregation, coronavirus-related racial bias, social status, and social support.

Methods

Data were collected as part of a larger longitudinal national study on mental health during the pandemic (n = 1,309). We tested if county-level segregation and individual-level social status, social support, and coronavirus racial bias were associated with pandemic distress using cumulative ordinal regression models, both unadjusted and adjusted for covariates (gender, age, education, and income).

Results

Both the segregation index (PR = 1.19; 95% CI 1.03, 1.36) and the coronavirus racial bias scale (PR = 1.17; 95% CI 1.06, 1.29) were significantly associated with pandemic distress. Estimates were similar, after adjusting for covariates, for both segregation (aPR = 1.15; 95% CI 1.01, 1.31) and coronavirus racial bias (PR = 1.12; 95% CI 1.02, 1.24). Higher social status (aPR = 0.74; 95% CI 0.64, 0.86) and social support (aPR = 0.81; 95% CI 0.73, 0.90) were associated with lower pandemic distress after adjustment.

Conclusion

Segregation and coronavirus racial bias are relevant pandemic stressors, and thus have implications for minority health. Future research exploring potential mechanisms of this relationship, including specific forms of racial discrimination related to pandemic distress and implications for social justice efforts, are recommended.

Relationship of Neighbourhood Social Deprivation and Ethnicity on Access to Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Population-Level Study

BACKGROUND

Wide geographic variation in access to transcatheter (TAVR) and surgical (SAVR) aortic valve replacement exists, but the impact of socioethnic factors on the geographic variation of AS management in Ontario, Canada, is unknown.

METHODS

Neighbourhood rates of AS admissions, as a proxy for AS burden, and downstream TAVR and SAVR referrals and procedures were estimated for the 76 subregions in Ontario. To determine if the socioethnic geographic variations in referrals and procedures were concordant or discordant with AS burden, we calculated Pearson correlation coefficients to determine the relationship between AS burden and each of TAVR referrals, TAVR procedures, SAVR referrals, or SAVR procedures. We developed generalised linear models to determine the association between social deprivation indices captured in the Ontario Marginalization index and the rates of AS burden as well as TAVR/SAVR referral and procedures.

RESULTS

There was wide geographic variation that was concordant between AS burden and the referral and procedure rates for TAVR and SAVR (correlation coefficients 0.86-0.96). Increased dependency was associated with higher rates of both TAVR/SAVR referrals and procedures (rate ratios 1.63-2.22). Neighbourhoods with a higher concentration of ethnic minorities were associated with lower AS burden as well as lower rates of both SAVR and TAVR referrals and procedures (rate ratios 0.57-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

An important ethnic gradient exists in AS burden and in both referral and completion of TAVR and SAVR in Ontario. Further research is necessary to understand if this gradient is appropriate or requires mitigation.

Associations of COVID-19 Related Work Stressors with Psychological Distress: Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Californian Workers

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to exert immense societal impacts, with recent data showing inequitable distribution of consequences among racial and ethnic groups. The objective of this study was to assess associations between COVID-related work stressors and psychological distress, with special emphasis on differences by race and ethnicity. Data were from the population-based California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) 2020. Associations of individual and cumulative work stressors, including job loss, reduced work hours, and working from home, with psychological distress in 12,113 workers were examined via multivariable linear regression, and stratified analyses were conducted for racial and ethnic subgroups. After adjustment for covariates, compared to workers with no work stressors, those who experienced either one or two/more work stressors had higher psychological distress (βs and 95% CIs were 0.80 [0.51, 1.09] and 1.98 [1.41, 2.56], respectively). Notably, experiencing cumulative (two/more) work stressors had much stronger effects on psychological distress among participants who were Black (β and 95% CI were 3.51 [1.09, 5.93]) or racial minorities (β and 95% CI were 3.57 [1.10, 6.05]). Occupational consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with increased psychological distress in Californian workers and inequitably distributed, with racial and ethnic minorities suffering the greatest burden.

Missing Care: the Initial Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on CKD Care Delivery

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a common condition with adverse health outcomes addressable by early disease management. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on care utilization for the CKD population is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To examine pandemic CKD care and identify factors associated with a high care deficit.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study PARTICIPANTS: 248,898 insured individuals (95% Medicare Advantage, 5% commercial) with stage G3-G4 CKD in 2018 MAIN MEASURES: Predicted (based on the pre-pandemic period of January 1, 2019-February 28, 2020) to observed per-member monthly face-to-face and telehealth encounters, laboratory testing, and proportion of days covered (PDC) for medications, evaluated during the early (March 1, 2020-June 30, 2020), pre-vaccine (July 1, 2020-December 31, 2020), and late (January 2021-August 2021) periods and overall.

KEY RESULTS

In-person encounters fell by 24.1% during the pandemic overall; this was mitigated by a 14.2% increase in telehealth encounters, resulting in a cumulative observed utilization deficit of 10% relative to predicted. These reductions were greatest in the early pandemic period, with a 19.8% cumulative deficit. PDC progressively decreased during the pandemic (range 9-20% overall reduction), with the greatest reductions in hypertension and diabetes medicines. CKD laboratory monitoring was also reduced (range 11.8-43.3%). Individuals of younger age (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.16, 2.28), with commercial insurance (1.43, 95% CI 1.25, 1.63), residing in the Southern US (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.14, 1.21), and with stage G4 CKD (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.17, 1.26) had greater odds of a higher care deficit overall.

CONCLUSIONS

The early COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a marked decline of healthcare services for individuals with CKD, with an incomplete recovery during the later pandemic. Increased telehealth use partially compensated for this deficit. The downstream impact of CKD care reduction on health outcomes requires further study, as does evaluation of effective care delivery models for this population.