Reductions in 2020 US life expectancy due to COVID-19 and the disproportionate impact on the Black and Latino populations

Does race and insurance status play a role in high-grade renal trauma in the pediatric population? - An analysis from the traumatic renal injury collaborative in kids (TRICK) consortium

BACKGROUND

We sought to examine the potential role of race and insurance status on the presentation, management, and outcomes of high-grade renal trauma (HGRT) in a large trauma registry.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of a large, multi-center registry of high-grade pediatric renal trauma was performed. Patients < 18 years of age with HGRT (grades III, IV, and V) from 2007 to 2020 were included. Patient demographics, presenting characteristics, hospital courses, outcomes, and follow-ups were extracted and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 341 patients were initially identified, 32 were excluded. 66.3% were Caucasian(C), 27.5% were African American(AA), and 6.2% were Other races(O). 43.7% had public insurance,49.8% had private insurance and 6.5% were self-pay. Association of Race: AA patients had a higher rate of penetrating trauma (9% AA vs. 4% C, 0% Others, p = 0.002). Those with O and AA races presented at a younger age (9.5 yo O vs. 12.5 yo AA vs. 14 yo C, p = 0.001). However, no differences were found between race groups in the hospital course or outcome. Association of Insurance status: Those with public insurance presented with higher rates of bowel injury and blood transfusion, no differences were found in hospital course or outcome. Private insurance had higher Urology follow up rates (49% Private vs. 34.6% Public vs. 35% Self pay, p = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

Race and insurance status was associated with differences found on the mechanism of injury, transfusion rate and urology follow-up rate; however, they do not influence rates of surgical intervention, post-injury complications or mortality.

Country-based modelling of COVID-19 case fatality rate: A multiple regression analysis

BACKGROUND

The spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 outbreak worldwide has caused concern regarding the mortality rate caused by the infection. The determinants of mortality on a global scale cannot be fully understood due to lack of information.

AIM

To identify key factors that may explain the variability in case lethality across countries.

METHODS

We identified 21 Potential risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case fatality rate for all the countries with available data. We examined univariate relationships of each variable with case fatality rate (CFR), and all independent variables to identify candidate variables for our final multiple model. Multiple regression analysis technique was used to assess the strength of relationship.

RESULTS

The mean of COVID-19 mortality was 1.52 ± 1.72%. There was a statistically significant inverse correlation between health expenditure, and number of computed tomography scanners per 1 million with CFR, and significant direct correlation was found between literacy, and air pollution with CFR. This final model can predict approximately 97% of the changes in CFR.

CONCLUSION

The current study recommends some new predictors explaining affect mortality rate. Thus, it could help decision-makers develop health policies to fight COVID-19.

Do healthcare disparities play a role in pediatric testicular torsion? - Analysis of a single large pediatric center

INTRODUCTION

Healthcare disparities have been shown to impact outcomes of various acute pediatric conditions. We sought to examine the impact of race, ethnicity and insurance status on the presentation, management and outcome of testicular torsion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained testicular torsion database was performed. Patients ≤18 years of age evaluated in our pediatric institution's emergency room between April 2016-April 2020 with US diagnosed and OR confirmed testicular torsion were included. Basic demographics, timing of presentation, referral rate, time to OR and orchiectomy rate were extracted and compared. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 206 patients were included. 114 (56.2%) were Black or African American (Black/AA), 43 were (21.2%) Hispanic/Latino, 22 (10.8%) were Caucasian, and 24 (11.8%) were designated as Other races. Ninety-eight (48.3%) patients had Medicaid, 90 (44.3%) had private insurance, and 15 (7.4%) patients were uninsured. Sixty-eight (33.0%) presented in a delayed fashion (>24 h). Compared to the Caucasian patients, Black/AA patients were 2.1 years (95% CI: 0.5, 3.8; P = 0.010) older at the time of presentation. When compared to those with Medicaid insurance, uninsured patients had 6.26 times (95% CI: 1.58, 41.88; P = 0.021) higher odds to be referred from an outside hospital for management. In those patients presenting acutely (<24 h, N = 138), there were no significant differences in the odds of orchiectomy for Black/AA or Hispanic/Latino patients when compared to Caucasian patients, however, the odds of orchiectomy in Other races (non-Caucasian, non-Black/AA, non-Hispanic/Latino) was significantly higher (OR: 10.38; 95% CI: 1.13, 246.96; P = 0.049). While the mean time in minutes from ED to OR was longer in those with Medicaid insurance (141 vs 125.4 private vs 115 uninsured, p = 0.042), this did not impact orchiectomy rate (39.8% vs 40.9% vs 46.7%, p = 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no differences in the orchiectomy rates by race with the exception of a higher rate in the diverse and heterogeneous Other race (non-Caucasian, non-Black/AA, non-Hispanic/Latino) group. Those uninsured had a higher referral rate highlighting the potential existence of disparities for those uninsured and the need for further investigation.

Interventions on Socioeconomic and Racial Inequities in Respiratory Pandemics: a Rapid Systematic Review

Purpose of Review

Racial and socioeconomic inequities in respiratory pandemics have been consistently documented, but little official guidance exists on effective action to prevent these. We systematically reviewed quantitative evaluations of (real or simulated) interventions targeting racial and socioeconomic inequities in respiratory pandemic outcomes.

Recent Findings

Our systematic search returned 10,208 records, of which 5 met inclusion criteria, including observational (n = 1), randomized trial (n = 1), and simulation (n = 3) studies. Interventions studied included vaccination parity, antiviral distribution, school closure, disinfection, personal protective equipment, and paid sick leave, with a focus on Black (n = 3) and/or Latinx (n = 4) or low-SES (n = 2) communities. Results are suggestive that these interventions might be effective at reducing racial and/or SES disparities in pandemics.

Summary

There is a dearth of research on strategies to reduce pandemic disparities. We provide theory-driven, concrete suggestions for incorporating equity into intervention research for pandemic preparedness, including a focus on social and economic policies.

Professionally responsible coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination counseling of obstetrical and gynecologic patients

The development of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines in the current and planned clinical trials is essential for the success of a public health response. This paper focuses on how physicians should implement the results of these clinical trials when counseling patients who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed about vaccines with government authorization for clinical use. Determining the most effective approach to counsel patients about coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination is challenging. We address the professionally responsible counseling of 3 groups of patients-those who are pregnant, those planning to become pregnant, and those breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed. We begin with an evidence-based account of the following 5 major challenges: the limited evidence base, the documented increased risk for severe disease among pregnant coronavirus disease 2019-infected patients, conflicting guidance from government agencies and professional associations, false information about coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines, and maternal mistrust and vaccine hesitancy. We subsequently provide evidence-based, ethically justified, practical guidance for meeting these challenges in the professionally responsible counseling of patients about coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination. To guide the professionally responsible counseling of patients who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, and breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed, we explain how obstetrician-gynecologists should evaluate the current clinical information, why a recommendation of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination should be made, and how this assessment should be presented to patients during the informed consent process with the goal of empowering them to make informed decisions. We also present a proactive account of how to respond when patients refuse the recommended vaccination, including the elements of the legal obligation of informed refusal and the ethical obligation to ask patients to reconsider. During this process, the physician should be alert to vaccine hesitancy, ask patients to express their hesitation and reasons for it, and respectfully address them. In contrast to the conflicting guidance from government agencies and professional associations, evidence-based professional ethics in obstetrics and gynecology provides unequivocal and clear guidance: Physicians should recommend coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination to patients who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, and breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed. To prevent widening of the health inequities, build trust in the health benefits of vaccination, and encourage coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine and treatment uptake, in addition to recommending coronavirus disease 2019 vaccinations, physicians should engage with communities to tailor strategies to overcome mistrust and deliver evidence-based information, robust educational campaigns, and novel approaches to immunization.

G6PD deficiency, redox homeostasis, and viral infections: implications for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19)

The COVID-19 pandemic has so far affected more than 45 million people and has caused over 1 million deaths worldwide. Infection with SARS-CoV-2, the pathogenic agent, which is associated with an imbalanced redox status, causes hyperinflammation and a cytokine storm, leading to cell death. Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficient individuals may experience a hemolytic crisis after being exposed to oxidants or infection. Individuals with G6PD deficiency are more susceptible to coronavirus infection than individuals with normally functioning G6PD. An altered immune response to viral infections is found in individuals with G6PD deficiency. Evidence indicates that G6PD deficiency is a predisposing factor of COVID-19.