Association Between Insurer Connectivity in Appalachian Population Health Networks and Preventable Hospitalizations: Evidence from Kentucky

Introduction: Addressing complex health and social needs requires cross-sector collaboration to deliver medical, social, and population health services at the community level. Capacity in community health and social services networks may be constrained in regions like Appalachia due to the combined effects of rurality and persistently poor health and social outcomes. One way that cross-sector networks serving low-resource communities can expand their capacity is by engaging partners, like health insurers, who can leverage resources from outside the local area. Purpose: This study examines insurer connectivity in cross-sector networks across Kentucky’s geographic regions and the association between connectivity and the probability of an individual experiencing a preventable hospitalization. Methods: A cross-sectional design was used that linked data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Public Health Systems (NALSYS) with 2018 patient-level Kentucky hospital discharge data to examine the association between insurer connectivity in community networks and preventable hospitalizations across urban, rural non-Appalachian, and Appalachian regions. Results: Analysis of the data shows substantial geographic variation in the association between insurer connectivity in community networks and preventable hospitalization. Insurer connectivity in rural Appalachian communities was associated with lower likelihood that an individual was admitted for a preventable hospitalization (p \u3c 0.01). Implications: Findings suggest insurer connectivity in cross-sector community health and social services networks has the potential to strengthen network capacity to address preventable hospitalizations and improve health outcomes and well-being for the people of Appalachia

Geographic Variation in the Structure of Kentucky’s Population Health Systems: An Urban, Rural, and Appalachian Comparison

Introduction: Research examining geographic variation in the structure of population health systems is continuing to emerge, and most of the evidence that currently exists divides systems by urban and rural designation. Very little is understood about how being rural and Appalachian impacts population health system structure and strength. Purpose: This study examines geographic differences in key characteristics of population health systems in urban, rural non-Appalachian, and rural Appalachian regions of Kentucky. Methods: Data from a 2018 statewide survey of community networks was used to examine population health system characteristics. Descriptive statistics were generated to examine variation across geographic regions in the availability of 20 population health activities, the range of organizations that contribute to those activities, and system strength. Data were collected in 2018 and analyzed in 2020. Results: Variation in the provision of population health protections and the structure of public health systems across KY exists. Urban communities are more likely than rural to have a comprehensive set of population health protections delivered in collaboration with a diverse set of multisector partners. Rural Appalachian communities face additional limited capacity in the delivery of population health activities, compared to other rural communities in the state. Implications: Understanding the delivery of population health provides further insight into additional system-level factors that may drive persistent health inequities in rural and Appalachian communities. The capacity to improve health happens beyond the clinic, and the strengthening of population health systems will be a critical step in efforts to improve population health

Policy Implications of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Food Security in Rural America: Evidence from Appalachia

Rural communities are disproportionally affected by food insecurity, making them vulnerable to the consequences of supply disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. While access to food was initially diminished due to food supply disruptions, little is known about the mechanisms through which federal emergency assistance programs impacted food access in rural populations. Through a series of five focus groups in spring 2021, we examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on food access in a rural Appalachian community in Kentucky. Data were analyzed using a Grounded Theory Approach. Findings revealed the following four primary themes: food scarcity in grocery stores; expanded federal food assistance; expanded community food resources; and expanded home gardening. Participants provided details regarding the way increased federal assistance, especially expanded benefits within the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, allowed them to purchase greater quantities of nutritious food. This study unveils the specific impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on one rural population, including the influence of some social determinants of health on food insecurity. Policymakers and stakeholders should recognize the layered protection of multiple federal emergency assistance programs against food insecurity and the potential for long-term population health promotion in rural areas

BOOSTing Patient Mobility and Function on a General Medical Unit by Enhancing Interprofessional Care

Low mobility during hospitalization remains prevalent despite associated negative consequences. The goal of this quality improvement (QI) project was to increase patient mobility and function by adding a physical therapist (PT) to an existing interprofessional care team. A mobility technician assisted treatment group patients with mobility during hospitalization based on physical therapist recommendations. Change in functional status and highest level of mobility achieved by treatment group patients was measured from admission to discharge. Observed hospital length of stay (LOS), LOS index, and 30-day all cause hospital readmission comparisons between treatment group and a comparison group on the same unit, and between cross-sectional comparison groups one year prior were used for Difference in Difference analysis. Bivariate comparisons between the treatment and a cross-sectional comparison group from one year prior showed a statistically significant change in LOS Index. No other bivariate comparisons were statistically significant. Difference in Difference methods showed no statistically significant change in observed LOS, LOS Index, or 30-day readmission. Patients in the treatment group had statistically significant improvements in functional status and highest level of mobility achieved. Physical function and mobility improved for patients who participated in mobility sessions. Mobility technicians may contribute to improved care quality and patient safety in the hospital

Association Between Community Social Vulnerability and Preventable Hospitalizations

Preventable hospitalizations are common and costly events that burden patients and our health care system. While research suggests that these events are strongly linked to ambulatory care access, emerging evidence suggests they may also be sensitive to a patient’s social, environmental, and economic conditions. This study examines the association between variations in social vulnerability and preventable hospitalization rates. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of county-level preventable hospitalization rates for 33 states linked with data from the 2020 Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). Preventable hospitalizations were 40% higher in the most vulnerable counties compared with the least vulnerable. Adjusted regression results confirm the strong relationship between social vulnerability and preventable hospitalizations. Our results suggest wide variation in community-level preventable hospitalization rates, with robust evidence that variation is strongly related to a community’s social vulnerability. The human toll, societal cost, and preventability of these hospitalizations make understanding and mitigating these inequities a national priority

Antibody prevalence after three or more COVID-19 vaccine doses in individuals who are immunosuppressed in the UK: a cross-sectional study from MELODY

SummaryBackground In the UK, additional COVID-19 vaccine booster doses and treatments are offered to people who are immunosuppressed to protect against severe COVID-19, but how best to choose the individuals that receive these vaccine booster doses and treatments is unclear. We investigated the association between seropositivity to SARSCoV-2 spike protein with demographic, disease, and treatment- related characteristics after at least three COVID-19 vaccines in three cohorts of people who are immunosuppressed.Methods In a cross-sectional study using UK national disease registries, we identified, contacted, and recruited recipients of solid organ transplants, participants with rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases, and participants with lymphoid malignancies who were 18 years or older, resident in the UK, and who had received at least three doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. The study was open to recruitment from Dec 7, 2021, to June 26, 2022. Participants received a lateral flow immunoassay test for SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies to complete at home, and an online questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the mutually adjusted odds of seropositivity against each characteristic.FindingsBetween Feb 14 and June 26, 2022, we screened 101 972 people (98 725 invited, 3247 self-enrolled) and recruited 28 411 (27·9%) to the study. 23 036 (81·1%) recruited individuals provided serological data. Of these, 9927 (43·1%) were recipients of solid organ transplants, 6516 (28·3%) had rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases, and 6593 (28·6%) had lymphoid malignancies. 10 485 (45·5%) participants were men and 12 535 (54·4%) were women (gender was not reported for 16 [<0·1%] participants), and 21661 (94·0%) participants were of White ethnicity. The median age of participants with solid organ transplants was 60 years (SD 50–67), with rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases was 65 years (54–73), and with lymphoid malignancy was 69 years (61–75). Of the 23 036 participants with serological data, 6583 (28·6%) had received three vaccine doses, 14 234 (61·8%) had received four vaccine doses, and 2219 (9·6%) had received five or more vaccine doses. IgG anti-spike antibodies were undetectable in 2310 (23·3%) of 9927 patients with solid organ transplants, 922 (14·1%) of 6516 patients with rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases, and 1366 (20·7%) of 6593 patients with lymphoid malignancies. In all groups, seropositivity was associated with younger age, higher number of vaccine doses (ie, five vs three), and previous COVID-19. Immunosuppressive medication reduced the likelihood of seropositivity: the lowest odds of seropositivity were found in recipients of solid organ transplants receiving a combination of an anti-proliferative agent, a calcineurin inhibitor, and steroids, and those with rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases or lymphoid malignancies treated with anti-CD20 therapies. InterpretationApproximately one in five recipients of solid organ transplants, individuals with rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases, and individuals with lymphoid malignancies have no detectable IgG anti-spike antibodies despite three or more vaccine doses, but this proportion decreases with sequential booster doses. Choice of immunosuppressant and disease type is strongly associated with serological response. Antibody testing using lateral flow immunoassay tests could enable rapid identification of individuals who are most likely to benefit from additional COVID-19 interventions

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases: subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy

Health, education, and social care provision after diagnosis of childhood visual disability

Aim: To investigate the health, education, and social care provision for children newly diagnosed with visual disability.Method: This was a national prospective study, the British Childhood Visual Impairment and Blindness Study 2 (BCVIS2), ascertaining new diagnoses of visual impairment or severe visual impairment and blindness (SVIBL), or equivalent vi-sion. Data collection was performed by managing clinicians up to 1-year follow-up, and included health and developmental needs, and health, education, and social care provision.Results: BCVIS2 identified 784 children newly diagnosed with visual impairment/SVIBL (313 with visual impairment, 471 with SVIBL). Most children had associated systemic disorders (559 [71%], 167 [54%] with visual impairment, and 392 [84%] with SVIBL). Care from multidisciplinary teams was provided for 549 children (70%). Two-thirds (515) had not received an Education, Health, and Care Plan (EHCP). Fewer children with visual impairment had seen a specialist teacher (SVIBL 35%, visual impairment 28%, χ2p < 0.001), or had an EHCP (11% vs 7%, χ2p < 0 . 01).Interpretation: Families need additional support from managing clinicians to access recommended complex interventions such as the use of multidisciplinary teams and educational support. This need is pressing, as the population of children with visual impairment/SVIBL is expected to grow in size and complexity.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention