Cardiac Procedures among American Indians and Alaska Natives compared to Non-Hispanic Whites Hospitalized with Ischemic Heart Disease in California

BackgroundAmerican Indians/Alaska Natives (AIAN) experience a high burden of cardiovascular disease with rates for fatal and nonfatal heart disease approximately twofold higher than the U.S. population.ObjectiveTo determine if disparities exist in cardiac procedure rates among AIAN compared to non-Hispanic whites hospitalized in California for ischemic heart disease defined as acute myocardial infarction or unstable angina.DesignCross-sectional study. EVENTS: A total of 796 ischemic heart disease hospitalizations among AIAN and 90971 among non-Hispanic whites in 37 of 58 counties in California from 1998-2002.MeasurementsCardiac catheterization, percutaneous cardiac intervention, and coronary artery bypass graft surgery procedure rates from hospitalization administrative data.Main resultsAIAN did not have lower cardiac procedure rates for cardiac catheterization and percutaneous cardiac intervention compared to non-Hispanic whites (unadjusted OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87-1.16 and OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90-1.20, respectively). Adjustment for age, sex, comorbidities, and payer source did not alter the results (adjusted OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.82-1.10 and OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.85-1.14, respectively). We found higher odds (unadjusted OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.09-1.70) for receipt of coronary artery bypass graft surgery among AIAN hospitalized for ischemic heart disease compared to non-Hispanic whites which after adjustment attenuated some and was no longer statistically significant (adjusted OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.00-1.58).ConclusionAIAN were not less likely to receive cardiac procedures as non-Hispanic whites during hospitalizations for ischemic heart disease. Additional research is needed to determine whether differences in specialty referral patterns, patients' treatment preferences, or outpatient management may explain some of the health disparities due to cardiovascular disease that is found among AIAN

Perceived Discrimination and Self-Reported Quality of Care Among Latinos in the United States

Given the persistence of health and health-care disparities among Latinos in the United States and evidence that discrimination affects health and health care, an investigation of the relationship between perceived discrimination and quality of health care among Latinos is warranted. To examine the relationship of perceived discrimination (in general and in regard to doctors and medical personnel) with self-reported quality of health care and doctor-patient communication in a nationally representative Latino population sample. Participants were 1,067 Latino adults aged ≥18 years living in the US selected via random-digit dialing. Telephone interviews were conducted in 2008 during Wave 2 of the Pew Hispanic Center/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Hispanic Healthcare Survey. US-born Latinos were twice as likely to report general discrimination as foreign born: 0.32 SD versus −0.23 SD (P < 0.001) on the Detroit Area Survey (DAS) discrimination scale. Higher DAS discrimination was associated with lower self-reported quality of care in US-born Latinos [OR = 0.5; 95% CI (0.3, 0.9); P = 0.009]. For foreign-born Latinos, report of any doctor or medical staff discrimination was associated with lower quality of care [OR = 0.5; 95% CI (0.3, 0.9); P = 0.03], but the DAS was not. For US-born Latinos, doctor discrimination and higher DAS were jointly associated with worse doctor-patient communication. For foreign-born Latinos, the effect of discrimination on doctor-patient communication was significantly smaller than that observed in US-born Latinos. Given the association between perceived discrimination and quality of care, strategies to address discrimination in health-care settings may lead to improved patient satisfaction with care and possibly to improved treatment outcomes

Heterogeneity in Health Insurance Coverage Among US Latino Adults

We sought to determine the differences in observed and unobserved factors affecting rates of health insurance coverage between US Latino adults and US Latino adults of Mexican ancestry. Our hypothesis was that Latinos of Mexican ancestry have worse health insurance coverage than their non-Mexican Latino counterparts. The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) database from 1999–2007 consists of 33,847 Latinos. We compared Latinos of Mexican ancestry to non-Mexican Latinos in the initial descriptive analysis of health insurance coverage. Disparities in health insurance coverage across Latino categories were later analyzed in a multivariable logistic regression framework, which adjusts for confounding variables. The Blinder-Oaxaca technique was applied to parse out differences in health insurance coverage into observed and unobserved components. US Latinos of Mexican ancestry consistently had lower rates of health insurance coverage than did US non-Mexican Latinos. Approximately 65% of these disparities can be attributed to differences in observed characteristics of the Mexican ancestry population in the US (e.g., age, sex, income, employment status, education, citizenship, language and health condition). The remaining disparities may be attributed to unobserved heterogeneity that may include unobserved employment-related information (e.g., type of employment and firm size) and behavioral and idiosyncratic factors (e.g., risk aversion and cultural differences). This study confirmed that Latinos of Mexican ancestry were less likely to have health insurance than were non-Mexican Latinos. Moreover, while differences in observed socioeconomic and demographic factors accounted for most of these disparities, the share of unobserved heterogeneity accounted for 35% of these differences

African-American crack abusers and drug treatment initiation: barriers and effects of a pretreatment intervention

BACKGROUND: Individual and sociocultural factors may pose significant barriers for drug abusers seeking treatment, particularly for African-American crack cocaine abusers. However, there is evidence that pretreatment interventions may reduce treatment initiation barriers. This study examined the effects of a pretreatment intervention designed to enhance treatment motivation, decrease crack use, and prepare crack abusers for treatment entry. METHODS: Using street outreach, 443 African-American crack users were recruited in North Carolina and randomly assigned to either the pretreatment intervention or control group. RESULTS: At 3-month follow-up, both groups significantly reduced their crack use but the intervention group participants were more likely to have initiated treatment. CONCLUSION: The intervention helped motivate change but structural barriers to treatment remained keeping actual admissions low. Policy makers may be interested in these pretreatment sites as an alternative to treatment for short term outcomes

Establishing LA VIDA: A Community-Based Partnership to Prevent Intimate Violence against Latina Women

LA VIDA—the Southwest Detroit Partnership to Prevent Intimate Violence Against Latina Women— evolved in response to community concern about the problem of intimate partner violence (IPV) and the lack of culturally competent preventive and support services for Latino women and men in southwest Detroit. Since 1997, diverse organizations have mobilized as a community-academic partnership to ensure the availability, accessibility, and utilization of IPV services. This article describes and analyzes the evolution of LA VIDA within a community-based participatory research framework using a case study approach that draws on multiple data sources including group and individual interviews and field notes. The challenges and lessons learned in addressing a complex multifaceted problem such as IPV in an ethnic minority community are highlighted in an examination of the process of mobilizing diverse organizations, conducting community diagnosis and needs assessment activities, establishing goals and objectives within a social ecological framework, and integrating evaluation during the development phase.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/66991/2/10.1177_109019819902600606.pd

Prognostic implications of negative dobutamine stress echocardiography in African Americans compared to Caucasians

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licens

Self-Reported Health Status in Primary Health Care: The Influence of Immigration and Other Associated Factors

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study are to compare self-reported health status between Spanish-born and Latin American-born Spanish residents, adjusted by length of residence in the host country; and additionally, to analyse sociodemographic and psychosocial variables associated with a better health status. DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional population based study of Latin American-born (n = 691) and Spanish-born (n = 903) in 15 urban primary health care centres in Madrid (Spain), carried out between 2007 and 2009. The participants provided information, through an interview, about self-reported health status, socioeconomic characteristics, psychosocial factors and migration conditions. Descriptive and multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The Spanish-born participants reported a better health status than the Latin America-born participants (79.8% versus 69.3%, p<0.001). Different patterns of self-reported health status were observed depending on the length of residence in the host country. The proportion of immigrants with a better health status is greater in those who have been in Spain for less than five years compared to those who have stayed longer. Better health status is significantly associated with being men, under 34 years old, being Spanish-born, having a monthly incomes of over 1000 euros, and having considerable social support and low stress. CONCLUSIONS: Better self-reported health status is associated with being Spanish-born, men, under 34 years old, having an uppermiddle-socioeconomic status, adequate social support, and low stress. Additionally, length of residence in the host country is seen as a related factor in the self-reported health status of immigrants