Assessing the Mental Health Needs and Barriers to Care Among a Diverse Sample of Asian American Older Adults

BackgroundAsian Americans represent a mix of cultures and immigration experiences, which may put them differentially at risk for mental health problems. Yet, little is known about the mental health needs of older adults from various Asian subgroups compared to non-Hispanic whites.ObjectivesTo compare the prevalence rates of mental distress of Chinese, Filipino, South Asian, Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese older adults (aged 55 and older) to that of non-Hispanic whites; and to examine subgroup differences in utilization of mental health services.MethodsA cross-sectional analysis of a population-based sample of California adults responding to the 2007 California Health Interview Survey. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine subgroup differences in mental health status and use of mental health services among the six different Asian subgroups and non-Hispanic whites, adjusting for respondents' demographic and health characteristics, socioeconomic status, and English-language proficiency.ResultsA total of 20,712 respondents were included. Filipino [aOR=2.25; 95% CI=1.14-4.47] and Korean Americans [aOR=2.10; 95% CI=1.06-4.17] were more likely to report symptoms indicative of mental distress compared to non-Hispanic whites, yet were less likely to have seen a primary care provider [Filipino: aOR=0.41; 95% CI=0.18-0.90; Korean: aOR=0.24; 95% CI = 0.08-0.69] or have taken a prescription medication [Filipino: aOR=0.20; 95% CI=0.10-0.40; Korean: aOR=0.15; 95% CI=0.05-0.40], even after adjusting for indicators of respondents' demographic and health characteristics, socioeconomic status, and English-language proficiency. In contrast, Japanese Americans were less likely to report symptoms indicative of mental distress [aOR=0.43; 95% CI=0.21-0.90], and were less likely to make use of mental health services compared to non-Hispanic whites.Discussion/conclusionsThe findings from this study not only highlight the unmet mental health needs among older Asian Americans, but also illustrate significant variations among the various Asian subgroups. Clinicians who work closely with these patients should regularly screen and assess older Asian adults for symptoms related to their mental health needs

Rationale and study protocol for Unidas por la Vida (United for Life): A dyadic weight-loss intervention for high-risk Latina mothers and their adult daughters.

BackgroundHalf of Mexican-American women are under-active and nearly 78% are overweight/obese. The high lifetime risk of developing type 2 diabetes necessitates a culturally appropriate lifestyle intervention.PurposeUnidas por la Vida is a novel dyadic intervention that capitalizes on the centrality of family in Latino culture to mobilize an existing family dyad as a resource for health behavior change. The intervention aims to improve health behaviors and promote weight loss in two at-risk members of the same family: mothers with type 2 diabetes and their overweight/obese adult daughters who are at risk for developing diabetes.MethodsParticipants (N = 460 mother-adult daughter dyads) will be randomized into one of three conditions: 1) dyadic participation (mothers-daughters) in a lifestyle intervention; 2) individual participation (mothers alone; unrelated daughters alone) in a lifestyle intervention; and 3) mother-daughter dyads in a minimal intervention control group.ResultsThe primary outcome is weight loss. Secondary outcomes include physical activity, dietary intake, physiological measures (e.g. HbA1c), and body composition. Both the dyadic and individual interventions are expected to produce greater weight loss at 6, 12, and 18 months than those in minimal intervention control group, with women assigned to the dyadic intervention expected to lose more weight and to maintain the weight loss longer than women assigned to the individual intervention.ConclusionBecause health risks are often shared by multiple members of at-risk families, culturally appropriate, dyadic interventions have the potential to increase the success of behavior change efforts and to extend their reach to multiple family members.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02741037

Providing High-Quality Care for Limited English Proficient Patients: The Importance of Language Concordance and Interpreter Use

Background: Provider–patient language discordance is related to worse quality care for limited English proficient (LEP) patients who speak Spanish. However, little is known about language barriers among LEP Asian-American patients. Objective: We examined the effects of language discordance on the degree of health education and the quality of interpersonal care that patients received, and examined its effect on patient satisfaction. We also evaluated how the presence/absence of a clinic interpreter affected these outcomes. Design: Cross-sectional survey, response rate 74%. Participants: A total of 2,746 Chinese and Vietnamese patients receiving care at 11 health centers in 8 cities. Measurements: Provider–patient language concordance, health education received, quality of interpersonal care, patient ratings of providers, and the presence/absence of a clinic interpreter. Regression analyses were used to adjust for potential confounding. Results: Patients with language-discordant providers reported receiving less health education (β = 0.17, p < 0.05) compared to those with language-concordant providers. This effect was mitigated with the use of a clinic interpreter. Patients with language-discordant providers also reported worse interpersonal care (β = 0.28, p < 0.05), and were more likely to give low ratings to their providers (odds ratio [OR] = 1.61; CI = 0.97–2.67). Using a clinic interpreter did not mitigate these effects and in fact exacerbated disparities in patients’ perceptions of their providers. Conclusion: Language barriers are associated with less health education, worse interpersonal care, and lower patient satisfaction. Having access to a clinic interpreter can facilitate the transmission of health education. However, in terms of patients’ ratings of their providers and the quality of interpersonal care, having an interpreter present does not serve as a substitute for language concordance between patient and provider

Clinical Quality Indicators of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islander Patients Seen at Health Resources and Services Administration-Supported Community Health Centers

The Health Resources and Services Administration supports federally qualified health centers that provide health care services to more than 21.7 million low-income and medically underserved patients, the majority being racial/ethnic minorities. Nationally, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (NHPIs) represent 1.3 percent of all health center patients; however, NHPIs constitute more than half of the patients for some health centers. National data of health center clinical quality indicators were analyzed to explore potential differences between Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and Asian American patients. Even among a group of medically underserved patients, health disparities were found in NHPIs, illustrating the relevance of disaggregating data in identifying idiosyncratic differences deserving culturally appropriate interventions

Clinical Quality Indicators of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islander Patients Seen at Health Resources and Services Administration-Supported Community Health Centers

The Health Resources and Services Administration supports federally qualified health centers that provide health care services to more than 21.7 million low-income and medically underserved patients, the majority being racial/ethnic minorities. Nationally, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (NHPIs) represent 1.3 percent of all health center patients; however, NHPIs constitute more than half of the patients for some health centers. National data of health center clinical quality indicators were analyzed to explore potential differences between Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and Asian American patients. Even among a group of medically underserved patients, health disparities were found in NHPIs, illustrating the relevance of disaggregating data in identifying idiosyncratic differences deserving culturally appropriate interventions

Racial/Ethnic Discrimination in Health Care: Impact on Perceived Quality of Care

Racial/ethnic minorities are more likely to report receipt of lower quality of health care; however, the mediators of such patient reports are not known. To determine (1) whether racial disparities in perceptions of quality of health care are mediated by perceptions of being discriminated against while receiving medical care and (2) whether this association is further mediated by patient sociodemographic characteristics, access to care, and patient satisfaction across racial/ethnic groups. A cross-sectional analysis of a population-based sample of California adults responding to the 2003 California Health Interview Survey. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between perceived discrimination and perceived quality of health care after adjusting for patient characteristics and reports of access to care. A total of 36,831 respondents were included. African Americans (68.7%) and Asian/Pacific Islanders (64.5%) were less likely than non-Hispanic whites (72.8%) and Hispanics (74.9%) to rate their health care quality highly. African Americans (13.1%) and Hispanics (13.4%) were the most likely to report discrimination, followed by Asian/Pacific Islanders (7.3%) and non-Hispanic whites (2.6%). Racial/ethnic discrimination in health care was negatively associated with ratings of health care quality within each racial/ethnic group, even after adjusting for sociodemographic variables and other indicators of access and satisfaction. Feeling discriminated against fully accounted for the difference in low ratings of quality care between African Americans and whites, but not for other racial/ethnic minorities. Patient perceptions of discrimination may play an important, yet variable role in ratings of health care quality across racial/ethnic minority groups. Health care institutions should consider how to address this patient concern as a part of routine quality improvement