Importance

Despite complexities of racial and ethnic residential segregation (hereinafter referred to as segregation) and neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation, public health studies, including those on COVID-19 racial and ethnic disparities, often rely on composite neighborhood indices that do not account for residential segregation.

Objective

To examine the associations by race and ethnicity among California's Healthy Places Index (HPI), Black and Hispanic segregation, Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), and COVID-19-related hospitalization.

Design, setting, and participants

This cohort study included veterans with positive test results for COVID-19 living in California who used Veterans Health Administration services between March 1, 2020, and October 31, 2021.

Main outcomes and measures

Rates of COVID-19-related hospitalization among veterans with COVID-19.

Results

The sample available for analysis included 19 495 veterans with COVID-19 (mean [SD] age, 57.21 [17.68] years), of whom 91.0% were men, 27.7% were Hispanic, 16.1% were non-Hispanic Black, and 45.0% were non-Hispanic White. For Black veterans, living in lower-HPI (ie, less healthy) neighborhoods was associated with higher rates of hospitalization (odds ratio [OR], 1.07 [95% CI, 1.03-1.12]), even after accounting for Black segregation (OR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.11]). Among Hispanic veterans, living in lower-HPI neighborhoods was not associated with hospitalization with (OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.99-1.09]) and without (OR, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.00-1.08]) Hispanic segregation adjustment. For non-Hispanic White veterans, lower HPI was associated with more frequent hospitalization (OR, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.00-1.06]). The HPI was no longer associated with hospitalization after accounting for Black (OR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.99-1.05]) or Hispanic (OR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.95-1.02]) segregation. Hospitalization was higher for White (OR, 4.42 [95% CI, 1.62-12.08]) and Hispanic (OR, 2.90 [95% CI, 1.02-8.23]) veterans living in neighborhoods with greater Black segregation and for White veterans in more Hispanic-segregated neighborhoods (OR, 2.81 [95% CI, 1.96-4.03]), adjusting for HPI. Living in higher SVI (ie, more vulnerable) neighborhoods was associated with greater hospitalization for Black (OR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.10]) and non-Hispanic White (OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.01-1.06]) veterans.

Conclusions and relevance

In this cohort study of US veterans with COVID-19, HPI captured neighborhood-level risk for COVID-19-related hospitalization for Black, Hispanic, and White veterans comparably with SVI. These findings have implications for the use of HPI and other composite neighborhood deprivation indices that do not explicitly account for segregation. Understanding associations between place and health requires ensuring composite measures accurately account for multiple aspects of neighborhood deprivation and, importantly, variation by race and ethnicity.

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic in the United States has disproportionately impacted communities deemed vulnerable to disease outbreaks. Our objectives were to test (1) whether infection and mortality decreased in counties in the most vulnerable (highest) tercile of the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), and (2) whether disparities between terciles of SVI were reduced, as the length of mask mandates increased.

Methods

Using the New York Times COVID-19 and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention SVI and mask mandate datasets, we conducted negative binomial regression analyses of county-level COVID-19 cases and deaths from 1/2020-11/2021 on interactions of SVI and mask mandate durations.

Results

Mask mandates were associated with decreases in mid-SVI cases (IRR: 0.79) and deaths (IRR: 0.90) and high-SVI cases (IRR: 0.89) and deaths (IRR: 0.88). Mandates were associated with the mitigation of infection disparities (Change in IRR: 0.92) and mortality disparities (Change in IRR: 0.85) between low and mid-SVI counties and mortality disparities between low and high-SVI counties (Change in IRR: 0.84).

Discussion

Mask mandates were associated with reductions in COVID-19 infection and mortality and mitigation of disparities for mid and high-vulnerability communities.

Conclusions

Ongoing COVID-19 response efforts may benefit from longer-standing infection control policies, particularly in the most vulnerable communities.

Objective

To examine mediation and moderation of racial/ethnic all-cause mortality disparities among Veteran Health Administration (VHA)-users by neighborhood deprivation and residential segregation.

Data sources

Electronic medical records for 10/2008-9/2009 VHA-users linked to National Death Index, 2000 Area Deprivation Index, and 2006-2009 US Census.

Study design

Racial/ethnic groups included American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN), Asian, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, and non-Hispanic white (reference). We measured neighborhood deprivation by Area Deprivation Index, calculated segregation for non-Hispanic black, Hispanic, and AI/AN using the Isolation Index, evaluated mediation using inverse odds-weighted Cox regression models and moderation using Cox regression models testing for neighborhood*race/ethnicity interactions.

Principal findings

Mortality disparities existed for AI/ANs (HR = 1.07, 95%CI:1.01-1.10) but no other groups after covariate adjustment. Neighborhood deprivation and Hispanic segregation neither mediated nor moderated AI/AN disparities. Non-Hispanic black segregation both mediated and moderated AI/AN disparities. The AI/AN vs. non-Hispanic white disparity was attenuated for AI/ANs living in neighborhoods with greater non-Hispanic black segregation (P = .047). Black segregation's mediating effect was limited to VHA-users living in counties with low black segregation. AI/AN segregation also mediated AI/AN mortality disparities in counties that included or were near AI/AN reservations.

Conclusions

Neighborhood characteristics, particularly black and AI/AN residential segregation, may contribute to AI/AN mortality disparities among VHA-users, particularly in communities that were rural, had greater black segregation, or were located on or near AI/AN reservations. This suggests the importance of neighborhood social determinants of health on racial/ethnic mortality disparities. Living near reservations may allow AI/AN VHA-users to maintain cultural and tribal ties, while also providing them with access to economic and other resources. Future research should explore the experiences of AI/ANs living in black communities and underlying mechanisms to identify targets for intervention.

Introduction

Equitable COVID-19 vaccine access is imperative to mitigating negative COVID-19 impacts among racial/ethnic minorities. U.S. racial/ethnic minorities have lower COVID-19 vaccination rates than Whites despite higher COVID-19 death/case rates. The Veterans Health Administration provides the unique context of a managed care system with few access barriers. This study evaluates race/ethnicity as a predictor of Veterans Health Administration COVID-19 vaccination.

Methods

The cohort was composed of Veterans Health Administration outpatient users aged ≥65 years (N=3,474,874). COVID-19 vaccination was assessed between December 14, 2020 and February 23, 2021. Multivariable logistic regressions were conducted, controlling for demographics, medical comorbidity, and influenza vaccination history. Proximity to Indian Health Service Contract Health Service Delivery Areas was tested as a moderator. Data analyses were conducted during 2021.

Results

Blacks (OR=1.28, 95% CI=1.17, 1.40), Hispanics (OR=1.15, 95% CI=1.05, 1.25), and Asians (OR=1.21, 95% CI=1.02, 1.43) were more likely than Whites to receive Veterans Health Administration COVID-19 vaccinations. American Indian/Alaska Natives were less likely than Whites to receive Veterans Health Administration COVID-19 vaccinations, but only those residing in Contract Health Service Delivery Area counties (OR= 0.58, 95% CI= 0.47, 0.72). Influenza vaccine history positively predicted COVID-19 vaccine uptake (OR= 2.28, 95% CI=2.22, 2.34).

Conclusions

In the Veterans Health Administration, compared with the general U.S. population, COVID-19 vaccine receipt is higher among most racial/ethnic minority groups than Whites, suggesting reduced vaccination barriers . The Indian Health Service may provide a safety net for American Indian/Alaska Native populations. Addressing vaccination access barriers in non-Veterans Health Administration settings can potentially reduce racial/ethnic disparities.

Purpose

Racial/ethnic minoritized groups, women, and economically disadvantaged groups are disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigated racial/ethnic differences by gender in correlates of COVID-19 infection among veterans seeking health care services at the Veterans Health Administration. Little is known about gender-specific factors associated with infection among veterans. This study seeks to fill this gap.

Methods

The sample was veterans with results from a COVID-19 test (polymerase chain reaction) conducted at Veterans Health Administration facilities between March 1, 2020, and August 5, 2020, and linked to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index data (39,223 women and 316,380 men). Bivariate, multivariate logistic, and predicted probability analyses were conducted. All analyses were stratified by gender.

Results

Similar percentages of women and men tested positive for COVID-19 (9.6% vs. 10.0%). In multivariate analysis, compared with non-Hispanic White women, American Indian/Alaska Native, Black, and Hispanic women all had significantly higher odds of infection. Similar racial/ethnic differences were found for men. Both older men and women (>40 years) had lower odds of infection, but the age cut points differed (40 for women, 55 for men). Men 80 years and older had a higher odds than those aged less than 40 years of age. For men, but not for women, being employed (vs. unemployed) was associated with an increased odds of infection, and having comorbidities was associated with decreased odds. There were significant differences within and across gender-by-race/ethnicity in infection, after adjusting for covariates.

Conclusions

American Indian/Alaska Native, Hispanic, and Black women and men veterans are disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 infection. Widespread testing and tracking, education, and outreach regarding COVID-19 mitigation and vaccination efforts are recommended.

Purpose: Equal-access health care systems such as the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) reduce financial and nonfinancial barriers to care. It is unknown if such systems mitigate racial/ethnic mortality disparities, such as those well documented in the broader U.S. population. We examined racial/ethnic mortality disparities among VHA health care users, and compared racial/ethnic disparities in VHA and U.S. general populations. Methods: Linking VHA records for an October 2008 to September 2009 national VHA user cohort, and National Death Index records, we assessed all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular-related mortality through December 2011. We calculated age-, sex-, and comorbidity-adjusted mortality hazard ratios. We computed sex-stratified, age-standardized mortality risk ratios for VHA and U.S. populations, then compared racial/ethnic disparities between the populations. Results: Among VHA users, American Indian/Alaskan Natives (AI/ANs) had higher adjusted all-cause mortality, whereas non-Hispanic Blacks had higher cause-specific mortality versus non-Hispanic Whites. Asians, Hispanics, and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islanders had similar, or lower all-cause and cause-specific mortality versus non-Hispanic Whites. Mortality disparities were evident in non-Hispanic-Black men compared with non-Hispanic White men in both VHA and U.S. populations for all-cause, cardiovascular, and cancer (cause-specific) mortality, but disparities were smaller in VHA. VHA non-Hispanic Black women did not experience the all-cause and cause-specific mortality disparity present for U.S. non-Hispanic Black women. Disparities in all-cause and cancer mortality existed in VHA but not in U.S. population AI/AN men. Conclusion: Patterns in racial/ethnic disparities differed between VHA and U.S. populations, with fewer disparities within VHAs equal-access system. Equal-access health care may partially address racial/ethnic mortality disparities, but other nonhealth care factors should also be explored.

Background

Quantitative evaluations of the effectiveness of intensive primary care (IPC) programs for high-needs patients have yielded mixed results for improving healthcare utilization, cost, and mortality. However, IPC programs may provide other value.

Objective

To understand the perspectives of high-needs patients and primary care facility leaders on the effects of a Veterans Affairs (VA) IPC program on patients.

Design

A total of 66 semi-structured telephone interviews with high-needs VA patients and primary care facility leaders were conducted as part of the IPC program evaluation.

Participants

High-needs patients (n = 51) and primary care facility leaders (n = 15) at 5 VA pilot sites.

Approach

We used content analysis to examine interview transcripts for both a priori and emergent themes about perceived IPC program effects.

Key results

Patients enrolled in VA IPCs reported improvements in their experience of VA care (e.g., patient-provider relationship, access to their team). Both patients and leaders reported improvements in patient motivation to engage with self-care and with their IPC team, and behaviors, especially diet, exercise, and medication management. Patients also perceived improvements in health and described receiving assistance with social needs. Despite this, patients and leaders also outlined patient health characteristics and contextual factors (e.g., chronic health conditions, housing insecurity) that may have limited the effectiveness of the program on healthcare cost and utilization.

Conclusions

Patients and primary care facility leaders report benefits for high-needs patients from IPC interventions that translated into perceived improvements in healthcare, health behaviors, and physical and mental health status. Most program evaluations focus on cost and utilization, which may be less amenable to change given this cohort's numerous comorbid health conditions and complex social circumstances. Future IPC program evaluations should additionally examine IPC's effects on quality of care, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and patient health behaviors other than utilization (e.g., engagement, self-efficacy).