No abstract

Background Insured adults receive invasive cardiovascular procedures more frequently than uninsured adults. We examined the impact of Massachusetts’s healthcare reform on use of coronary revascularization procedures, in–hospital and 1-year mortality by race/ethnicity, education, and sex. Methods and Results Using hospital claims data, we compared differences in coronary revascularization rates [coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention] and in-hospital mortality by race/ethnicity, education, and sex among Massachusetts residents age 21–64 hospitalized with a principal discharge diagnosis of ischemic heart disease pre (November 1, 2004 to July 31, 2006) and post (December 1, 2006 to September 30, 2008) reform; 1-year mortality was calculated for those undergoing revascularization. Adjusted-logistic regression assessed 24,216 discharges pre-reform and 20,721 discharges post-reform. Blacks had 30% lower odds of receiving coronary revascularization than whites in the pre-reform period. Compared to whites in the post-reform period, blacks (OR=0.73, 95%CI 0.63–0.84) and Hispanics (OR= 0.84, 95%CI 0.74–0.97) were less likely and Asians (OR=1.29, 95%CI 1.01–1.65) more likely to receive coronary revascularization. Patients living in more educated communities, males, and persons with private insurance were more likely to receive coronary revascularization pre and post-reform. Compared to pre-reform, the adjusted odds of in-hospital mortality were higher in patients living in less educated communities in the post-reform period. No differences in 1-year mortality by race/ethnicity, education, or sex for revascularized patients were observed pre- or post-reform. Conclusion Reducing insurance barriers to receipt of coronary revascularization procedures has not yet eliminated pre-existing demographic and educational disparities in access to these procedures.

Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for high-risk women interested in BRCA1/2 testing has been shown to yield positive outcomes comparable to usual care (UC; in-person) genetic counseling. However, little is known about how genetic counselors perceive the delivery of these alternate forms of genetic counseling. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus UC, genetic counselors completed a 5-item genetic counselor process questionnaire (GCQ) assessing key elements of pre-test sessions (information delivery, emotional support, addressing questions and concerns, tailoring of session, and facilitation of decision- making) with the 479 female participants (TC, N=236; UC, N=243). The GCQ scores did not differ for TC vs. UC sessions (t (477) = 0.11, p = 0.910). However, multivariate analysis showed that participant race/ethnicity significantly predicted genetic counselor perceptions (β = 0.172, p<0.001) in that the GCQ scores were lower for minorities in TC and UC. Exploratory analyses suggested that GCQ scores may be associated with patient preference for UC versus TC (t (79) = 2.21, p=0.030). Additionally, we found that genetic counselor ratings of session effectiveness were generally concordant with patient perceptions of the session. These data indicate that genetic counselors perceive that key components of TC can be delivered as effectively as UC, and that these elements may contribute to specific aspects of patient satisfaction. However, undefined process differences may be present which account for lower counselor perceptions about the effectiveness of their sessions with minority women (i.e., those other than non-Hispanic Whites). We discuss other potential clinical and research implications of our findings.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Discrimination is recognized as a chronic psychological stressor related to poor health outcomes. However, investigations about lifetime discrimination and hypertension (HTN), a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) have yielded mixed results. Data are limited by small sample size and lack of studies involving women. Therefore, we assessed the association between unfair treatment (UT), a form of discrimination, and prevalent HTN in women. Methods and Results: In this cross-sectional analysis, we used data from women the Women’s Health Study follow-up cohort who responded to questions about UT (n= 30,873; mean age 69 years). HTN was defined as:a physician’s diagnosis of HTN, the use of anti-hypertensive treatment or self-reported systolic blood pressure (BP) ≥ 140 mmHg, or diastolic BP ≥ 90 mmHg. UT asked about experiences over their lifetime in 4 domains [obtaining housing, getting a job, being fired/not promoted, being stopped/questioned by the police; response (yes/no) to each question was used to compute an UT score (range 0-4; coded in 3 categories: 0 (reference), 1, and 2-4 domains). Logistic regression models estimated the likelihood of HTN if treated unfairly. Among WHS participants, the prevalence of HTN was 67% (20,808 of 30,873); and, 15% (4,614 of 30,873) of women reported UT in at least one domain. In the crude model, increasing UT score was associated with increasing relative odds of HTN (1.01 and 1.26 for 1 and 2-4 domains, vs 0;ptrend=0.03); adjustment for age, race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status (education and income) strengthened the magnitude of observed association (1.00, 1.16, 1.36; ptrend<0.0001). This association was attenuated in a fully adjusted model additionally accounting for factors that may lie in the mechanistic pathway including smoking status, diabetes, physical activity, alcohol use, history of hyperlipidemia, use of hormone replacement therapy, and body mass index (1.00, 1.00, 1.18, ptrend=0.32). Conclusion: These data are hypothesis generating in that they suggest UT is related to hypertension, a potent risk factor for CVD. Additional research is needed to better understand the influence of UT for cardiovascular health disparities in the United States.

Background: Discrimination, a form of chronic psychological stress, is related to certain chronic health conditions such as poor physical health and hypertension. However, little is known about the associations of everyday discrimination with risk of myocardial infarction. Methods and Results: We assessed the association between everyday discrimination (discrimination) and myocardial infarction (MI) using a prospective, nested case control study of 548 women (267 cases, 281 controls), selected from 26,763 women without a history of cardiovascular disease at baseline who participated in the Women’s Heath Study (WHS). Among 267 MI cases, there was a mean follow-up of 8.8 + 4.1 years from date of WHS randomization to date of MI event. At baseline, the mean age of participants was 53.6 + 6.1 years. Cases and controls were matched for age and smoking history. Discrimination was assessed by 5 questions where women reported whether they were: 1) treated with less courtesy/respect than others; 2) treated as not being smart; 3) treated as if others were afraid of them; 4) received poorer service at restaurants/stores; or 5) felt threatened/harassed. Responses were based on a Likert scale of 1=never to 5=at least once/weekly with higher scores indicating more experiences with discrimination. In unadjusted logistic regression models of increasing tertiles of discrimination, we found no significant association between discrimination and odds of MI [Odds Ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI): 1.00, 1.28 (0.85-1.94), 1.06 (0.69-1.64); p trend =0.5]. Adjustment for cardiovascular disease risk factors (lipid parameters, hsCRP, family history of MI, hypertension, body mass index, diabetes, and alcohol consumption) revealed an inverse-U-shaped relationship [OR, 95%CI: 1.00, 2.14 (1.21-3.77), 1.55 (0.87-2.78); p trend = 0.03], suggesting that these factors obscured the association in unadjusted models. Notably, addition of education and income to the crude model alone [1.00, 1.38 (0.89, 2.15), 0.97 (0.61, 1.54) p trend = 0.2] or to the model with the cardiovascular risk factors [1.00, 2.27 (1.25-4.10), 1.36 (0.73, 2.53); p trend = 0.02] had minimal impact on odds of MI in these women. Conclusion: Among women participating in the WHS follow-up cohort, higher levels of everyday discrimination were related to increased odds of myocardial infarction in an inverse-U-shaped manner, a finding that is obscured by traditional cardiovascular disease risk factors. Access to measures associated with a healthy heart might be important to myocardial infarction risk attenuation among women reporting everyday discrimination. Further research is warranted to elucidate the relationship between everyday discrimination and increased risk of MI.

Background: Although psychosocial stressors such as negative life events predict adverse physical and mental health outcomes, significant gaps remain in the literature regarding whether such associations appear with cardiovascular disease (CVD) in middle-aged and older women, a demographic at higher risk for CVD than younger women. Hence, we investigated the relationship of cumulative negative life events and risk of myocardial infarction in the Women’s Health Study (WHS). Methods and Results: We performed a prospective, nested case-control study of apparently healthy post-menopausal women participating in the ongoing follow-up cohort of the Women’s Health Study; 26,763 women were followed for an average of 9 years to ascertain MI risk. Participants answered 12 standardized questions about negative life events within 5 years of survey completion (e.g. death/illness/accidental injury of someone close, fired from job, legal trouble, unemployment, marital infidelity, serious financial problems), and 3 questions about lifetime traumatic events (life-threatening illness, accident involving child or spouse, or victim of serious assault). Our cumulative life events score (CLES) was the count of items endorsed on all 15 questions, whereas our traumatic life events score counted positive responses to the 3 traumatic event questions. Women with a CLES score of zero were compared to women with scores >0 who were divided into tertiles; thus defining 4 categories. Among 267 women with a history of MI and 281 age and smoking matched controls, the median age of participants was 56.0 years old (Interquartile range: 51.3 - 60.6). Logistic regression analyses revealed that while increasing CLES was associated with increasing MI risk [Odds Ratio: OR unadjusted model: 1.00, 1.21, 1.52, 1.87; p-trend 0.16], the trend did not reach statistical significance. In models adjusted for CVD risk factors, there was a significant interaction with household income: CLES was associated with MI only in women with household income < $50,000 yearly (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.05-1.49. The odds of MI was significantly higher in women who reported traumatic life events compared to women who did not (ORtraumatic life event score =1.65: 95% CI: 1.02, 2.68); women with traumatic life event(s) had a 65% increase in odds of MI when compared to women without, after adjusting for CVD risk factors and socio-economic status. In question specific analyses, women reporting serious financial problems as a life event had significantly higher odds of MI than women who did not (OR=2.60, 95% CI: 1.20 - 5.64). Conclusion: In this analysis among middle aged and older women, we found supportive evidence that negative cumulative life events were associated with MI risk, especially in low-income women and those suffering major traumatic life events. Further research is warranted particularly in women who also have limited socioeconomic resources.