Minority Health and Health Equity Archive
Permanent URI for this collectionhttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/21769
Welcome to the Minority Health and Health Equity Archive (MHHEA), an electronic archive for digital resource materials in the fields of minority health and health disparities research and policy. It is offered as a no-charge resource to the public, academic scholars and health science researchers interested in the elimination of racial and ethnic health disparities.
Browse
1137 results
Search Results
Item Qualitative Systematic Review of Barber-Administered Health Education, Promotion, Screening and Outreach Programs in African-American Communities(2014) Luque, J. S.; Ross, Levi; Gwede, Clement K.The barbershop has been portrayed as a culturally appropriate venue for reaching Black men with health information and preventive health screenings to overcome institutional and socio-cultural barriers. The purpose of this review is to synthesize the peer-reviewed literature on barbershop-based health programs to provide lessons learned for researchers and practitioners. A literature search was conducted to identify articles for the review. Inclusion criteria specified that studies had to be based in the United States and reported about research where barbers were either being assessed for the feasibility of their participation or recruited to administer health education/screening outreach or research activities. The literature search produced 901 unique bibliographic records from peer-reviewed publications. After eliminating articles not meeting the inclusion criteria, 35 articles remained for full-text review. The final article sample consisted of 16 articles for complete abstraction to assess characteristics of studies, role and training of barbers, outcomes targeted, effectiveness, and key findings. All barbershop-based studies reviewed targeted Black men in urban settings. Common study designs were cross-sectional studies, feasibility studies, needs assessments, and one-shot case studies. Barber administered interventions addressed primarily prostate cancer and hypertension, and barbers provided health education, screening, and referrals to health care. Nonintervention studies focused mostly on surveying or interviewing barbers for assessing the feasibility of future interventions. Barbershops are a culturally appropriate venue for disseminating health education materials in both print and media formats. Barbershops are also acceptable venues for training barbers to conduct education and screening. In studies where barbers received training, their knowledge of various health conditions increased significantly and knowledge gains were sustained over time. They were also able to increase knowledge and promote positive health behaviors among their customers, but these outcomes were variable and not consistently documented.Item Strategies for Recruiting African American Men into Prostate Cancer Screening Studies(Nursing Research, 2010) Jones, Randy; Steeves, Richard; Williams, IshanBackground Recruitment for research and clinical trials continues to be challenging. Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in men and disproportionately affects African American men; thus, effective recruitment strategies are essential for this population. Objectives To focus on innovative and effective recruitment strategies for research on prostate cancer with minorities. Methods A systematic description is provided of the recruitment efforts for a hermeneutic phenomenological qualitative study of African American men's experiences in decision-making on whether or not to have a prostate cancer screening. Results Seventeen African American men were enrolled from rural Central Virginia. Recruiting strategies were targeted on places where African American men usually are found, but that are rarely used for recruitment: barbershops, community health centers, and churches. Word-of-mouth was used also, and the majority of the participants (n = 11) were reached through this method. Discussion Recruitment efforts have been noted to be particularly challenging among minorities, for numerous reasons. Making minority recruitment a priority in any research or clinical trial is essential in gaining a representative sample. Word-of-mouth is a powerful tool that is often forgotten, but should be looked at in further detail.Item A Cluster-Randomized Trial of Blood-Pressure Reduction in Black Barbershops(The New England Journal of Medicine, 2018) Victor, Ronald; Lynch, Kathleen; Li, Ning; Blyler , CiantelBACKGROUND Uncontrolled hypertension is a major problem among non-Hispanic black men, who are underrepresented in pharmacist intervention trials in traditional health care settings. METHODS We enrolled a cohort of 319 black male patrons with systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg or more from 52 black-owned barbershops (nontraditional health care setting) in a cluster-randomized trial in which barbershops were assigned to a pharmacist-led intervention (in which barbers encouraged meetings in barbershops with specialty-trained pharmacists who prescribed drug therapy under a collaborative practice agreement with the participants’ doctors) or to an active control approach (in which barbers encouraged lifestyle modification and doctor appointments). The primary outcome was reduction in systolic blood pressure at 6 months. RESULTS At baseline, the mean systolic blood pressure was 152.8 mm Hg in the intervention group and 154.6 mm Hg in the control group. At 6 months, the mean systolic blood pressure fell by 27.0 mm Hg (to 125.8 mm Hg) in the intervention group and by 9.3 mm Hg (to 145.4 mm Hg) in the control group; the mean reduction was 21.6 mm Hg greater with the intervention (95% confidence interval, 14.7 to 28.4; P<0.001). A blood-pressure level of less than 130/80 mm Hg was achieved among 63.6% of the participants in the intervention group versus 11.7% of the participants in the control group (P<0.001). In the intervention group, the rate of cohort retention was 95%, and there were few adverse events (three cases of acute kidney injury). CONCLUSIONS Among black male barbershop patrons with uncontrolled hypertension, health promotion by barbers resulted in larger blood-pressure reduction when coupled with medication management in barbershops by specialty-trained pharmacists. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02321618.)Item Outpatient weight management in African-Americans: The Healthy Eating and Lifestyle Program (HELP) study(2005) Kumanyika, Shiriki K; Shults, Justine; Fassbender, Jennifer E; Whitt-Glover, Melicia C; Brake, Vivian; Kallan, Michael J; Iqbal, Nayyar; Bowman, Marjorie AItem Ethnic Comparison of Weight Loss in Trial of Nonpharmacologic Interventions in the Elderly(2001) Kumanyika, Shiriki K.; Espeland, Mark A.; Bahnson, Judy L.; Bottom, Juliene B.; Charleston, Jeanne B.; Folmar, Steve; Wilson, Alan C.; Whelton, Paul K.Item Translating the Diabetes Prevention Program Into an Urban Medically Underserved Community(2008) Seidel, Miriam; Powell, Robert; Zgibor, Janice; Siminerio, Linda; Piatt, GretchenItem Translating the Diabetes Prevention Program Into an Urban Medically Undeserved Community(2008) Seidel, Miriam; Powell, Robert; Zgibor, Janice; Siminerio, Linda; Piatt, GretchenItem Ethnic Comparison of Weight Loss in Trial of Nonpharmacologic Interventions in the Elderly(2001) Kumanyika, Shiriki K.; Espeland, Mark A.; Bahnson, Judy L.; Bottom, Juliene B.; Charleston, Jeanne B.; Folmar, Steve; Wilson, Alan C.; Whelton, Paul K.Item Felon Disenfranchisement in the United States: A Health Equity Perspective(2013) Purtle, JonathanApproximately 13% of African American men are disqualified from voting because of a felony conviction. I used ecosocial theory to identify how institutionalized racism helps perpetuate health disparities and to explore pathways through which felon disenfranchisement laws may contribute to racial health disparities in the United States. From a literature review, I identified 2 potential pathways: (1) inability to alter inequitable public policies that differentially allocate resources for health; and (2) inability to reintegrate into society by voting, which contributes to allostatic load.Item PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT OF 2010: Advancing Health Equity for Racially and Ethnically Diverse Populations(Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, 2010) Andrulis, Dennis P.; Siddiqui, Nadia J.; PURTLE, Jonathan; Duchon, LisaRacial/ethnic disparities in health and health care in the United States are persistent and well documented. Communities of color fare far worse than their white counterparts across a range of health indicators: life expectancy, infant mortality, prevalence of chronic diseases, self-rated health status, insurance coverage, and many others.1 As the nation’s population continues to become increasingly diverse—people of color are projected to comprise 54% of the U.S. population by 2050 and more than half of U.S. children by 20232— these disparities are likely to grow if left unaddressed. Recent health care reform legislation, while not a panacea for eliminating health disparities, off ers an important fi rst step and an unprecedented opportunity to improve health equity in the United States. Reforming the nation’s health care system was President Obama’s top domestic priority when he was sworn into offi ce in January 2009. Th e road to reform was complex and unoffi cially started in summer of 2009 when House and Senate committees began to draft legislation. On November 7, 2009, the House of Representatives passed its health care reform proposal, Th e Aff ordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (H.R. 3962). On December 24, 2009, the Senate passed its own proposal for health care reform, Th e Patient Protection and Aff ordable Care Act (H.R. 3590)*, which was a merged version of the Senate Finance Committee’s America’s Health Future Act (S.1796) and the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions’ Aff ordable Health Choices Act (S. 1697).† Eff orts to reconcile diff erences between the Senate and House bills were stymied by the death of Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), a lifelong proponent of health care reform and critical force in securing a proposal’s passage in the Senate. Faced with limited options and expecting that a compromise bill could not get Senate support, the House passed the Senate’s proposal and Th e Patient Protection and Aff ordable Care Act (ACA) was signed into law by President Obama on March 23, 2010 (Pub. L. No. 111-148).‡ On March 30, 2010, the ACA was amended by Th e Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (H.R. 4872). According to Congressional Budget Offi ce (CBO) estimates, the ACA, as reconciled by H.R. 4872, will reduce the defi cit by $143 billion over the next decade and decrease the number of non-elderly uninsured by 32 million, leaving 23 million uninsured— approximately one-third of whom would be undocumented immigrants.3 Th is report provides a comprehensive review of general and specifi c ACA provisions with the potential to signifi cantly improve health and health care for millions of diverse populations and their communities. Th e narrative that follows identifi es these provisions, discusses why they are important, and considers challenges that may lie ahead in implementing them. We have organized this presentation in three major sections. Th e next section discusses provisions that explicitly address health disparities, such as those concerning data collection by race/ethnicity, workforce diversity, cultural competence, health disparities research, health disparities initiatives in prevention, and health equity in health insurance reform, and discusses their implications for racially and ethnically diverse communities. Section III describes general provisions, including health insurance reforms, access to care, quality improvement, cost containment, public health and social determinants of health, all of which are likely to have major implications for diverse communities. An accompanying appendix identifi es these provisions, provides a timetable and, where identifi ed in the legislation, the federal agencies responsible for implementation, as well as allocations as of June 30, 2010. Section IV discusses issues that will be critical in realizing the full potential of health care reform and highlights questions and directions for the future, particularly in context of important priorities for reducing racial/ethnic health disparities that were left unaddressed.