465. Mental Health Treatment Disparities During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a decline in mental health status in the US, as well as reduced ability to seek mental health treatment. This study analyzed undertreatment of mental health during the pandemic to identify possible disparities and assess the need for interventions. Methods Data were collected from Wave 3 (January 6-February 15, 2021) of the US Census COVID-19 Household Pulse online survey, designed to measure the ongoing impact of the pandemic. Microdata files were downloaded from the Census website and included N=185,201 respondents. Data was collected in both English and Spanish and consisted of a representative sample of US residents. Data were analyzed using χ 2 tests, with z-tests for more granular between-group comparisons. Results When asked if they needed and received therapy due to mental health concerns, 81% of respondents did not need therapy and did not receive it. Some (2%) reported receiving therapy but needing more. However, 9% reported needing therapy but not receiving it. A similar proportion, 9%, reported having received adequate therapy from a mental health professional. Those who needed therapy but did not receive it were more likely than adequately treated respondents to express debilitating worry, anxiety, depression, and lack of interest/pleasure in doing things (all p< .05). These respondents were also more likely (vs. adequately treated respondents) to be younger, lower-income, racial/ethnic minorities, without health insurance, and food-insecure (all p< .05). Conclusion Inadequate mental health treatment is a critical challenge, especially in the wake of COVID-19; Just as many respondents reported adequate mental health treatment as did needing additional mental health treatment. Respondents reporting undertreated mental health issues in this study were more likely to be vulnerable populations, many of whom have already been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. Methods to expand accessible counseling capacity in economically feasible ways to limit these disparities should be further explored. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Association of race and health insurance in treatment disparities of colon cancer: A retrospective analysis utilizing a national population database in the United States

Background Both health insurance status and race independently impact colon cancer (CC) care delivery and outcomes. The relative importance of these factors in explaining racial and insurance disparities is less clear, however. This study aimed to determine the association and interaction of race and insurance with CC treatment disparities. Study setting Retrospective cohort review of a prospective hospital-based database. Methods and findings In this cross-sectional study, patients diagnosed with stage I to III CC in the United States were identified from the National Cancer Database (NCDB; 2006 to 2016). Multivariable regression with generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were performed to evaluate the association of insurance and race/ethnicity with odds of receipt of surgery (stage I to III) and adjuvant chemotherapy (stage III), with an additional 2-way interaction term to evaluate for effect modification. Confounders included sex, age, median income, rurality, comorbidity, and nodes and margin status for the model for chemotherapy. Of 353,998 patients included, 73.8% (n = 261,349) were non-Hispanic White (NHW) and 11.7% (n = 41,511) were non-Hispanic Black (NHB). NHB patients were less likely to undergo resection [odds ratio (OR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61 to 0.72, p < 0.001] or to receive adjuvant chemotherapy [OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.87, p < 0.001] compared to NHW patients. NHB patients with private or Medicare insurance were less likely to undergo resection [OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.91, p = 0.004 (private insurance); OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.66, p < 0.001 (Medicare)] and to receive adjuvant chemotherapy [0.77, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.87, p < 0.001 (private insurance); OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91, p < 0.001 (Medicare)] compared to similarly insured NHW patients. Although Hispanic patients with private and Medicare insurance were also less likely to undergo surgical resection, this was not the case with adjuvant chemotherapy. This study is mainly limited by the retrospective nature and by the variables provided in the dataset; granular details such as continuity or disruption of insurance coverage or specific chemotherapy agents or dosing cannot be assessed within NCDB. Conclusions This study suggests that racial disparities in receipt of treatment for CC persist even among patients with similar health insurance coverage and that different disparities exist for different racial/ethnic groups. Changes in health policy must therefore recognize that provision of insurance alone may not eliminate cancer treatment racial disparities.

Disparities across Diverse Populations in the Health and Treatment of Patients with Osteoarthritis

The study of disparities across diverse populations regarding the health and treatment of patients with osteoarthritis (OA) is recognized as a priority for investigation and action by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS) and the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS). OA is a common condition that increases with age, but with prevalence generally similar across racial and ethnic groups. However, disparities in the treatment of OA among racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups are well-documented and continue to rise and persist. The reasons are complex, likely involving a combination of patient, provider, and healthcare system factors. Treatment disparities among these different populations have an impact on clinical outcomes, healthcare, and productivity, and are projected to increase significantly with the growing diversity of the United States population. The aim of this short review is to summarize studies of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities among patients with OA in the United States, with a focus on prevalence, treatment utilization, and clinical and economic outcomes.

Surgery for chronic pancreatitis: the comparison of two high-volume centers reveals lack of a uniform operative management

Purpose Many aspects of surgical therapy for chronic pancreatitis (CP), including the correct indication and timing, as well as the most appropriate operative techniques, are still a matter of debate in the surgical community and vary widely across different centers. The aim of the present study was to uncover and analyze these differences by comparing the experiences of two specialized surgical units in Italy and Austria. Methods All patients operated for CP between 2000 and 2018 at the two centers involved were included in this retrospective analysis. Data regarding the clinical history and the pre- and perioperative surgical course were analyzed and compared between the two institutions. Results Our analysis showed a progressive decrease in the annual rate of pancreatic surgical procedures performed for CP in Verona (no. = 91) over the last two decades (from 3% to less than 1%); by contrast, this percentage increased from 3 to 9% in Vienna (no. = 77) during the same time frame. Considerable differences were also detected with regard to the timing of surgery from the first diagnosis of CP — 4 years (IQR 5.5) in the Austrian series vs two (IQR 4.0) in the Italian series -, and of indications for surgery, with a 12% higher prevalence of groove pancreatitis among patients in the Verona cohort. Conclusion The comparison of the surgical attitude towards CP between two surgical centers proved that a consistent approach to this pathology still is lacking. The identification of common guidelines and labels of surgical eligibility is advisable in order to avoid interinstitutional treatment disparities.