The provision of supportive housing is often recognized as important public policy, but it also plays a role in health care reform. Health care costs for the homeless reflect both their medical complexity and psychosocial risk factors. Supportive housing attempts to moderate both by providing stable places to live along with on-site integrated health services. In this pilot study we used a mixture of survey and administrative claims data to evaluate outcomes for formerly homeless people who were living in a supportive housing facility in Oregon between 2010 and 2014. Results from the claims analysis showed significantly lower overall health care expenditures for the people after they moved into supportive housing. Expenditure changes were driven primarily by reductions in emergency and inpatient care. Survey data suggest that the savings were not at the expense of quality: Respondents reported improved access to care, stronger primary care connections, and better subjective health outcomes. Together, these results indicate a potential association between supportive housing and reduced health care costs that warrants deeper consideration as part of ongoing health care reforms.

No abstract

No abstract

Our study shows that PAACS general surgery training program has a high retention rate of African surgeons in rural settings compared to all programs reported to date, highlighting a multifaceted, rural-focused approach that could be emulated by surgical training programs worldwide.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has further exposed inequities in our society, demonstrated by disproportionate COVID-19 infection rate and mortality in communities of color and low-income communities. One key area of inequity that has yet to be explored is disparities based on preferred language. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 164,368 adults tested for COVID-19 in a large healthcare system across Washington, Oregon, and California from March – July 2020. Using electronic health records, we constructed multi-level models that estimated the odds of testing positive for COVID-19 by preferred language, adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, and social factors. We further investigated interaction between preferred language and both race/ethnicity and state. Analysis was performed from October–December 2020. Results Those whose preferred language was not English had higher odds of having a COVID-19 positive test (OR 3.07, p < 0.001); this association remained significant after adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, and social factors. We found significant interaction between language and race/ethnicity and language and state, but the odds of COVID-19 test positivity remained greater for those whose preferred language was not English compared to those whose preferred language was English within each race/ethnicity and state. Conclusions People whose preferred language is not English are at greater risk of testing positive for COVID-19 regardless of age, race/ethnicity, geography, or social factors – demonstrating a significant inequity. Research demonstrates that our public health and healthcare systems are centered on English speakers, creating structural and systemic barriers to health. Addressing these barriers are long overdue and urgent for COVID-19 prevention.