Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-20T05:39:09.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

106 Transforming Health Equity with an Innovative Social Determinants of Health Platform: Application of HOUSES Index to Colorectal Cancer Screening

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 April 2024

Chung-il Wi
Affiliation:
Mayo Clinic
Madison J. Roy
Affiliation:
Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic Rochester
Euijung Ryu
Affiliation:
Computational Biology, Mayo Clinic Rochester
Philip H. Wheeler
Affiliation:
Precision Population Science Lab, Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Mayo Clinic Rochester
Gokhan Anil
Affiliation:
Mankato Hospital, Administration, Mayo Clinic Health System
Kathy A. Madden
Affiliation:
Population Health, Administration, Mayo Clinic Health System
Folakemi T. Odedina
Affiliation:
Hematology/Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida
James R. Cerhan
Affiliation:
Epidemiology, Mayo Clinic Rochester
Young J. Juhn
Affiliation:
Precision Population Science Lab, Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Mayo Clinic Rochester
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To tackle population-level health disparities, quality dashboards can leverage individual socioeconomic status (SES) measures, which are not always readily accessible. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of a population health management strategy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates using the HOUSES index and heatmap analysis. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We applied the 2019 Minnesota Community Measurement data for optimal CRC screening to eligible Mayo Clinic Midwest panel patients. SES was defined by HOUSES index, a validated SES measure based on publicly available property data for the U.S. population. We first assessed the association of suboptimal CRC screening rate with HOUSES index adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, comorbidity, and Zip-code level deprivation by using a mixed effects logistic regression model. We then assessed changes in ranking for performance of individual clinics (i.e., % of patients with optimal CRC screening rate) before and after adjusting for HOUSES index. Geographical hotspots of high proportions of low SES AND high proportions of suboptimal CRC screening were superimposed to identify target population for outreach. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: A total of 58,382 adults from 41 clinics were eligible for CRC screening assessment in 2019 (53% Female). Patients with lower SES defined by HOUSES quartile 1-3 have significantly lower CRC screening compared to those with highest SES (HOUSES quartile 4) (adj. OR [95% CI]: 0.52 [0.50-0.56] for Q1, 0.66 [0.62-0.70] for Q2, and 0.81 [0.76-0.85]) for Q3). Ranking of 26 out of 41 (63%) clinics went down after adjusting for HOUSES index suggesting disproportionately higher proportion of underserved patients with suboptimal CRC screening. We were able to successfully identify hotspots of suboptimal CRC (area with greater than 130% of expected value) and overlay with higher proportion of underserved population (HOUSES Q1), which can be used for data-driven targeted interventions such as mobile health clinics. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: HOUSES index and associated heatmap analysis can contribute to advancing health equity. This approach can aid health care organizations in meeting the newly established standards by The Joint Commission, which have elevated health equity to a national safety priority.

Type
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. The Association for Clinical and Translational Science