Role of patient factors, preferences, and distrust in health care and access to liver transplantation and organ donation.

Despite major improvements in access to liver transplantation (LT), disparities remain. Little is known about how distrust in medical care, patient preferences, and the origins shaping those preferences contribute to differences surrounding access. We performed a single-center, cross-sectional survey of adults with end-stage liver disease and compared responses between LT listed and nonlisted patients as well as by race. Questionnaires were administered to 109 patients (72 nonlisted; 37 listed) to assess demographics, health care system distrust (HCSD), religiosity, and factors influencing LT and organ donation (OD). We found that neither HCSD nor religiosity explained differences in access to LT in our population. Listed patients attained higher education levels and were more likely to be insured privately. This was also the case for white versus black patients. All patients reported wanting LT if recommended. However, nonlisted patients were significantly less likely to have discussed LT with their physician or to be referred to a transplant center. They were also much less likely to understand the process of LT. Fewer blacks were referred (44.4% versus 69.7%; P = 0.03) or went to the transplant center if referred (44.4% versus 71.1%; P = 0.02). Fewer black patients felt that minorities had as equal access to LT as whites (29.6% versus 57.3%; P < 0.001). For OD, there were more significant differences in preferences by race than listing status. More whites indicated OD status on their driver's license, and more blacks were likely to become an organ donor if approached by someone of the same cultural or ethnic background (P < 0.01). In conclusion, our analysis demonstrates persistent barriers to LT and OD. With improved patient and provider education and communication, many of these disparities could be successfully overcome. Liver Transplantation 22 895-905 2016 AASLD.

Food Swamps, Obesity & Health Zoning Restrictions on Fast Food Restaurants

Protecting public health is the most legitimate use of zoning, and yet there is minimal progress in applying it to the obesity problem. Zoning could potentially be used to address both unhealthy and healthy food retailers, but lack of evidence regarding the impact of zoning and public opinion on zoning changes are barriers to implementing zoning restrictions on fast food on a larger scale. My dissertation addresses these gaps in our understanding of health zoning as a policy option for altering built, food environments.

Chapter 1 examines the relationship between food swamps and obesity and whether spatial mapping might be useful in identifying priority geographic areas for zoning interventions. I employ an instrumental variables (IV) strategy to correct for the endogeneity problems associated with food environments, namely that individuals may self-select into certain neighborhoods and may consider food availability in their decision process. I utilize highway exits as a source of exogenous variation .Using secondary data from the USDA Food Environment Atlas, ordinary least squares (OLS) and IV regression models were employed to analyze cross-sectional associations between local food environments and the prevalence of obesity. I find even after controlling for food desert effects, food swamps have a positive, statistically significant effect on adult obesity rates.

Chapter 2 applies theories of message framing and prospect theory to the emerging discussion around health zoning policies targeting food environments and to explore public opinion toward a list of potential zoning restrictions on fast-food restaurants (beyond moratoriums on new establishments). In order to explore causality, I employ an online survey experiment manipulating exposure to vignettes with different message frames about health zoning restrictions with two national samples of adult Americans age 18 and over (N1=2,768 and N2=3,236). The second sample oversamples Black Americans (N=1,000) and individuals with high school as their highest level of education. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of six conditions where they were primed with different message frames about the benefits of zoning restrictions on fast food retailers. Participants were then asked to indicate their support for six zoning policies on a Likert scale. Subjects also answered questions about their food store access, eating behaviors, health status and perceptions of food stores by type.

I find that a message frame about Nutrition and increasing Equity in the food system was particularly effective at increasing support for health zoning policies targeting fast food outlets across policy categories (Conditional, Youth-related, Performance and Incentive) and across racial groups. This finding is consistent with an influential environmental justice scholar’s description of “injustice frames” as effective in mobilizing supporters around environmental issues (Taylor 2000). I extend this rationale to food environment obesity prevention efforts and identify Nutrition combined with Equity frames as an arguably universal campaign strategy for bolstering public support of zoning restrictions on fast food retailers.

Bridging my findings from both Chapters 1 and 2, using food swamps as a spatial metaphor may work to identify priority areas for policy intervention, but only if there is an equitable distribution of resources and mobilization efforts to improve consumer food environments. If the structural forces which ration access to land-use planning persist (arguably including the media as gatekeepers to information and producers of message frames) disparities in obesity are likely to widen.

Examining the Crack Epidemic and Subsequent Drug Policy through Identifying Trends in Outpatient Substance Abuse Treatment for Crack Use/Abuse: 1995-2005

Disparities in the crack/cocaine discourse have changed drastically since its inception over 30 years ago. Since the late 1980s, research examining this particular abuse has become more complex as both nationally and globally crack use/abuse has been examined within various contexts. Crack use has often been framed as an African American problem in part resulting from the high volume of African Americans seeking treatment for illnesses associated with their crack-cocaine use, and more African Americans dying from crack-cocaine overdose. This logical fallacy persists despite evidence showing African Americans have lower substance use/abuse compared to Caucasians. Given the impact of the crack epidemic as well as its related drug policies on African American communities and their families, further examination of crack use/abuse is necessary. This study will discuss the crack epidemic historically and examine crack use among clients of a large sample of outpatient substance abuse treatment units over a decade period between 1995 and 2005.