Doing Research with Vulnerable Populations: The Case of Intravenous Drug Users

Article

Doing Research with Vulnerable Populations: The Case of Intravenous Drug Users

Article

Prevalence of HCV infection and associated factors among illicit drug users in Breves, State of Pará, northern Brazil

Introduction: Illicit drug users (DUs) are vulnerable to hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The shared use of illicit drugs is the main method of HCV transmission. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Breves, in northern Brazil. We surveyed 187 DUs to determine the prevalence of and factors associated with HCV infection. Results: The prevalence of anti-HCV antibodies was 36.9%, and the prevalence of hepatitis C virus-ribonucleic acid (HCV-RNA) was 31%. Hepatitis C virus infection was associated with tattoos, intravenous drug use, shared use of equipment for drug use, drug use for longer than 3 years, and daily drug use. Conclusions: Strategies for preventing and controlling HCV transmission should be implemented among DUs.

Effectiveness of interventions targeting frequent users of emergency departments: a systematic review.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Frequent users of emergency departments (EDs) are a relatively small group of vulnerable patients accounting for a disproportionally high number of ED visits. Our objective is to perform a systematic review of the type and effectiveness of interventions to reduce the number of ED visits by frequent users. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, the Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science for randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized controlled trials, interrupted time series, and controlled and noncontrolled before-and-after studies describing interventions targeting adult frequent users of EDs. Primary outcome of interest was the reduction in ED use. We also explored costs analyses and various clinical (alcohol and drug use, psychiatric symptoms, mortality) and social (homelessness, insurance status, social security support) outcomes. RESULTS: We included 11 studies (3 randomized controlled trials, 2 controlled and 6 noncontrolled before-and-after studies). Heterogeneity in both study designs and definitions of frequent users precluded meta-analyses of the results. The most studied intervention was case management (n=7). Only 1 of 3 randomized controlled trials showed a significant reduction in ED use compared with usual care. Six of the 8 before-and-after studies reported a significant reduction in ED use, and 1 study showed a significant increase. ED cost reductions were demonstrated in 3 studies. Social outcomes such as reduction of homelessness were favorable in 3 of 3 studies, and clinical outcomes trended toward positive results in 2 of 3 studies. CONCLUSION: Interventions targeting frequent users may reduce ED use. Case management, the most frequently described intervention, reduced ED costs and seemed to improve social and clinical outcomes. It appears to be beneficial to patients and justifiable for hospitals to implement case management for frequent users in the framework of a clear and consensual definition of frequent users and standardized outcome measures.

Taking care of the most vulnerable : a descriptive study of patients with 12 attendances or more at a Swiss university hospital emergency department in 2009

Introduction: Patients who repeatedly attend the Emergency Department (ED) often have a distinct and complex vulnerability profile that includes poor somatic, psychological, and social indicators. This profile has an impact on the patients' well-being as well as on hospital costs. The objective of the study was to specify the characteristics of hyper users (HU) and explore the connection with ED care and hospital costs. Methods: The study sample comprised all adult patients with 12 or more attendances at the ED of the Lausanne University Hospital in 2009. The data were collected by retrospectively searching internal databases to identify the patients concerned and then analysing the profiles of these patients. Information gathered included demographic, somatic, psychological, at-risk behaviour, and social indicators, and health system consumption including costs. Results: In 2009, 23 patients (0.1%) attended 12 times or more (425 attendances, 0.8%). The average age was about 43 years, 60.9% were female, and 47.8% single. Of these 95.7% had basic insurance, 87.0% had a general practitioner, and 30.4% were under legal guardianship. The majority attended in the evening or at night (67.1%), and almost one quarter of these attendances resulted in inpatient treatment (24.0%). Most HU had attended the ED in previous years too (95.7% in 2008). The most prevalent diagnoses concerned 'mental disorders' (87.0%). About 30.4% of patients had attempted suicide (all were female patients). Other frequent diagnoses concerned 'trauma' (65.2%), and the 'digestive' and the 'nervous system' (each 56.5%). At-risk behaviour such as severe alcohol consumption (34.8%), or excessive use of medicines (26.1%) was very frequent, and some patients used illicit drugs (21.7%). There was only a weak association between the number of ED attendances and the resulting costs. However, a reduction of one outpatient visit per patient would have decreased ED outpatient costs by 8.5%. Conclusions: HU often have a particularly vulnerable profile. Mental problems are prevalent among them, as are at-risk behaviour and severe somatic conditions. The complexity of the patients' profiles demands specific care that cannot be guaranteed within an everyday ED routine. The use of an interdisciplinary case management team might be a promising approach in diminishing the number of attendances and the associated costs, although the profiles of HU are such that they probably cannot completely give up ED attendance.

An Investigation of User Costs and Benefits of Winter Road Closures, June 2005

This project explores the user costs and benefits of winter road closures. Severe winter weather makes travel unsafe and dramatically increases crash rates. When conditions become unsafe due to winter weather, road closures should allow users to avoid crash costs and eliminate costs associated with rescuing stranded motorists. Therefore, the benefits of road closures are the avoided safety costs. The costs of road closures are the delays that are imposed on motorists and motor carriers who would have made the trip had the road not been closed. This project investigated the costs and benefits of road closures and found that evaluating the benefits and costs is not as simple as it appears. To better understand the costs and benefits of road closures, the project investigates the literature, conducts interviews with shippers and motor carriers, and conducts case studies of road closures to determine what actually occurred on roadways during closures. The project also estimates a statistical model that relates weather severity to crash rates. Although, the statistical model is intended to illustrate the possibility to quantitatively relate measurable and predictable weather conditions to the safety performance of a roadway. In the future, weather conditions such as snow fall intensity, visibility, etc., can be used to make objective measures of the safety performance of a roadway rather than relying on subjective evaluations of field staff. The review of the literature and the interviews clearly illustrate that not all delays (increased travel time) are valued the same. Expected delays (routine delays) are valued at the generalized costs (value of the driver’s time, fuel, insurance, wear and tear on the vehicle, etc.), but unexpected delays are valued much higher because they result in interruption of synchronous activities at the trip’s destination. To reduce the costs of delays resulting from road closures, public agencies should communicate as early as possible the likelihood of a road closure.

Social and medical vulnerability factors of emergency department frequent users in a universal health insurance system.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to identify the social and medical factors associated with emergency department (ED) frequent use and to determine if frequent users were more likely to have a combination of these factors in a universal health insurance system. METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review case-control study comparing randomized samples of frequent users and nonfrequent users at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. The authors defined frequent users as patients with four or more ED visits within the previous 12 months. Adult patients who visited the ED between April 2008 and March 2009 (study period) were included, and patients leaving the ED without medical discharge were excluded. For each patient, the first ED electronic record within the study period was considered for data extraction. Along with basic demographics, variables of interest included social (employment or housing status) and medical (ED primary diagnosis) characteristics. Significant social and medical factors were used to construct a logistic regression model, to determine factors associated with frequent ED use. In addition, comparison of the combination of social and medical factors was examined. RESULTS: A total of 359 of 1,591 frequent and 360 of 34,263 nonfrequent users were selected. Frequent users accounted for less than a 20th of all ED patients (4.4%), but for 12.1% of all visits (5,813 of 48,117), with a maximum of 73 ED visits. No difference in terms of age or sex occurred, but more frequent users had a nationality other than Swiss or European (n = 117 [32.6%] vs. n = 83 [23.1%], p = 0.003). Adjusted multivariate analysis showed that social and specific medical vulnerability factors most increased the risk of frequent ED use: being under guardianship (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 15.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.7 to 147.3), living closer to the ED (adjusted OR = 4.6; 95% CI = 2.8 to 7.6), being uninsured (adjusted OR = 2.5; 95% CI = 1.1 to 5.8), being unemployed or dependent on government welfare (adjusted OR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.3 to 3.4), the number of psychiatric hospitalizations (adjusted OR = 4.6; 95% CI = 1.5 to 14.1), and the use of five or more clinical departments over 12 months (adjusted OR = 4.5; 95% CI = 2.5 to 8.1). Having two of four social factors increased the odds of frequent ED use (adjusted = OR 5.4; 95% CI = 2.9 to 9.9), and similar results were found for medical factors (adjusted OR = 7.9; 95% CI = 4.6 to 13.4). A combination of social and medical factors was markedly associated with ED frequent use, as frequent users were 10 times more likely to have three of them (on a total of eight factors; 95% CI = 5.1 to 19.6). CONCLUSIONS: Frequent users accounted for a moderate proportion of visits at the Lausanne ED. Social and medical vulnerability factors were associated with frequent ED use. In addition, frequent users were more likely to have both social and medical vulnerabilities than were other patients. Case management strategies might address the vulnerability factors of frequent users to prevent inequities in health care and related costs.

Support services for vulnerable patients by a multidisciplinary team in an emergency department

Introduction: Individuals with poor social determinants of health aremore likely to receive improper healthcare. Frequent Users (FUs) ofEmergency Departments (ED) (defined as >4 visits in the previous12 months) represent a subgroup of vulnerable patients presentingwith specific medical and social needs. They usually account for highhealthcare costs by overusing the healthcare system. In 2008-2009,FUs accounted for 4% of our ED patients but 17% of all our ED visits.Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort of patients admitted toour ED with vulnerabilities in ≥3 specific domains (somatic or mentaldiseases, risk behaviors, social determinants of health, and healthcareuse). Patients were either directly identified by a multidisciplinary team(two nurses, one social worker, one physician) or referred to that teamby the ED staff during opening hours from July 1st 2010 to April 30th2011.Results: 127 patients were included (67% males), aged 43 years (SD15); 65% were migrants. They had a median of 6 ED visits (interquartilerange (IQR) 8-1) in the previous 12 months, representing a total of 697visits. The most frequently affected domains during the index visit were:71% somatic, 61% psychiatric, 75% risk behaviors, 97% social and84% healthcare use issues. Each case required a median of 234minutes (IQR 300-90) dedicated to assess their outpatient network(99% of the patients), to set up an ambulatory medical follow-up (43%)or a meeting with social services (40%).Conclusions: Vulnerability affected ED patients in more than onedomain. Vulnerable patients have complex needs that were difficult toaddress in the time-pressured ED setting. Although ED consultationoffers immediate access to medical care, EDs are dedicated more foracute short-term somatic care. Caring for a growing number ofvulnerable patients requires a different type of management. Limitedevidence shows that multidisciplinary case-management interventionshave demonstrated positive outcomes in terms of reducing ED useand costs, and improvement of patient's medical and social outcomes.A randomized trial of case-management is underway to confirm theresults of observational studies.

2011 Road Use Tax Fund (RUTF) Study A report to the Iowa Legislature, per 2011 Iowa Code Section 307.31

The transportation system is in demand 24/7 and 365 days a year irrespective of neither the weather nor the conditions. Iowa’s transportation system is an integral and essential part of society serving commerce and daily functions of all Iowans across the state. A high quality transportation system serves as the artery for economic activity and, the condition of the infrastructure is a key element for our future growth opportunities. A key component of Iowa’s transportation system is the public roadway system owned and maintained by the state, cities and counties. In order to regularly re-evaluate the conditions of Iowa’s public roadway infrastructure and assess the ability of existing revenues to meet the needs of the system, the Iowa Department of Transportation’s 2006 Road Use Tax Fund (RUTF) report to the legislature included a recommendation that a study be conducted every five years. That recommendation was included in legislation adopted in 2007 and signed into law. The law specifically requires the following (2011 Iowa Code Section 307.31): •“The department shall periodically review the current revenue levels of the road use tax fund and the sufficiency of those revenues for the projected construction and maintenance needs of city, county, and state governments in the future. The department shall submit a written report to the general assembly regarding its findings by December 31 every five years, beginning in 2011. The report may include recommendations concerning funding levels needed to support the future mobility and accessibility for users of Iowa's public road system.” •“The department shall evaluate alternative funding sources for road maintenance and construction and report to the general assembly at least every five years on the advantages and disadvantages and the viability of alternative funding mechanisms.” Consistent with this requirement, the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) has prepared this study. Recognizing the importance of actively engaging with the public and transportation stakeholders in any discussion of public roadway conditions and needs, Governor Terry E. Branstad announced on March 8, 2011, the creation of, and appointments to, the Governor’s Transportation 2020 Citizen Advisory Commission (CAC). The CAC was tasked with assisting the Iowa DOT as they assess the condition of Iowa’s roadway system and evaluate current and future funding available to best address system needs. In particular the CAC was directed to gather input from the public and stakeholders regarding the condition of Iowa’s public roadway system, the impact of that system, whether additional funding is needed to maintain/improve the system, and, if so, what funding mechanisms ought to be considered. With this input, the CAC prepared a report and recommendations that were presented to Governor Branstad and the Iowa DOT in November 2011 for use in the development of this study. The CAC’s report is available at www.iowadot.gov/transportation2020/pdfs/CAC%20REPORT%20FINAL%20110211.pdf. The CAC’s report was developed utilizing analysis and information from the Iowa DOT. Therefore, the report forms the basis for this study and the two documents are very similar. Iowa is fortunate to have an extensive public roadway system that provides access to all areas of the state and facilitates the efficient movement of goods and people. However, it is also a tremendous challenge for the state, cities and counties to maintain and improve this system given flattening revenue, lost buying power, changing demands on the system, severe weather, and an aging system. This challenge didn’t appear overnight and for the last decade many studies have been completed to look into the situation and the legislature has taken significant action to begin addressing the situation. In addition, the Iowa DOT and Iowa’s cities and counties have worked jointly and independently to increase efficiency and streamline operations. All of these actions have been successful and resulted in significant changes; however, it is apparent much more needs to be done. A well-maintained, high-quality transportation system reduces transportation costs and provides consistent and reliable service. These are all factors that are critical in the evaluation companies undertake when deciding where to expand or locate new developments. The CAC and Iowa DOT heard from many Iowans that additional investment in Iowa’s roadway system is vital to support existing jobs and continued job creation in the state of Iowa. Beginning June 2011, the CAC met regularly to review material and discuss potential recommendations to address Iowa’s roadway funding challenges. This effort included extensive public outreach with meetings held in seven locations across Iowa and through a Transportation 2020 website hosted by the Iowa DOT (www.iowadot.gov/transportation2020). Over 500 people attended the public meetings held through the months of August and September, with 198 providing verbal or written comment at the meetings or through the website. Comments were received from a wide array of individuals. The public comments demonstrated overwhelming support for increased funding for Iowa’s roads. Through the public input process, several guiding principles were established to guide the development of recommendations. Those guiding principles are: • Additional revenues are restricted for road and bridge improvements only, like 95 percent of the current state road revenue is currently. This includes the fuel tax and registration fees. • State and local governments continue to streamline and become more efficient, both individually and by looking for ways to do things collectively. • User fee concept is preserved, where those who use the roads pay for them, including non¬residents. • Revenue-generating methods equitable across users. • Increase revenue generating mechanisms that are viable now but begin to implement and set the stage for longer-term solutions that bring equity and stability to road funding. • Continue Iowa’s long standing tradition of state roadway financing coming from pay-as-you-go financing. Iowa must not fall into the situation that other states are currently facing where the majority of their new program dollars are utilized to pay the debt service of past bonding. Based on the analysis of Iowa’s public roadway needs and revenue and the extensive work of the Governor’s Transportation 2020 Citizen Advisory Commission, the Iowa DOT has identified specific recommendations. The recommendations follow very closely the recommendations of the CAC (CAC recommendations from their report are repeated in Appendix B). Following is a summary of the recommendations which are fully documented beginning on page 21. 1. Through a combination of efficiency savings and increased revenue, a minimum of $215 million of revenue per year should be generated to meet Iowa’s critical roadway needs. 2. The Code of Iowa should be changed to require the study of the sufficiency of the state’s road funds to meet the road system’s needs every two years instead of every five years to coincide with the biennial legislative budget appropriation schedule. 3.Modify the current registration fee for electric vehicles to be based on weight and value using the same formula that applies to most passenger vehicles. 4.Consistent with existing Code of Iowa requirements, new funding should go to the TIME-21 Fund up to the cap ($225 million) and remaining new funding should be distributed consistent with the Road Use Tax Fund distribution formula. 5.The CAC recommended the Iowa DOT at least annually convene meetings with cities and counties to review the operation, maintenance and improvement of Iowa’s public roadway system to identify ways to jointly increase efficiency. In direct response to this recommendation, Governor Branstad directed the Iowa DOT to begin this effort immediately with a target of identifying $50 million of efficiency savings that can be captured from the over $1 billion of state revenue already provided to the Iowa DOT and Iowa’s cities and counties to administer, maintain and improve Iowa’s public roadway system. This would build upon past joint and individual actions that have reduced administrative costs and resulted in increased funding for improvement of Iowa’s public roadway system. Efficiency actions should be quantified, measured and reported to the public on a regular basis. 6.By June 30, 2012, Iowa DOT should complete a study of vehicles and equipment that use Iowa’s public roadway system but pay no user fees or substantially lower user fees than other vehicles and equipment.

Characteristics of highly frequent users of a Swiss academic emergency department: a retrospective consecutive case series.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe the demographic, social and medical characteristics, and healthcare use of highly frequent users of a university hospital emergency department (ED) in Switzerland. METHODS: A retrospective consecutive case series was performed. We included all highly frequent users, defined as patients attending the ED 12 times or more within a calendar year (1 January 2009 to 31 December 2009). We collected their characteristics and calculated a score of accumulation of risk factors of vulnerability. RESULTS: Highly frequent users comprised 0.1% of ED patients, and they accounted for 0.8% of all ED attendances (23 patients, 425 attendances). Of all highly frequent users, 87% had a primary care practitioner, 82.6% were unemployed, 73.9% were socially isolated, and 60.9% had a mental health or substance use primary diagnosis. One-third had attempted suicide during study period, all of them being women. They were often admitted (24.0% of attendances), and only 8.7% were uninsured. On average, they cumulated 3.3 different risk factors of vulnerability (SD 1.4). CONCLUSION: Highly frequent users of a Swiss academic ED are a highly vulnerable population. They are in poor health and accumulate several risk factors of being even in poorer health. The small number of patients and their high level of insurance coverage make it particularly feasible to design a specific intervention to approach their needs, in close collaboration with their primary care practitioner. Elaboration of the intervention should focus on social reinsertion and risk-reduction strategies with regard to substance use, hospital admissions and suicide.

Frequent users of the emergency department in a universal health coverage system : a randomized controlled trial of a case-management intervention

BACKGROUND: Frequent emergency department users represent a small number of patients but account for a large number of emergency department visits. They should be a focus because they are often vulnerable patients with many risk factors affecting their quality of life (QoL). Case management interventions have resulted in a significant decrease in emergency department visits, but association with QoL has not been assessed. One aim of our study was to examine to what extent an interdisciplinary case management intervention, compared to standard emergency care, improved frequent emergency department users' QoL. METHODS: Data are part of a randomized, controlled trial designed to improve frequent emergency department users' QoL and use of health-care resources at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. In total, 250 frequent emergency department users (≥5 attendances during the previous 12 months; ≥ 18 years of age) were interviewed between May 2012 and July 2013. Following an assessment focused on social characteristics; social, mental, and somatic determinants of health; risk behaviors; health care use; and QoL, participants were randomly assigned to the control or the intervention group (n=125 in each group). The final sample included 194 participants (20 deaths, 36 dropouts, n=96 in the intervention group, n=99 in the control group). Participants in the intervention group received a case management intervention by an interdisciplinary, mobile team in addition to standard emergency care. The case management intervention involved four nurses and a physician who provided counseling and assistance concerning social determinants of health, substance-use disorders, and access to the health-care system. The participants' QoL was evaluated by a study nurse using the WHOQOL-BREF five times during the study (at baseline, and at 2, 5.5, 9, and 12 months). Four of the six WHOQOL dimensions of QoL were retained here: physical health, psychological health, social relationship, and environment, with scores ranging from 0 (low QoL) to 100 (high QoL). A linear, mixed-effects model with participants as a random effect was run to analyze the change in QoL over time. The effects of time, participants' group, and the interaction between time and group were tested. These effects were controlled for sociodemographic characteristics and health-related variables (i.e., age, gender, education, citizenship, marital status, type of financial resources, proficiency in French, somatic and mental health problems, and behaviors at risk).

Impact of case management on frequent users quality of life : a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Frequent emergency department users represent a small number of patients but account for a large number of emergency department visits. They should be a focus because they are often vulnerable patients with many risk factors affecting their quality of life (QoL). Case management interventions have resulted in a significant decrease in emergency department visits, but association with QoL has not been assessed. One aim of our study was to examine to what extent an interdisciplinary case management intervention, compared to standard emergency care, improved frequent emergency department users' QoL. METHODS: Data are part of a randomized, controlled trial designed to improve frequent emergency department users' QoL and use of health-care resources at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. In total, 250 frequent emergency department users (≥5 attendances during the previous 12 months; ≥ 18 years of age) were interviewed between May 2012 and July 2013. Following an assessment focused on social characteristics; social, mental, and somatic determinants of health; risk behaviors; health care use; and QoL, participants were randomly assigned to the control or the intervention group (n=125 in each group). The final sample included 194 participants (20 deaths, 36 dropouts, n=96 in the intervention group, n=99 in the control group). Participants in the intervention group received a case management intervention by an interdisciplinary, mobile team in addition to standard emergency care. The case management intervention involved four nurses and a physician who provided counseling and assistance concerning social determinants of health, substance-use disorders, and access to the health-care system.

Impact of case management on frequent users' quality of life : a randomized, controlled trial (FM 286)

Introduction: Frequent emergency department (ED) users are often vulnerable patients with many risk factors affecting their quality of life (QoL). The aim of this study was to examine to what extent a case management intervention improved frequent ED users' QoL. Methods: Data were part of a randomized, controlled trial designed to improve frequent ED users' QoL at the Lausanne University Hospital. A total of 194 frequent ED users (≥ 5 attendances during the previous 12 months; ≥ 18 years of age) were randomly assigned to the control or the intervention group. Participants in the intervention group received a case management intervention (i.e. counseling and assistance concerning social determinants of health, substance-use disorders, and access to the health-care system). QoL was evaluated using the WHOQOL-BREF at baseline and twelve months later. Four dimensions of QoL were retained: physical health, psychological health, social relationship, and environment, with scores ranging from 0 (low QoL) to 100 (high QoL).

Characterizing the vulnerability of frequent emergency department users by applying a conceptual framework: a controlled, cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Frequent emergency department (ED) users meet several of the criteria of vulnerability, but this needs to be further examined taking into consideration all vulnerability's different dimensions. This study aimed to characterize frequent ED users and to define risk factors of frequent ED use within a universal health care coverage system, applying a conceptual framework of vulnerability. METHODS: A controlled, cross-sectional study comparing frequent ED users to a control group of non-frequent users was conducted at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. Frequent users were defined as patients with five or more visits to the ED in the previous 12 months. The two groups were compared using validated scales for each one of the five dimensions of an innovative conceptual framework: socio-demographic characteristics; somatic, mental, and risk-behavior indicators; and use of health care services. Independent t-tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, Pearson's Chi-squared test and Fisher's exact test were used for the comparison. To examine the -related to vulnerability- risk factors for being a frequent ED user, univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: We compared 226 frequent users and 173 controls. Frequent users had more vulnerabilities in all five dimensions of the conceptual framework. They were younger, and more often immigrants from low/middle-income countries or unemployed, had more somatic and psychiatric comorbidities, were more often tobacco users, and had more primary care physician (PCP) visits. The most significant frequent ED use risk factors were a history of more than three hospital admissions in the previous 12 months (adj OR:23.2, 95%CI = 9.1-59.2), the absence of a PCP (adj OR:8.4, 95%CI = 2.1-32.7), living less than 5 km from an ED (adj OR:4.4, 95%CI = 2.1-9.0), and household income lower than USD 2,800/month (adj OR:4.3, 95%CI = 2.0-9.2). CONCLUSIONS: Frequent ED users within a universal health coverage system form a highly vulnerable population, when taking into account all five dimensions of a conceptual framework of vulnerability. The predictive factors identified could be useful in the early detection of future frequent users, in order to address their specific needs and decrease vulnerability, a key priority for health care policy makers. Application of the conceptual framework in future research is warranted.