Faculty Bibliography

Early in the pandemic, New York City's public hospital system partnered with multiple philanthropic foundations to offer an unconditional cash transfer program for low-income New Yorkers affected by COVID-19. The $1000 cash transfers were designed to help people meet their most immediate health and social needs and were incorporated into healthcare delivery and contact tracing workflows as a response to the public health emergency. To better understand program recipients' experiences, researchers conducted 150 telephone surveys with randomly sampled cash transfer recipients and 20 in-depth qualitative interviews with purposefully sampled survey participants. Survey participants were predominantly Latinx (87%) and women (65%). The most common reported uses of the $1000 were food and rent. Most participants (79%) reported that without the $1000 cash transfer they would have had difficulty paying for basic expenses or making ends meet, with specific positive effects reported related to food, housing, and ability to work. The majority of survey participants reported that receiving the cash assistance somewhat or greatly improved their physical health (83%) and mental health (89%). Qualitative interview results generally supported the survey findings.

OBJECTIVES:To examine the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine receipt among healthcare workers and the role of vaccine confidence in decisions to vaccinate, and to better understand concerns related to COVID-19 vaccination. DESIGN:Cross-sectional anonymous survey among front-line, support service and administrative healthcare workers. SETTING:Two large integrated healthcare systems (one private and one public) in New York City during the initial roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine. PARTICIPANTS:1933 healthcare workers, including nurses, physicians, allied health professionals, environmental services staff, researchers and administrative staff. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was COVID-19 vaccine receipt during the initial roll-out of the vaccine among healthcare workers. RESULTS:Among 1933 healthcare workers who had been offered the vaccine, 81% had received the vaccine at the time of the survey. Receipt was lower among black (58%; OR: 0.14, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.2) compared with white (91%) healthcare workers, and higher among non-Hispanic (84%) compared with Hispanic (69%; OR: 2.37, 95% CI 1.8 to 3.1) healthcare workers. Among healthcare workers with concerns about COVID-19 vaccine safety, 65% received the vaccine. Among healthcare workers who agreed with the statement that the vaccine is important to protect family members, 86% were vaccinated. Of those who disagreed, 25% received the vaccine (p<0.001). In a multivariable analysis, concern about being experimented on (OR: 0.44, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.6), concern about COVID-19 vaccine safety (OR: 0.39, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.55), lack of influenza vaccine receipt (OR: 0.28, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.44), disagreeing that COVID-19 vaccination is important to protect others (OR: 0.37, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.52) and black race (OR: 0.38, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.59) were independently associated with COVID-19 vaccine non-receipt. Over 70% of all healthcare workers responded that they had been approached for vaccine advice multiple times by family, community members and patients. CONCLUSIONS:Our data demonstrated high overall receipt among healthcare workers. Even among healthcare workers with concerns about COVID-19 vaccine safety, side effects or being experimented on, over 50% received the vaccine. Attitudes around the importance of COVID-19 vaccination to protect others played a large role in healthcare workers' decisions to vaccinate. We observed striking inequities in COVID-19 vaccine receipt, particularly affecting black and Hispanic workers. Further research is urgently needed to address issues related to vaccine equity and uptake in the context of systemic racism and barriers to care. This is particularly important given the influence healthcare workers have in vaccine decision-making conversations in their communities.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Immigrant adults tend to have better health than native-born adults despite lower incomes, but the health advantage decreases with length of residence. To determine whether immigrant adults have a health advantage over US-born adults in New York City, we compared cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors among both groups. METHODS:Using data from the New York City Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2013-2014, we assessed health insurance coverage, health behaviors, and health conditions, comparing adults ages ≥20 born in the 50 states or the District of Columbia (US-born) with adults born in a US territory or outside the United States (immigrants, following the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) and comparing US-born adults with (1) adults who immigrated recently (≤10 years) and (2) adults who immigrated earlier (>10 years). RESULTS:< .05). Comparable proportions of immigrant adults and US-born adults were overweight or obese (67% vs 63%) and reported CVD (both 7%). Immigrant adults who arrived recently were less likely than immigrant adults who arrived earlier to have diabetes or high cholesterol but did not differ overall from US-born adults. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings may help guide prevention programs and policy efforts to ensure that immigrant adults remain healthy.

Health and housing consortia in New York City offer a model for bridging the divide between the health care and housing sectors. While staff in these sectors often recognize the need to better integrate their services, there are few models for doing so. In this article we describe the formation of a health and housing consortium in the Bronx, New York City, as well as the successful replication of its model in Brooklyn. While each consortium has some features specific to its service area, the primary goal of both is the same: to provide a neutral space for health care and housing organizations to collaborate in what is otherwise often competitive and fragmented territory. In addition, the work of both consortia coalesces around training and resource development, cross-sector communication, and research and advocacy. We provide examples of the Bronx Consortium's activities in each of these core areas, highlight tangible results to date, and offer recommendations for people interested in undertaking similar efforts.

From April 2016 to June 2017, the Health + Housing Project employed four community health workers who engaged residents of two subsidized housing buildings in New York City to address individuals' broadly defined health needs, including social and economic risk factors. Following the intervention, we observed significant improvements in residents' food security, ability to pay rent, and connection to primary care. No immediate change was seen in acute health care use or more narrowly defined health outcomes. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print March 19, 2020: e1-e4. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2019.305544).

National examination surveys provide trend information on diabetes prevalence, diagnoses, and control. Few localities have access to such information. Using a similar design as the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), two NYC Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NYC HANES) were conducted over a decade, recruiting adults ≥ 20 years using household probability samples (n = 1808 in 2004; n = 1246 in 2013-2014) and physical exam survey methods benchmarked against NHANES. Participants had diagnosed diabetes if told by a health provider they had diabetes, and undiagnosed diabetes if they had no diagnosis but a fasting plasma glucose ≥ 126 mg/dl or A1C ≥ 6.5%. We found that between 2004 and 2014, total diabetes prevalence (diagnosed and undiagnosed) in NYC increased from 13.4 to 16.0% (P = 0.089). In 2013-2014, racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes burden had widened; diabetes was highest among Asians (24.6%), and prevalence was significantly lower among non-Hispanic white adults (7.7%) compared to that among other racial/ethnic groups (P < 0.001). Among adults with diabetes, the proportion of cases diagnosed increased from 68.3 to 77.3% (P = 0.234), and diagnosed cases with very poor control (A1C > 9%), decreased from 26.9 to 18.0% (P = 0.269), though both were non-significant. While local racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes prevalence persist, findings suggest modest improvements in diabetes diagnosis and management.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to secondhand smoke is hazardous and can cause cancer, coronary heart disease, and birth defects. New York City and other jurisdictions have established smoke-free air laws in the past 10-15 years. METHODS: NYC HANES (Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) 2013-14 was a population-based survey of NYC residents, aged 20 years and older, in which biospecimens were collected and cotinine levels were measured. Secondhand smoke exposure by demographics and risk factors was compared with exposure measured by NYC HANES 2004 and by national HANES in corresponding years (for national changes). RESULTS: More than a third (37.1%, 95% CI = 33.3-41.2%) of nonsmoking adult New Yorkers were exposed to secondhand smoke, defined as a cotinine level of 0.05-10 ng/ml. This was significantly lower than in 2004 NYC HANES, when 56.7% (95% CI = 53.6-59.7%) of nonsmokers were exposed to secondhand smoke, but was greater than the proportion of adults exposed nationwide, as measured by national HANES (24.4%, 95% CI = 22.0-26.9% in 2011-12). Men, non-Hispanic blacks, adults aged 20-39, those with less education, and those living in high-poverty neighborhoods were more likely to be exposed. CONCLUSIONS: There has been a large decrease in secondhand smoke exposure in NYC, although disparities persist. The decrease may be the result of successful policies to limit exposure to secondhand smoke in public places and of fewer cigarettes smoked per day. Yet New York City residents still experience more secondhand smoke exposure than U.S. residents overall. Possible explanations include multiunit housing, greater population density, and pedestrian exposure.