Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AIM: Examine racial and ethnic inequities in hepatitis C and B virus (HCV and HBV) screening across high-risk populations. SUBJECT AND METHODS: Chronic HCV and HBV infections can lead to cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and death. Despite universal screening recommendations, < 50% of US adults are tested for these viruses. Populations with lower socio-economic status experience higher rates of viral-related cirrhosis and HCC, which may be reduced through screening and treatment. This study analyzed data from 91,875 patients (2019-2021) at the Health Choice Network, a federally qualified health center in Florida. Logistic regression assessed the determinants of HCV and HBV screening, considering factors such as age, sex, language, and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: The study population was predominantly female, Hispanic, uninsured, and living below the federal poverty line. Overall, 61.7% had HCV screening, and 43.7% had HBV screening. Haitian Creole-speaking patients (aOR 1.67; 95% CI, 1.50-1.85), Asian (aOR 1.41; 95% CI, 1.26-1.58), Spanish-speaking Hispanic (aOR 1.38; 95% CI, 1.32-1.44), and English-speaking Hispanic patients (aOR 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.18) had higher odds of HCV screening, compared to NH-Whites. Similarly, Haitian Creole-speaking (aOR 1.91; 95% CI, 1.73-2.12), Asian (aOR 1.50; 95% CI, 1.33-1.68), and Spanish-speaking Hispanic patients (aOR 1.23; 95% CI, 1.17-1.29) had higher odds of HBV screening. CONCLUSION: For an underserved population context, screening rates were above average, with higher prevalence among historically disadvantaged populations. However, rates remained suboptimal, particularly among NH-Whites, who account for the largest number of HCV-related liver cancers, often linked to injection drug use. Increasing screening, especially among NH-Whites and English-speaking Hispanics for HCV, is crucial for early diagnosis, treatment, and reducing severe liver disease risk, including cirrhosis and HCC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cranford et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: