Literature Collection

IMPORTANCE: Health-related social risks are increasingly recognized as important contributors to health. Compared with individual screening, neighborhood measures are potentially a lower cost, scalable strategy for identifying social risk. OBJECTIVE: To inform health resource planning and social risk screening strategies by comparing self-reported vs neighborhood-level social risk with inpatient, emergency department (ED), and outpatient care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional analysis of self-reported social risks measured during Medicaid enrollment and neighborhood-level social risk in relation to health care use was conducted. Members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California, a large integrated health care delivery system, who completed the Medicaid Integrated Outcomes Questionnaire from January 1, 2018, to February 29, 2020, were included. Analysis took place from January 8 to November 29, 2024. EXPOSURE: Neighborhood-level social risk (living in the least-resourced Neighborhood Deprivation Index quartile) and self-reported social risk (indicating a need or wanting help with finances, food, housing, or transportation domains). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Hospital and ED admissions, primary care, specialty care, mental health, and social work visits in the year prior to questionnaire completion. Multivariable negative binomial regression models were analyzed for each type of health care use, controlling for demographic characteristics and several health conditions (eg, asthma, hypertension, and chronic pain). RESULTS: Among 13 527 respondents (8631 [63.8%] female; 5289 [39.1%] aged 25-44 years; 2846 [21.0%] Asian, 1986 [14.7%] Black or African American, 3040 [22.5%] Hispanic, 4602 [34.0%] White, and 1053 [7.8%] other race or ethnicity), 33.8% in the most-resourced neighborhood reported at least 1 social risk vs 40.1% in the least-resourced quartile (P < .001). Individual- and neighborhood-level measures were each associated with ED visits (marginal effect estimate for both measures: 0.23; 95% CI, 0.17-0.29). Neither measure was associated with hospital admissions. Individual risk was associated with greater use of all outpatient services (ranging from primary care visit marginal effect estimate: 0.22; 95% CI, 0.13-0.31 to mental health visit marginal effect estimate: 1.21; 95% CI, 0.67-1.75). Neighborhood-level risk was not associated with most outpatient visits and was negatively associated with mental health visits. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cross-sectional study, associations were found for hospital and ED use but not outpatient visits, especially mental health visits. These findings suggest that individual social risk screening appears to provide distinct information compared with neighborhood social risk.

In this paper, we present findings from a qualitative study that explored Indigenous people's experiences of mental health and addictions care in the context of an inner-city area in Western Canada. Using an ethnographic design, a total of 39 clients accessing 5 community-based mental health care agencies were interviewed, including 18 in-depth individual interviews and 4 focus groups. Health care providers also were interviewed (n = 24). Data analysis identified four intersecting themes: normalization of social suffering; re-creation of trauma; the challenge of reconciling constrained lives with harm reduction; and mitigating suffering through relational practice. The results highlight the complexities of experiences of accessing systems of care for Indigenous people marginalized by poverty and other forms of social inequity, and the potential harms that arise from inattention to the intersecting social context(s) of peoples' lives. Service delivery that aims to address the mental health concerns of Indigenous people must be designed with awareness of, and responsiveness to, the impact of structural violence and social suffering on peoples' lived realities. A relational policy and policy lens is key to alleviate patterns of social suffering and counter the harms that are unwittingly created when social suffering is normalized.

The social support network is a health protective factor involving physical, mental and psychological aspects, providing a better quality of life, favoring better adaptation to adverse conditions, promoting resilience and mobilizing resources for a more effective coping with negative life events that can lead to illness. We aimed to analyze the association between physical diseases, common mental disorders and the social support network of patients serviced at primary care facilities in the cities of Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo through a cross-sectional study with 1,466 patients in the 18-65 years age group. We used the Social Network Index (SNI) to assess the support network through the categories of isolation and integration. The doctor/nurse completed the questionnaire to evaluate the physical disease diagnosis, while the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was used to detect mental disorders. We found that the pattern of social support was different depending on the presence of physical diseases or mental disorders. Negative associations were found between diabetes and isolation; integration and anxiety; integration and depression. Positive associations were identified between isolation and anxiety and isolation and depression.

In the first of three articles we shared our understanding of integrated care and traced the evolution of interprofessional learning from organic to strategic and systemic, prepared to play its part in the implementation of integrated care. In this third article, joined by Lee-Ann Fenge, we focus on the role of the social worker in integrating care and clarifying their roles in collaboration with other professions. We distinguish between social work as a profession and social care as a field of practice, which includes many professions as well as other occupations. We share the literature on where social work plays a role in integrated care and ask questions about the lack of interprofessional education involving social workers and without whom integrated care cannot succeed.

Social workers play an important role in assessing social determinants of health (SDH) and providing behavioral health services in integrated care settings. Evidence suggests that integrated care interventions improve quality of life and other patient outcomes. However, the ambiguous role of social workers on the interdisciplinary team, the lack of protocol in SDH screening and intervention, and restrictions due to healthcare reimbursement limit social workers' ability to intervene. Future directions include standardizing integrated care models, evaluating integrated care's efficacy to address SDH, incorporating SDH into interprofessional training including role clarification and reimbursing for SDH assessment and intervention.