Explore the vast range of titles available.

Multilevel and community-level interventions that target the social determinants of health and ultimately health disparities are seldom conducted in Native American communities. To contextualize the importance of multilevel and community-level interventions, major contributors to and causes of health disparities in Native communities are highlighted. Among the many documented socioeconomic factors influencing health are poverty, low educational attainment, and lack of insurance. Well-recognized health disparities include obesity, diabetes, and hypertension. Selected challenges of implementing community-level and multilevel interventions in Native communities are summarized such as the shortage of high-quality population health data and validated measurement tools. To address the lack of multilevel and community-level interventions, the National Institutes of Health created the Intervention Research to Improve Native American Health (IRINAH) program which solicits proposals that develop, adapt, and test strategies to address these challenges and create interventions appropriate for Native populations. A discussion of the strategies that four of the IRINAH grantees are implementing underscores the importance of community-based participatory policy work, the development of new partnerships, and reconnection with cultural traditions. Based on the work of the nearly 20 IRINAH grantees, ameliorating the complex social determinants of health disparities among Native people will require (1) support for community-level and multilevel interventions that examine contemporary and historical factors that shape current conditions; (2) sustainability plans; (3) forefronting the most challenging issues; (4) financial resources and time to collaborate with tribal leaders; and (5) a solid evidence base.

Abstract Fatigue is a dominant feature of both acute and convalescent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (sometimes termed “long-COVID”), with up to 46% of patients reporting fatigue that lasts from weeks to months. The investigators of the international Collaborative on Fatigue Following Infection (COFFI) conducted a systematic review of post-COVID fatigue and a narrative review on fatigue after other infections, and made recommendations for clinical and research approaches to assessing fatigue after COVID-19. In the majority of COVID-19 cohort studies, persistent fatigue was reported by a significant minority of patients, ranging from 13% to 33% at 16–20 weeks post-symptom onset. Data from the prospective cohort studies in COFFI and others indicate that fatigue is also a prevalent outcome from many acute systemic infections, notably infectious mononucleosis, with a case rate for clinically significant Post-infective fatigue after exclusion of recognized medical and psychiatric causes, ranging from 10%–35% at 6 months. To better characterize post-COVID fatigue, the COFFI investigators recommend the following: application of validated screening questionnaires for case detection; standardized interviews encompassing fatigue, mood, and other symptoms; and investigative approaches to identify end-organ damage and mental health conditions. Fatigue after COVID-19 is common but generally resolves over months, like other postinfective fatigue states. Post-COVID fatigue results from end-organ injury, mental health conditions, or idiopathic post-COVID fatigue. Post-COVID fatigue should be assessed with validated questionnaires, interviews, and protocolized investigations.

INTRODUCTION Accurate epidemiologic estimates for dementia are lacking for American Indians, despite substantive social and health disparities. METHODS The Strong Heart Study, a population‐based cohort of 11 American Indian tribes, conducted detailed cognitive testing and examinations over two visits approximately 7 years apart. An expert panel reviewed case materials for consensus adjudication of cognitive status (intact; mild cognitive impairment [MCI]; dementia; other impaired/not MCI) and probable etiology (Alzheimer's disease [AD], vascular bain injury [VBI], traumatic brain injury [TBI], other). RESULTS American Indians aged 70–95 years had 54% cognitive impairment including 10% dementia. VBI and AD were primary etiology approximately equal proportions (>40%). Apolipoprotein (APO) Eε4 carriers were more common among those with dementia (p = 0.040). Plasma pTau, glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and neurofilament light chain (NfL) were higher among those with cognitive impairment, but not amyloid beta (Aβ). Cognitive intact had mean 3MSE 92.2 (SD 6.4) and mean Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score of 21.3 (SD 3.2). DISCUSSION This is the first population‐based study to estimate the prevalence of vascular and Alzheimer's dementias in a population‐based study of American Indians. Highlights The Strong Heart Study is a population‐based cohort of American Indian tribes, conducted over 30+ years and three US geographic regions (Northern Plains, Southern Plains, Southwest). Our teams conducted detailed cognitive testing, neurological examination, and brain imaging over two visits approximately 7 years apart. An expert panel reviewed collected materials for consensus‐based adjudication of cognitive status (intact; MCI; dementia; other impaired/not MCI) and probable underlying etiology (AD; VBI; TBI; other). In this cohort of American Indians aged 70–95, 54% were adjudicated with cognitive impairment, including approximately 35% MCI and 10% dementia. These data expand on prior reports from studies using electronic health records, which had suggested prevalence, and incidence of dementia in American Indians to be more comparable to the majority population or non‐Hispanic White individuals, perhaps due to latent case undercounts in clinical settings. Vascular and neurodegenerative injuries were approximately equally responsible for cognitive impairment, suggesting that reduction of cardiovascular disease is needed for primary prevention. Traumatic injury was more prevalent than in other populations, and common among those in the “other/not MCI” cognitive impairment category. Mean scores for common dementia screening instruments—even among those adjudicated as unimpaired—were relatively low compared to other populations (mean unimpaired 3MSE 92.2, SD 6.4; mean unimpaired MoCA 21.3, SD 3.2), suggesting the need for cultural and environmental adaptation of common screening and evaluation instruments.

Purpose American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/ANs) experience high rates of trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). We reviewed existing literature to address three interrelated questions: (1) What is the prevalence of PTSD and PTSD symptoms among AI/ANs? (2) What are the inciting events, risk factors, and co-morbidities in AI/ANs, and do they differ from those in the general U.S. population? (3) Are studies available to inform clinicians about the course and treatment of PTSD in this population? Methods We searched the PubMed and Web of Science databases and a database on AI/AN health, capturing an initial sample of 77 original English-language articles published 1992–2010. After applying exclusion criteria, we retained 37 articles on prevalence of PTSD and related symptoms among AI/AN adults. We abstracted key information and organized it in tabular format. Results AI/ANs experience a substantially greater burden of PTSD and related symptoms than U.S. Whites. Combat experience and interpersonal violence were consistently cited as leading causes of PTSD and related symptoms. PTSD was associated with bodily pain, lung disorders, general health problems, substance abuse, and pathological gambling. In general, inciting events, risk factors, and co-morbidities appear similar to those in the general U.S. population. Conclusions Substantial research indicates a strikingly high incidence of PTSD in AI/AN populations. However, inciting events, risk factors, and co-morbidities in AI/ANs, and how they may differ from those in the general population, are poorly understood. Very few studies are available on the clinical course and treatment of PTSD in this vulnerable population.

Background Rural, Indigenous, and isolated communities faced unique challenges and opportunities during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Identifying lessons from these communities, which are rarely studied, is crucial for improving future crisis responses similar populations. This study aims to inform similar communities by centralizing lessons learned and improving preparedness for future health crises. Methods We examined three geographically and culturally distinct self-governing communities: a Tibetan Buddhist monastic community in southern India, Alaska Native communities in Interior Alaska, and the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe in South Dakota. Through semi-structured interviews conducted from 2021 to 2022 with community members working in healthcare, education, law enforcement, and governance, we analyzed the policies implemented, the decision-making processes behind them, and the psychological experiences of community members during the pandemic. Results The themes identified from the interviews included the creative mobilization of internal resources amid limited external support, such as community members assuming new roles like quarantine enforcement and using shared culture as a resource to change health behaviors. All three communities implemented travel restrictions. Reported stress on a personal and community level was high, particularly due to deaths caused by the pandemic. Conclusions Rural, Indigenous, and isolated communities responded to the COVID-19 pandemic with a range of strategies, including strict shutdowns, travel restrictions, community-driven support, and traditional healing practices. Despite demonstrating resilience and adaptability, they faced challenges such as resource limitations, enforcement difficulties, and community stress, highlighting the need for ongoing support and tailored approaches.

Background Given high rates of cancer mortality in Native communities, we examined how urban American Indian and Alaska Native elders talk about colorectal cancer (CRC) and CRC screening. Methods We conducted seven focus groups with a total of 46 participants in two urban clinics in the Pacific Northwest to assess participant awareness, perceptions, and concerns about CRC and CRC screening. Using speech codes theory, we identified norms that govern when and how to talk about CRC in this population. Results Our analyses revealed that male participants often avoided screening because they perceived it as emasculating, whereas women often avoided screening because of embarrassment and past trauma resulting from sexual abuse. Both men and women used humor to mitigate the threatening nature of discussions about CRC and CRC screening. Conclusions We offer our analytic results to assist others in developing culturally appropriate interventions to promote CRC screening among American Indians and Alaska Natives.

Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MSE) is often used to screen for dementia, but little is known about psychometric validity in American Indians. We recruited 818 American Indians aged 65-95 for 3MSE examinations in 2010-2013; 403 returned for a repeat examination in 2017-2019. Analyses included standard psychometrics inferences for interpretation, generalizability, and extrapolation: factor analysis; internal consistency-reliability; test-retest score stability; multiple indicator multiple cause structural equation models. This cohort was mean age 73, majority female, mean 12 years education, and majority bilingual. The 4-factor and 2nd-order models fit best, with subfactors for orientation and visuo-construction (OVC), language and executive functioning (LEF), psychomotor and working memory (PMWM), verbal and episodic memory (VEM). Factor structure was supported for both research and clinical interpretation, and factor loadings were moderate to high. Scores were generally consistent over mean 7 years. Younger participants performed better in overall scores, but not in individual factors. Males performed better on OVC and LEF, females better on PMWM. Those with more education performed better on LEF and worse on OVC; the converse was true for bilinguals. All differences were significant, but small. These findings support use of 3MSE for individual interpretation in clinic and research among American Indians, with moderate consistency, stability, reliability over time. Observed extrapolations across age, sex, education, and bilingual groups suggest some important contextual differences may exist.

Arsenic and cadmium are known cardiovascular toxicants that pose disproportionate risk to rural communities where environmental exposures are high. American Indians have high vascular risk, which may be attributable in part to these exposures. We examined urine metal concentrations in association with magnetic resonance imaging findings of vascular brain injury or cerebral atrophy in adult American Indians. We measured arsenic and cadmium in American Indian participants from the Strong Heart Study (1989-1991) and evaluated these associations with later (2010-2013) measures of infarct, hemorrhage, white matter hyperintensity (WMH) grade, brain and hippocampal volume, and sulcal and ventricle atrophy using nested multivariate regression analyses. Among participants with available data ( ), the median urine arsenic:creatinine ratio was [interquartile range (IQR): 4.90-11.93] and the cadmium:creatinine ratio was (IQR: 0.61-1.51). Median time between metal measurement and brain imaging was 21 y (range: 18-25 y). Statistical models detected significant associations between arsenic and higher burden of WMH [ (95% CI: 0.000, 0.028) per 10% increase in arsenic]; and between cadmium and presence of lacunar infarcts [ (95% CI: 1.004, 1.045) per 10% increase in cadmium]. This population-based cohort of American Indian elders had measured values of urine arsenic and cadmium several times higher than previous population- and clinic-based studies in the United States and Mexico, and comparable values with European industrial workers. Our findings of associations for arsenic and cadmium exposures with vascular brain injury are consistent with established literature. Environmental toxicant accumulation is modifiable; public health policy may benefit from focusing on reductions in environmental metals. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP6930.

Abstract This study tested the effectiveness of Promoting First Relationships® (PFR), a preventive intervention program aimed at fostering positive caregiver-child relationships in Native families living on a rural reservation. Participants were 162 primary caregivers (96% Native; 93% female) and their Native toddlers (10–31 months old; 50% female). Families were randomized to a PFR group (n = 81) or Resource and Referral (RR) control group (n = 81), after baseline data collection (Time 1) to assess the quality of caregiver-child interaction, caregiver knowledge about children’s social-emotional needs, caregiver depressive symptoms, and child externalizing behavior. After delivery of the PFR intervention or the RR service, follow-up assessments were repeated immediately post-intervention (Time 2) and 3 months later (Time 3). After controlling for baseline assessments, multivariate analyses of covariance revealed that caregivers in the PFR group had significantly higher scores on knowledge about children’s social-emotional needs at Time 2 (p < .01, η2 = .06) and Time 3 (p < .05, η2 = .04) and less severe depressive symptoms at Times 2 and 3 (both p < .05, η2 = .04). At Time 3, the quality of caregiver-child interaction was better in the PFR group (p < .01, η2 = .06), an effect that was moderated by severity of depressive symptoms (p = .05, η2 = .06), with PFR having the greatest impact at low levels of initial symptoms (p = .02). Results support the positive impact of PFR in a Native community and suggest conditions under which the intervention may be most effective.

Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is a disabling long-term condition of unknown cause. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published a guideline in 2021 that highlighted the seriousness of the condition, but also recommended that graded exercise therapy (GET) should not be used and cognitive–behavioural therapy should only be used to manage symptoms and reduce distress, not to aid recovery. This U-turn in recommendations from the previous 2007 guideline is controversial.We suggest that the controversy stems from anomalies in both processing and interpretation of the evidence by the NICE committee. The committee: (1) created a new definition of CFS/ME, which ‘downgraded’ the certainty of trial evidence; (2) omitted data from standard trial end points used to assess efficacy; (3) discounted trial data when assessing treatment harm in favour of lower quality surveys and qualitative studies; (4) minimised the importance of fatigue as an outcome; (5) did not use accepted practices to synthesise trial evidence adequately using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations trial evidence); (6) interpreted GET as mandating fixed increments of change when trials defined it as collaborative, negotiated and symptom dependent; (7) deviated from NICE recommendations of rehabilitation for related conditions, such as chronic primary pain and (8) recommended an energy management approach in the absence of supportive research evidence.We conclude that the dissonance between this and the previous guideline was the result of deviating from usual scientific standards of the NICE process. The consequences of this are that patients may be denied helpful treatments and therefore risk persistent ill health and disability.