News

CHRT research cited in Michigan Radio story about the effects of long COVID on women

Kid Brushing Woman's Hair

Kid brushing mom's hairMichigan Radio cites CHRT’s study on the impact of long COVID on Michiganders in “Women may be experiencing more long COVID than men. We don’t know why.” The article by Kate Wells focuses on why women are more vulnerable to long COVID, and other diseases that disproportionately affect women, and how Michigan-based health systems are supporting individuals with long COVID. 

“We could possibly approach a million, and even higher than a million, long COVID cases in Michigan,” says Jonathan Tsao, lead author of CHRT’s brief in the story, going on to explain that “long haulers are more likely to be in a worse financial situation than a year ago compared to those who recovered from COVID and those who never got COVID.”

“[With] all these long term chronic conditions, it is very debilitating for individuals to function at their full working capacity,” says Tsao. “Those who’ve experienced these symptoms, they were more likely to either work reduced hours, or decide to voluntarily quit, or even get laid off from their jobs due to the demands of their jobs as well.”

Tsao is hoping employers are paying attention, and make accommodations just “like any other disability that might happen in the workplace.” But women will likely be most impacted — not just because they experience more long COVID, but because they already were more likely to work in sectors that saw COVID-related job cuts, or have to take on caregiving responsibilities during the pandemic.“What we want them to take away from this … is basically that they’re not alone,” Tsao said. “There’s a lot of people who are going through what they’re going through.”

CHRT’s STUDY MAIN FINDINGS ARE:

  • One in three Michiganders with COVID-19 are “long haulers” or someone experiencing long COVID.
  • 15% of men and 55% of women identified as long haulers.
  • Michiganders with diabetes were two times more likely to report long COVID.

READ MICHIGAN RADIO ARTICLE

READ CHRT’S BRIEF

Karin Teske and Marissa Rurka discuss new survey findings about COVID vaccine hesitancy and avoidance

covid vaccine interview

covid vaccine interviewMichigan Radio’s Kate Wells quotes Karin Teske and Marissa Rurka senior analysts at the Center for Health and Research Transformation (CHRT), in “Here are the biggest reasons Michiganders say they don’t want the COVID vaccine.”

The article describes CHRT’s recent analysis of vaccine hesitancy and avoidance, using data from a supplemental Cover Michigan survey that examined trends in vaccination rates and the reasons why Michiganders may be choosing to delay or avoid vaccination.

Teske notes that uninsured people were three times less likely to have received at least one dose of vaccine compared to those who were insured, explaining that those who “don’t have insurance [and] don’t have a medical home, may not be interacting with the health system as often and receiving those trusted messages about the safety and efficacy of the COVID vaccine.”

Teske also touches on the finding that 83 percent of those who didn’t intend to get vaccinated reported that they believe the vaccine “is too new and I want to wait to see how it works for other people,” noting this information “is pretty encouraging: the fact that we would hope that, over time, that concern might be alleviated as people see that the vaccine is safe and effective.”

The survey also found that hesitancy and avoidance reasons differed by race, and, as Rurka explains, “understanding what some of the most common concerns are [for different communities] is a helpful guide moving forward, to try and tailor messages to two different groups.”

For example, says Rurka, “we saw that respondents who were Black and Latino/Hispanic, were more concerned about the vaccine [itself],” compared to white respondents who were more likely to think they weren’t at risk for COVID-19 transmission.

READ THE ARTICLE

CHRT on Michigan Radio: More changes needed for Michigan’s COVID-19 response in nursing homes

Radio microphoneIn a New report suggests more changes needed for Michigan’s COVID-19 response in nursing homes, Michigan Radio journalist Will Callan talks with CHRT Founding Executive Director Marianne Udow-Phillips about a CHRT report published in September, 2020 that examines “how Michigan’s health department could better manage COVID-19 in nursing homes.”

The report, Keeping nursing home residents safe and advancing health in light of COVID-19, compares Michigan’s COVID-19 response to similar efforts in other states, and makes a number of recommendations, including providing additional support for nursing home staff with more training resources and extra pay.

Callan’s discussion with Udow-Phillips also focuses on the report’s finding that nursing homes that had strong relationships with local hospitals did a better job of controlling infections. “But not all nursing homes have that,” said Udow-Phillips. “So we are recommending strengthening and formalizing those relationships.”

READ THE ARTICLE

About half of Michiganders trust Whitmer, Faucic; 27 percent trust Trump reports Michigan Radio

Vector art of a politician

Vector art of a politicianKate Wells, reporting for Michigan Radio, interviews Marianne Udow-Phillips for a segment on where Michiganders get COVID-19 information and which sources they trust most and least.

“I think the experience we’re seeing in the field, where people aren’t always wearing masks or where you see gatherings–is reflected in this data,” says Udow-Phillips, founding executive director of the Center for Health and Research Transformation. “I do believe a lot of it has to do with the conflicting information people are getting.” 

Healthcare providers have been deemed the most trustworthy sources of COVID-19 information, says Wells, reporting on the survey results. Udow-Phillips says that’s an opportunity for public health officials to use providers as messengers. 

“They could mobilize our health care providers to be giving more direct messages to their patients,” says Udow-Phillips. “I think that there’s a good reason why health care providers are more trusted. It’s because they have a personal relationship with their patients. And yet they’re not doing the outreach in terms of helping patients follow public health guidance. And so I think this survey really speaks to engaging our frontline health care providers, primary care physicians in particular, to be giving the public health messages.” 

LISTEN TO THE SEGMENT

Subscribe to your doctor? A new model for medical care is catching doctors’ attention

Subscription services for doctors

In today’s world, where healthcare costs are soaring and patients struggle to access affordable and quality care, a new model of medical care is emerging as a promising alternative to the traditional fee-for-service model. This model, called “direct primary care,” is gaining popularity among patients and doctors alike. The direct primary care model allows patients to subscribe to a doctor for a monthly or yearly fee and receive unlimited access to primary care services, without worrying about insurance reimbursements for each appointment.  In this article, Udow-Phillips explore the challenges of implementing this model.  

Marianne Udow-Phillips on doctors noticing a new model of medical care“How do we better support primary care so we have viable numbers of primary care physicians for the future?”

 

Marianne Udow-Phillips

 

“Before insurance companies, and co-pays, and filing claims, the relationship between doctors and patients was simple,” notes Michigan Radio. “Those who needed medical care would visit their doctor’s office or request a house call. Once that care was provided, the doctor was paid directly. Some physicians are bringing that model into the 21st century by offering direct primary care to their patients on a subscription basis.”

On Michigan Radio’s Stateside with Cynthia Canty, “Marianne Udow-Phillips, director of the Center for Health and Research Transformation at the University of Michigan, notes that this model isn’t affordable for everyone, particularly because direct primary care doesn’t replace insurance….”

“The patient will usually still have to buy insurance because this only covers a limited set of primary care services,” Udow-Phillips said. “So, if you need surgery or you need most medications, you would still need to either pay for that out of pocket or pay for insurance.”

LISTEN TO THE FULL SEGMENT ON MICHIGAN RADIO