Faculty

Background: In the United States, 16 million immigrants are 50 years and older, but little is known about their cardiometabolic health and how to best assess their cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Aging immigrants may therefore not be benefitting from advances in CVD prevention. Objective: In this study, we estimate and compare CVD risk in a nationally representative sample of aging immigrants using 3 different measures. Methods: This was a cross-sectional analysis using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data. Immigrants 50 years and older with no history of CVD were eligible. The Framingham Risk Score (FRS), the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Pooled Cohort Risk Equation, and presence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) were used to estimate risk. Bivariate statistics were analyzed using SPSS version 23.0 Complex Survey module to account for National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey unique weighting scheme. Results: The mean age of the sample was 61.3 years; 40% had hypertension, 17% had diabetes, 10% were smokers, and 95% did not meet the recommended physical activity guidelines. Proportions at an elevated CVD risk were as follows: American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association, 42% female and 76% male; FRS, 17.4% female and 76% male; and MetS, 22% female and 24% male. Conclusions: Immigrants had a lower overall risk using MetS and the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association equation than has been found using these tools in similarly aged samples. The opposite was true for the FRS. The discrepancy between the proportion at risk and those being treated may reflect healthcare access gaps that warrant further investigation. A more holistic approach to risk measurement is needed that accounts for determinants of health that disproportionately affect immigrants, including language and socioeconomic status.

Nurses are often recognized for their volunteer efforts following disasters and international humanitarian crises. However, little attention is paid to the activities of nurses who promote a culture of health in their communities through local volunteer work. In this article, we describe nurses’ perceptions of how they promote health in their communities through formal and informal volunteer work. Using 315 written responses to an open-ended question included in a 2016 survey of the career patterns of nurses in the U.S., we utilized conventional content analysis methods to code and thematically synthesize responses. Two broad categories of nurse involvement in volunteer activities arose from the participants’ responses to the open-ended question, “Please tell us what you have done in the past year to improve the health of your community”: 17% identified job-related activities, and 74% identified non-job-related activities. 9% of respondents indicated they do not participate in volunteer work. Job-related activities included patient education, educating colleagues, and “other” job-related activities. Non-job-related activities included health-related community volunteering, volunteering related to a specific population or disease, family-related volunteering, church activities, health fairs, raising or donating money, and travelling abroad for volunteer work. Nurses are committed to promoting a culture of health in their communities both at work and in their daily lives. Leveraging nurses’ interest in volunteer work could improve the way nurses engage with their communities, expand the role of nurses as public health professionals, and foster the social desirability of healthful living.

During the past two decades, the drive to rein in rising health care costs has shifted some of the power in health care policy making from professional groups, government agencies, and not-for-profit health care organizations to large for-profit corporations (1-4). This has been a worldwide phenomenon, as the provision and financing of health care services is shifted from governments to private health care organizations (5,6). In the United States, the shift in power is manifested in profound ways. Market competition and bottom-line economics have permeated the health care system, creating powerful new incentives for mergers, other corporate restructuring, and the shift to for-profit status by formerly not-for-profit insurance companies and providers. Private sector health care is now increasingly influenced by for-profit organizations (3). Moreover, the health insurance industry has been transformed as traditional indemnity insurance is replaced by versions of managed care. The role of government, or the public sector, in setting parameters for health care financing and standards for the delivery of health care services is increasingly outpaced in cost cutting by organizations that directly face the bottom line. In addition, private foundations, many of which are under the auspices of managed care organizations, now fund a large proportion of health care research and demonstration projects, a task once largely within the realm of the government. Through education and experience, nurses have developed political sophistication and understanding of policy making in the public sector (7). The challenge now is to educate nurses to adapt their political and policy strategies to the new health care milieu. This challenge is particularly crucial for advanced practice nurses, who must survive in a managed care environment.