Deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) populations are understudied in health services research and underserved in healthcare systems. Existing data indicate that adult DHH patients are more likely to use the emergency department (ED) for less emergent conditions than non-DHH patients. However, the lack of research focused on this population’s ED utilization impedes the development of health promotion and quality improvement interventions to improve patient health and quality outcomes. The purpose of this study was to develop a conceptual model describing patient and non-patient (e.g., community, health system, provider) factors influencing ED utilization and ED care processes among DHH people. We conducted a critical review and used Andersen’s Behavioral Model of Health Services Use and the PRECEDE-PROCEED Model to classify factors based on their theoretical and/or empirically described role. The resulting Conceptual Model of Emergency Department Utilization Among Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Patients provides predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors influencing DHH patient ED care seeking and ED care processes. The model highlights the abundance of DHH patient and non-DHH patient enabling factors. This model may be used in quality improvement interventions, health services research, or in organizational planning and policymaking to improve health outcomes for DHH patients.

Background: Deaf and hard‐of‐hearing (DHH) patients are a priority population for emergency medicine health services research. DHH patients are at higher risk than non‐DHH patients of using the emergency department (ED), have longer lengths of stay in the ED and report poor patient–provider communication. This qualitative study aimed to describe ED care‐seeking and patient‐centred care perspectives among DHH patients.Methods: This qualitative study is the second phase of a mixed‐methods study. The goal of this study was to further explain quantitative findings related to ED outcomes among DHH and non‐DHH patients. We conducted semistructured interviews with 4 DHH American Sign Language (ASL)‐users and 6 DHH English speakers from North Central Florida. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using a descriptive qualitative approach.Results: Two themes were developed: (1) DHH patients engage in a complex decision‐making process to determine ED utilization and (2) patient‐centred ED care differs between DHH ASL‐users and DHH English speakers. The first theme describes the social‐behavioural processes through which DHH patients assess their need to use the ED. The second theme focuses on the social environment within the ED: patients feeling stereotyped, involvement in the care process, pain communication, receipt of accommodations and discharge processes.Conclusions: This study underscores the importance of better understanding, and intervening in, DHH patient ED care‐seeking and care delivery to improve patient outcomes. Like other studies, this study also finds that DHH patients are not a monolithic group and language status is an equity‐relevant indicator. We also discuss recommendations for emergency medicine.Patient or Public Contribution: This study convened a community advisory group made up of four DHH people to assist in developing research questions, data collection tools and validation of the analysis and interpretation of data. Community advisory group members who were interested in co‐authorship are listed in the byline, with others in the acknowledgements. In addition, several academic‐based co‐authors are also deaf or hard of hearing.

Objective: Deaf and hard‐of‐hearing (DHH) patients are understudied in emergency medicine health services research. Theory and limited evidence suggest that DHH patients are at higher risk of emergency department (ED) utilization and poorer quality of care. This study assessed ED condition acuity, length of stay (LOS), and acute ED revisits among DHH patients. We hypothesized that DHH patients would experience poorer ED care outcomes.Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of a single health care system using data from a large academic medical center in the southeast United States. Data were received from the medical center's data office, and we sampled patients and encounters from between June 2011 and April 2020. We compared DHH American Sign Language (ASL) users (n = 108), DHH English speakers (n = 358), and non‐DHH English speakers (n = 302). We used multilevel modeling to assess the differences among patient segments in outcomes related to ED use and care.Results: As hypothesized, DHH ASL users had longer ED LOS than non‐DHH English speakers, on average 30 min longer. Differences in ED condition acuity, measured through Emergency Severity Index and triage pain scale, were not statistically significant. DHH English speakers represented a majority (61%) of acute ED revisit encounters.Conclusions: Our study identified that DHH ASL users have longer ED LOS than non‐DHH English speakers. Additional research is needed to further explain the association between DHH status and ED care outcomes (including ED LOS and acute revisit), which may be used to identify intervention targets to improve health equity.

The purpose of our study was to use select constructs from objectification theory to investigate how society’s sexual objectification of female athletes is related to differences in body esteem and self-objectification among collegiate female athletes and non-athletes. Using a cross-sectional survey, we sampled three groups at a Division I National Collegiate Athletic Association university: 322 non-athletes, 58 athletes participating in sports that are considered more objectified, and 27 athletes participating in sports that are considered less objectified. Participants completed survey measures assessing body esteem (sexual attractiveness, weight concern, and physical condition), body surveillance, thin-ideal internalization, and body shame. As predicted, all athletes experienced better body esteem than non-athletes. Surprisingly, both more and less objectified athletes also reported lower rates of body surveillance than non-athletes. Other findings varied by grouping. Overall, study findings suggested that athletes in more objectified sports experience greater thin-ideal internalization, thereby enhancing body shame without increasing body surveillance or body image concerns. Researchers and interventionists should put more focus on sexual- and self-objectification of collegiate female athletes participating in the more objectified sports because their psychological and mental health risks appear to be associated with objectification and not necessarily poor body image.