Rural Appalachia Battling the Intersection of Two Crises: COVID-19 and Substance Use Disorders

During the COVID-19 pandemic, rural Appalachia is at great risk of unforeseen side effects including increased mortality from substance use disorders (SUDs). People living with SUDs are at increased risk for both exposure to and poor outcomes from COVID infection. The economic impacts of COVID-19 must also be considered. As rural Appalachia combats the substance use crisis amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, the geographic economic, health and social inequities within our region must be considered. As a national recovery is sought, we should reimagine federal policies that center the economic and public health of rural Appalachia addressing the two crises

Clinical Service Delivery along the Urban/Rural Continuum

Background: Engagement in the core public health functions and ten essential services remains the standard for measuring local health department (LHD) performance; their role as providers of clinical services remains uncertain, particularly in rural and underserved communities. Purpose: To examine the role of LHDs as clinical service providers and how this role varies among rural and nonrural communities. Methods: The 2013 National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) Profile was used to examine the geographic distribution of clinical service provision among LHDs. LHDs were coded as urban, large rural, or small rural based on Rural/Urban Commuting Area codes. Bivariate analysis for clinical services was conducted by rural/urban status. For each service, the proportions of LHDs that directly performed the service, contracted with other organizations to provide the service, or reported provision of the service by independent organizations in the community was compared. Results: Analyses show significant differences in patterns of clinical services offered, contracted, or provided by others, based on rurality. LHDs serving rural communities, especially large rural LHDs, tend to provide more direct services than urban LHDs. Among rural LHDs, larger rural LHDs provided a broader array of services and reported more community capacity for delivery than small rural LHDs- particularly maternal and child health services. Implications: There are capacity differences between large and small rural LHDs. Limited capacity within small rural LHDs may result in providing less services, regardless of the availability of other providers within their communities. These findings provide valuable information on clinical service provision among LHDs, particularly in rural and underserved communities

Local Health Department Clinical Service Delivery along the Urban/Rural Continuum

Background: Engagement in the core public health functions and ten essential services remains the standard for measuring local health department (LHD) performance; their role as providers of clinical services remains uncertain, particularly in rural and underserved communities. Purpose: To examine the role of LHDs as clinical service providers and how this role varies among rural and nonrural communities. Methods: The 2013 National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) Profile was used to examine the geographic distribution of clinical service provision among LHDs. LHDs were coded as urban, large rural, or small rural based on Rural/Urban Commuting Area codes. Bivariate analysis for clinical services was conducted by rural/urban status. For each service, the proportions of LHDs that directly performed the service, contracted with other organizations to provide the service, or reported provision of the service by independent organizations in the community was compared. Results: Analyses show significant differences in patterns of clinical services offered, contracted, or provided by others, based on rurality. LHDs serving rural communities, especially large rural LHDs, tend to provide more direct services than urban LHDs. Among rural LHDs, larger rural LHDs provided a broader array of services and reported more community capacity for delivery than small rural LHDs- particularly maternal and child health services. Implications: There are capacity differences between large and small rural LHDs. Limited capacity within small rural LHDs may result in providing less services, regardless of the availability of other providers within their communities. These findings provide valuable information on clinical service provision among LHDs, particularly in rural and underserved communities

The double disparity facing rural local health departments: A short report

Rural residents in the U.S. face significant health challenges, including higher rates of risky health behaviors and worse health outcomes than many other groups. Rural communities are also typically served by local health departments (LHDs) that have fewer human and financial resources than their suburban and urban peers. As a result of history and need, rural LHDs are more likely than urban LHDs to provide direct health services, which may result in limited resources for population-based activities. This review examines the double disparity facing rural LHDs and their constituents: pervasively poorer health behaviors and outcomes and a historical lack of investment by local, state, and federal public health entities

From Opportunity to Necessity: Development of an Asynchronous Online Interprofessional Learning Experience

Incorporating interprofessional collaboration competencies into both undergraduate pre-licensure and graduate health science students poses challenges for academic health science centers. Certain student groups may have less opportunity to participate in interprofessional learning experiences due to demands of individual programs of study and conflicts in scheduling time with other disciplines. A group of interprofessional higher education faculty members created an innovative online asynchronous interprofessional experience with the primary goals of meeting accreditation standards for specific programs and providing interprofessional education (IPE) to students who were unable to participate in traditional face-to-face IPE experiences already established at the institution. This guide will highlight the process of design and development of the learning opportunity, from conception to implementation. The pilot of the asynchronous online IPE experience served as a model for the transition of the original in-person model to virtual IPE during the COVID-19 pandemic

Patterns and Predictors of Local Health Department Accreditation in Missouri

Background: The Healthy People 2020 goal for the public health system is “to ensure that Federal, State, Tribal, and local health agencies have the necessary infrastructure to effectively provide essential public health services.” To address this goal, Missouri established the first statewide, voluntary accreditation program of local health departments (LHDs) and began accrediting the LHDs in 2003. The purpose of this study was to identify organizational, structural, and workforce factors related to accreditation status of LHDs in Missouri. Methods: Using data from the National Association of County & City Health Officials (2010) and the Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services (2012), binary logistic regression analysis was performed to predict accreditation status of LHDs. Likelihood ratio tests were used to examine whether the addition of each predictor added significantly to the model compared with a model including total revenues alone. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs), 95% confidence intervals, the significance level of the likelihood ratio test, and the overall Nagelkerke pseudo-R2 for each model are reported. Results: Having a community health improvement plan (aOR = 6.2), a strategic plan (aOR = 7.9), evaluating programs (aOR = 3.6), being in a region with a high proportion of accredited LHDs (aOR = 5.5), and participating in multijurisdictional collaborations (aOR = 6.4) all increased the likelihood of accreditation. Barriers of time (aOR = 0.1) and cost (aOR = 0.3) were negatively associated with accreditation. Conclusions: Accredited LHDs were more likely to have completed the prerequisites for accreditation and collaborate with other LHDs. These activities help LHDs meet the accreditation standards. In addition, with shrinking budgets, LHDs will need additional financial and technical support to achieve accreditation. Assisting LHDs to find ways to increase the staff is important. Through collaborations with other LHDs, regional or multicounty positions can be created. Also collaborations with universities, specifically colleges or schools of public health, can provide opportunities for internships at LHDs giving practical experience while providing important assistance to LHDs

Accessibility of Federally Funded Family Planning Services in South Carolina and Alabama

This study operationalized the five dimensions of health care access in the context of contraceptive service provision and used this framework to examine access to contraceptive care at health department (HD) (Title X funded) and federally qualified health center (FQHC) (primarily non-Title X funded) clinics in South Carolina and Alabama. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2017/18 that assessed clinic-level characteristics, policies, and practices related to contraceptive provision. Provision of different contraceptive methods was examined between clinic types. Survey items were mapped to the dimensions of access and internal consistency for each scale was tested with Cronbach\u27s alpha. Scores of access were developed and differences by clinic type were evaluated with an independent t-test. The overall response rate was 68.3% and the sample included 235 clinics. HDs (96.9%) were significantly more likely to provide IUDs and/or Impants on-site than FQHCs (37.4%) (P \u3c 0.0001). Scales with the highest consistency were Availability: Clinical Policy (24 items) (alpha = 0.892) and Acceptability (43 items) (alpha = 0.834). HDs had higher access scores than FQHCs for the Availability: Clinical Policy scale (0.58, 95% CL 0.55, 0.61) vs (0.29, 95% CL 0.25, 0.33) and Affordability: Administrative Policy scale (0.86, 95% CL 0.83, 0.90) vs (0.47, 95% CL 0.41, 0.53). FQHCs had higher access scores than HDs for Affordability: Insurance Policy (0.78, 95% CL 0.72, 0.84) vs (0.56, 95% CL 0.53, 0.59). These findings highlight strengths and gaps in contraceptive care access. Future studies must examine the impact of each dimension of access on clinic-level contraceptive utilization

The Double Disparity Facing Rural Local Health Departments

Residents of rural jurisdictions face significant health challenges, including some of the highest rates of risky health behaviors and worst health outcomes of any group in the country. Rural communities are served by smaller local health departments (LHDs) that are more understaffed and underfunded than their suburban and urban peers. As a result of history and current need, rural LHDs are more likely than their urban peers to be providers of direct health services, leading to relatively lower levels of population-focused activities. This review examines the double disparity faced by rural LHDs and their constituents: pervasively poorer health behaviors and outcomes and a historical lack of investment by local, state, and federal public health entities

Changes in Adolescent Birth Rates within Appalachian Subregions and Non-Appalachian Counties in the United States, 2012–2018

Background: Adolescent births are associated with numerous challenges. While adolescent birth rates have declined across the U.S., disparities persist and little is known about the extent to which broader declines are seen within Appalachia. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which adolescent birth rates have declined across the subregions of Appalachia relative to non-Appalachia. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of adolescent birth rates between 2012 and 2018 using county-level vital records data. Differences were examined across the subregions of Appalachia and among non-Appalachian counties. Multiple regression models were used to examine changes in the rate of decline over time, adjusting for additional covariates of relevance. Results: About 13.4% of all counties in the U.S. are within the Appalachian region. The rate of adolescent births decreased by 12.6 adolescent births per 1,000 females between 2012 and 2018 across the U.S. While all regions experienced declines in the rate of adolescent births, Central Appalachia had the largest reduction in adolescent births (18.5 per 1,000 females), which was also noted in the adjusted models when compared to the counties of non-Appalachia (b= –5.78, CI: –9.58, –1.97). Rates of adolescent birth were markedly higher in counties considered among the most socially and economically vulnerable. Implications: This study demonstrates that the rates of adolescent births vary across the subregions of Appalachia but have declined proportional to rates in non-Appalachia. While adolescent birth rates remain higher in select subregions of Appalachia compared to non-Appalachia, the gap has narrowed considerably

Access to Contraceptive Services during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perceptions of Choose Well Hospital Partners

Introduction: Contraceptive decision-making is individual in nature and access to high-quality contraceptive care, including counseling and the full range of contraceptive methods, can help individuals achieve their personal reproductive goals and prevent unintended pregnancy. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted provision and utilization of contraceptive counseling and contraceptive methods. Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) methods, such as the contraceptive implant and intrauterine devices (IUDs), were particularly affected by the pandemic because they require placement by a health care provider in a clinical setting. Choose Well (CW), an ongoing statewide contraceptive access initiative in South Carolina, launched in 2017 and continues through 2022. CW aims to implement best practices of contraceptive care via training and funding for IUD and implant methods. This study examined the perceptions of access to contraceptive counseling and implant and IUD methods during the pandemic in 2020 among CW hospital partners. Methods: Data were collected in 2021 via key informant interviews with partners (n=9) at CW implementing hospitals to assess perceptions of CW activities in 2020, the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. A semi-structured interview guide was used, and interviews were recorded, transcribed, and consensus coded. A codebook was developed based on the interview guide. Data from select questions of interest related to perceived access to contraceptive counseling, access to LARC methods, and the impact of the pandemic on contraceptive care services were analyzed for this study. Coding was conducted with NVivo software version 1.6.1. Results: Findings show that there was continued provision of contraceptive services during COVID-19 at CW partner hospitals, including an increase in access to contraceptive counseling and LARCs in 2020. The most prevalent facilitator for increased access to contraceptive counseling and LARCs at CW partner hospitals was having key personnel available such as physicians and Obstetrics (OB) navigators. Expanded access to outpatient sites was also noted as a facilitator of contraceptive counseling. Advertising and wide-spread patient education, buy-in and engagement from staff were additional facilitators for the increased access to LARCs. Considering the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, patients wanting to quickly leave the hospital and challenges with staffing contributed to an overall decline in access in some hospital locations. Challenges with staffing included not being able to receive training and nurses being overworked and overburdened. Conclusion: While COVID-19 has posed challenges to contraceptive care service provision, most individuals perceived an increase in access to contraceptive counseling and LARCs at CW partner hospitals. Hospital partners have continued to provide contraceptive services during COVID-19. The findings suggest the success of the CW initiative in increasing access to contraceptive services, particularly during COVID-19 through key facilitators. Staffing positions such as OB Navigators should be funded and maintained to increase access to contraceptive care services in hospital inpatient settings. Coordinating care between hospital inpatient and outpatient settings is similarly important for widespread patient education about contraceptive care services