Understanding cost variations in STD service delivery as state and federal agencies reduce funding

Sexually transmitted diseases (STD) continue to be a major health problem in the U.S. Despite the persistence of STDs and the critical role of the public health sector in controlling these diseases, STD services continue to be reduced. A linear regression was performed using county demographic and cost variables. Many of these variables in county public health agencies and the populations they serve were not significantly correlated with cost of service. However, the availability of local tax funding for county health departments (CHDs), which varies extensively across counties within the state, is statistically linked to higher STD expenditure per case. County STD rates were also negatively correlated with cost of service. As the STD rate increases, the cost per STD case decreases implying some economies of scale. County population size did not have any effect on the cost per case. Understanding the factors contributing to the unit costs of STD services is critical to be able to make actionable and prudent decisions about continued financial support for public health agency based STD prevention/control services

Enhancing Sexually Transmitted Infection Notification: A Quality Improvement Collaborative Case Report

This case study illustrates how a quality improvement (QI) Collaborative supports an implementation study of using mobile phone texting technology for notification of sexually transmitted infections (STI) test results. The County Health Departments making up the QI Collaborative meet monthly to discuss their progress in using QI to advance the use of texting for STI test results. The main purpose of QI Collaboratives is to maximize implementation outcomes through sharing of successes and challenges. The case study report describes how implementation research can adapt to the context of each unique CHD and the users of new knowledge rather than emphasizing the creation of new knowledge

Assessing a Quality Improvement Project in a Georgia County Health Department

The study and evaluation of quality improvement among Georgia’s public health systems continues to be a major priority for the Georgia Public Health Practice Based Research Network (GAPH-PBRN). This article focuses on the application and evaluation of a Quality Improvement project in a Georgia County Health Department. The QI team sought to reduce the waiting time in the teen clinic; thereby, increasing the Quality Improvement culture one project at a time in this Health Department. The project revealed that Quality Improvement is a continuous process that requires change and adaptation by employees. This initial Quality Improvement project was the first step in helping to establish Quality Improvement culture in the County Health Department

Health Districts as Quality Improvement Collaboratives and Multi-Jurisdictional Entities

Research Objective: The Georgia Public Health PBRN assessed the utility of the Multi-county Health District as a structured Quality Improvement Collaborative (QIC), and as multi jurisdictional entities for purposes of meeting standards for accreditation by the Public Health Accreditation Board. Data Sets and Sources: Data were collected from online surveys followed up with phone interviews or paper surveys to maximize participation. A newly developed clinical care QIC instrument (Schouten et al, 2010) was modified to collect data with a revised focus on QICs for public health. We retained QI culture constructs in the instrument while shifting the focus from healthcare to public health essential services related to accreditation standards. Study Design: Data was collected from a purposeful sample of local public health key informants in Georgia who were identified by the District Directors’ office as local key informants. Invitations Key informants included county and district staff and county board of health members. Analysis: Psychometric testing of the QIC assessment instrument included tests for validity and reliability. Census-based and self-reported demographic characteristics were used to compare responses. Principal Findings: Strong consensus emerged across various constituencies that Districts were critical for local public health to provide essential services. Key opinion leaders from both the rural and non-rural counties agreed that the Districts were important. Conclusion: Regionalization using Georgia Districts has major potential for supporting QI and meeting quality assurance standards associated with accreditation. Implications for Field of PHSSR: Accreditation has the potential to substantially clarify and enhance the role of public health in the 21st century. But local public health agencies, based on small municipality or county populations, are unlikely to possess and sustain capacity to meet the challenges of comprehensive essential services. Regionalization of local public health capacity is a critical emerging issue with the launching of public health accreditation

Clarifying and Expanding Concepts of Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing: Early Lessons Learned from Conducting QI with Georgia’s Health Districts

Research Objective: Assess the legal and organization cultural foundations for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing (CJS) in support of local public health accreditation and QI in Georgia. Data Sets and Sources: Archival data (primarily state statutes), secondary data from previous qualitative comparative research on Deep South public health organization, secondary data from previous surveys, and oral interviews and written communication. Study Design: Primarily Qualitative design combining ethnographic and participatory research methods. Analysis: Qualitative Content analysis based on predetermined and emergent themes. Principal Findings: Georgia’s Health Districts have emerged as major CJS entities that support delivery of essential services and local public health (LPH) QI and LPH accreditation readiness, driven primarily by local organizational leadership and culture that is facilitated through enabling statutes in contrast to more top-down state-mandating statutes, regulations and directives. Conclusion: Georgia’s use of districts as multi-county public health entities serves as a primary structure for providing local public health services and has become a critical structure to address the looming demands for QI and accreditation, even though the statutes clearly establish the county as the primary local public health entity. Implications for the Field of PHSSR: This CJS structure to facilitate public health QI and accreditation in Georgia illustrates how agency cultures can emerge from local demands for economies of scale, more than formal policies generated at state level. This is a model that could be very important for advancing CJS in other regions of the country

Evaluating Quality Improvement to Improve HIV Reporting

The incorporation and evaluation of Quality Improvement into Georgia’s public health systems continues to be a focus of the Georgia Public Health Practice Based Research Network. This report describes the process, preliminary results and lessons learned from incorporating Quality Improvement into one of Georgia’s public health districts

Comparison of practice based research network based quality improvement technical assistance and evaluation to other ongoing quality improvement efforts for changes in agency culture

Abstract Background Public health agencies in the USA are increasingly challenged to adopt Quality Improvement (QI) strategies to enhance performance. Many of the functional and structural barriers to effective use of QI can be found in the organizational culture of public health agencies. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of public health practice based research network (PBRN) evaluation and technical assistance for QI interventions on the organizational culture of public health agencies in Georgia, USA. Methods An online survey of key informants in Georgia’s districts and county health departments was used to compare perceptions of characteristics of organizational QI culture between PBRN supported QI districts and non-PBRN supported districts before and after the QI interventions. The primary outcomes of concern were number and percentage of reported increases in characteristics of QI culture as measured by key informant responses to items assessing organizational QI practices from a validated instrument on QI Collaboratives. Survey results were analyzed using Multi-level Mixed Effects Logistic Model, which accounts for clustering/nesting. Results Increases in QI organizational culture were consistent for all 10- items on a QI organizational culture survey related to: leadership support, use of data, on-going QI, and team collaboration. Statistically significant odds ratios were calculated for differences in increased QI organizational culture between PBRN-QI supported districts compared to Non-PBRN supported districts for 5 of the 10 items, after adjusting for District clustering of county health departments. Conclusions Agency culture, considered by many QI experts as the main goal of QI, is different than use of specific QI methods, such as Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles or root-cause analyses. The specific use of a QI method does not necessarily reflect culture change. Attempts to measure QI culture are newly emerging. This study documented significant improvements in characteristics of organizational culture and demonstrated the potential of PBRNs to support agency QI activities

Seeing the quality improvement forest through the quality improvement trees: A meta-synthesis of case studies in Florida and Georgia

Objectives: To identify important characteristics of quality improvement applications for population health and healthcare settings and to explore the use of quality improvement as a model for implementing and disseminating evidence-based or best practices. Methods: A meta-synthesis was used to examine published quality improvement case studies. A total of 10 published studies that were conducted in Florida and Georgia were examined and synthesized using meta-synthesis (a qualitative research methodology) for meaningful insights and lessons learned using defined meta-synthesis inclusion criteria. The primary focus of the analysis and synthesis were the reported processes and findings that included responses to structured questioning in addition to emergent results from direct observation and semi-structured open-ended interviewing. Results: The key insights for the use of quality improvement in public health and healthcare settings included (1) the essential importance of data monitoring, analysis, and data-based decision making; (2) the need to focus on internal mutable factors within organizations; (3) the critical role of quality improvement team group dynamics; (4) the value of using a quality improvement collaborative or multi-clinic quality council/committee for sharing and comparing performance on key metrics; and (5) the need to identify a quality improvement approach and methods for clarification as a structured quality improvement intervention. Conclusion: In addition to the advantages of using quality improvement to enhance or improve healthcare and public health services, there is also potential for quality improvement to serve as a model for enhancing the adoption of evidence-based practices within the context of dissemination and implementation research