Search

Introduction: Federal recommendations for providing quality family planning services were published in 2014 and included preconception care (PCC). This paper aims to describe the prevalence of PCC delivery among publicly funded clinics, prior to the recommendations.Methods: Prevalence of providing occasional or frequent PCC in the last 3 months and having written protocols for recommended PCC screenings were estimated in 2015 using survey data collected from a nationally representative sample of publicly funded clinic administrators (2013-2014, N=1,615). Analyses included examination of differential distributions of outcomes by clinic characteristics (p<0.05) and multivariable regression.Results: Prevalence of occasional or frequent PCC delivery was 81% for women and 38% for men. The percentage of clinics with written protocols for specific PCC screenings ranged from 74% to 88% (women) and 66% to 83% (men). Prevalence of having written protocols for all PCC screenings was 29% for women and 22% for men. Characteristics negatively associated with having written protocols for all PCC screenings for women and men (respectively) were as follows: not receiving Title X funding (adjusted prevalence ratio [APR]=0.6, 95% CI=0.50, 0.76; APR=0.6, 95% CI=0.47, 0.77) and being a community health center (APR=0.5, 95% CI=0.37, 0.72; APR=0.5, 95% CI=0.30, 0.67); health department (APR=0.7, 95% CI=0.61, 0.87; APR=0.6, 95% CI=0.49, 0.76); or hospital/other (APR=0.6, 95% CI=0.50, 0.79; APR=0.6, 95% CI=0.43, 0.75) (versus Planned Parenthood).Conclusions: Provision of PCC appears to differ by clinic characteristics and by interpretation of the phrase "preconception care," suggesting opportunities for education and improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The healthcare system in the U.S., particularly outpatient, office-based care, has been shifting toward service delivery by advanced practice providers, particularly nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs). The National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS), conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is the leading source of nationally representative data on care delivered by office-based physicians. This paper first describes NAMCS, then discusses key NAMCS expansion efforts, and finally presents major findings from two exploratory studies that assess the feasibility of collecting data from NPs and PAs as sampled providers in NAMCS. The first NAMCS expansion effort began in 2006 when the NAMCS sample was expanded to include community health centers and started collecting and disseminating data on physicians, NPs, PAs, and nurse midwives in these settings. Then, in 2013, NCHS included workforce questions in NAMCS on the composition and clinical tasks of all healthcare staff in physician offices. Finally, in 2013-2014, NCHS conducted two exploratory studies and found that collecting data from NPs and PAs as sampled providers in NAMCS is feasible. However, modifications to the current NAMCS procedures may be necessary, for example, changing recruitment strategies, visit sampling procedures, and physician-centric survey items. Collectively, these NCHS initiatives are important for healthcare research, practice, and policy communities in their efforts toward providing a more complete picture of the changing outpatient, office-based workforce, team-based care approach, and service utilization in the U.S. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cancer survivors, the medical community, public health professionals, researchers, and policymakers all need information about newly diagnosed cancer cases and deaths to better understand and address the disease burden. CDC collects cancer data on 96% of the U.S. population through the National Program of Cancer Registries. The National Program of Cancer Registries routinely collects data on all cancer occurrences, deaths, and the types of initial treatment received by the patients, and recently CDC has made advances in its cancer surveillance activities that have direct applicability to cancer survivorship research and care. This article examines CDC's innovative uses of the National Program of Cancer Registries infrastructure and data as a recruitment source for survivorship research studies and behavioral interventions; comparative effectiveness and patient-centered outcomes research; and the collection, consolidation, and dissemination of treatment summaries for cancer survivors and their providers. This paper also discusses long-term, idealistic plans for additional data linkages and sharing among public health, providers, and the cancer survivor through innovative concepts such as patient portals and rapid-learning health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Surveys of sensitive topics, such as the Injury Control and Risk Surveys (ICARIS) or the Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance System (BRFSS), are often conducted by telephone using random-digit-dial (RDD) sampling methods. Although this method of data collection is relatively quick and inexpensive, it suffers from growing coverage problems and falling response rates. In this paper, several alternative methods of data collection are reviewed, including audio computer-assisted interviews as part of personal visit surveys, mail surveys, web surveys, and interactive voice response surveys. Their strengths and weaknesses are presented regarding coverage, nonresponse, and measurement issues, and compared with RDD telephone surveys. The feasibility of several mixed mode designs is discussed; none of them stands out as clearly the right choice for surveys on sensitive issues, which implies increased need for methodologic research. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]