Search

Secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure is a public health issue for residents of multi-unit housing (MUH) properties. We evaluated the impact of smoke-free policy implementation on reported SHS exposure among racially, ethnically diverse seniors living in low-income MUH properties. In Spring 2013 and Summer 2014, we surveyed residents (n = 960) at 15 MUH properties in Broward and Miami-Dade Counties, Florida. The percentage of residents reporting SHS exposure within their apartments from elsewhere in or around their building decreased from 31.1 %, before policy implementation, to 23.6 % at follow-up ( p = 0.02). In multivariate analysis of non-smoking residents after policy implementation, residents who reported having one or more comorbidities were two times more likely to report SHS exposure (aOR 2.23, 95 % CI 1.12-4.40). Considering the vulnerability of low-income seniors to SHS exposure, our findings are relevant to residents, property owners/managers, and public health professionals making decisions about smoke-free policies for MUH properties in which seniors reside. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Human Resource and Services Administration, Bureau of Primary Health Care Health Center program was developed to provide comprehensive, community-based quality primary care services, with an emphasis on meeting the needs of medically underserved populations. Health Centers have been leaders in adopting innovative approaches to improve quality care delivery, including the patient centered medical home (PCMH) model. Engaging patients through patient experience assessment is an important component of PCMH evaluation and a vital activity that can help drive patient-centered quality improvement initiatives. A total of 488 patients from five Health Center PCMHs in south Florida were surveyed in order to improve understanding of patient experience in Health Center PCMHs and to identify quality improvement opportunities. Overall patients reported very positive experience with patient-centeredness including being treated with courtesy and respect (85 % responded 'always') and communication with their provider in a way that was easy to understand (87.7 % responded 'always'). Opportunities for improvement included patient goal setting, referrals for patients with health conditions to workshops or educational programs, contact with the Health Center via phone and appointment availability. After adjusting for patient characteristics, results suggest that some patient experience components may be modified by educational attainment, years of care and race/ethnicity of patients. Findings are useful for informing quality improvement initiatives that, in conjunction with other patient engagement strategies, support Health Centers' ongoing transformation as PCMHs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: Understanding how the COVID-19 pandemic affected cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk monitoring in primary care may inform new approaches for addressing modifiable CVD risks. This study examined how pandemic-driven changes in primary care delivery affected CVD risk management processes. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective study used electronic health record data from patients at 70 primary care community clinics with scheduled appointments from September 1, 2018, to September 30, 2021. METHODS: Analyses examined associations between appointment type and select care process measures: appointment completion rates, time to appointment, and up-to-date documentation for blood pressure (BP) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). RESULTS: Of 1,179,542 eligible scheduled primary care appointments, completion rates were higher for virtual care (VC) vs in-person appointments (10.7 percentage points [PP]; 95% CI, 10.5-11.0; P < .001). Time to appointment was shorter for VC vs in-person appointments (--3.9 days; 95% CI, --4.1 to --3.7; P < .001). BP documentation was higher for appointments completed pre-- vs post pandemic onset (16.2 PP; 95% CI, 16.0-16.5; P < .001) and for appointments completed in person vs VC (54.9 PP; 95% CI, 54.6-55.2; P < .001). HbA1c documentation was higher for completed appointments after pandemic onset vs before (5.9 PP; 95% CI, 5.1-6.7; P < .001) and for completed VC appointments vs in-person appointments (3.9 PP; 95% CI, 3.0-4.7; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: After pandemic onset, appointment completion rates were higher, time to appointment was shorter, HbA1c documentation increased, and BP documentation decreased. Future research should explore the advantages of using VC for CVD risk management while continuing to monitor for unintended consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]