Search

Context: The "community-based workforce" is an umbrella term used by a workgroup of U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) leaders to characterize a variety of job titles and descriptions for positions in the public health, health care delivery, and human service sectors across local communities., Approach: Definitions, expectations of the scope of work, and funding opportunities for this workforce vary. To address some of these challenges, a workgroup of HHS agencies met to define the roles of this workforce and identify existing opportunities for training, career advancement, and compensation., Discussion: The community-based workforce has demonstrated success in improving poor health outcomes and addressing the social determinants of health for decades. However, descriptions of this workforce, expectations of their roles, and funding opportunities vary. The HHS workgroup identified that comprehensive approaches are needed within HHS and via public health sectors to meet these challenges and opportunities., Conclusion: Using the common term "community-based workforce" across HHS can encourage alignment and collaboration. As the environment for this public health and health care community-based workforce shifts, it will be important to understand the value and opportunities available to ensure long-term sustainability for this workforce to continue to advance health equity., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This study estimated the benefits and costs of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' We Can Do This COVID-19 public education campaign (the Campaign) and associated vaccination-related impacts., Methods: Weekly media market and national Campaign expenditures were used to estimate weekly first-dose vaccinations that would not have occurred absent the Campaign, weekly Campaign-attributed complete vaccinations, and corresponding COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths averted. Benefits were valued using estimated morbidity and mortality reductions and associated values of a statistical life and a statistical case. Costs were estimated using Campaign paid media expenditures and corresponding vaccination costs. The net Campaign and vaccination benefit and return on investment were calculated. Analyses were conducted from 2022 to 2024., Results: Between April 2021 and March 2022, an estimated 55.9 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines would not have been administered absent the Campaign. Campaign-attributed vaccinations resulted in 2,576,133 fewer mild COVID-19 cases, 243,979 fewer nonfatal COVID-19 hospitalizations, and 51,675 lives saved from COVID-19. The total Campaign benefit was $740.2 billion, and Campaign and vaccination costs totaled $8.3 billion, with net benefits of approximately $732.0 billion. For every $1 spent, the Campaign and corresponding vaccination costs resulted in benefits of approximately $89.54., Conclusions: The We Can Do This COVID-19 public education campaign saved more than 50,000 lives and prevented hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations and millions of COVID-19 cases, representing hundreds of billions of dollars in benefits in less than one year. Findings suggest that public education campaigns are a cost-effective approach to reducing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The United States (U.S.) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversees the safety and quality of drugs and vaccines that are used in the U.S. Administration of the FDA falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The regulatory oversight of the FDA is complex and comprehensive, requiring the various roles and responsibilities to be divided across six main centers. The activities of two of these centers, the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) are the primary focus of this review., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The United States has high and increasing rates of maternal morbidity and mortality, large proportions of which are related to cardiovascular health (CVH). Methods: We searched for National Institutes of Health (NIH) supported research as well as that of two other Agencies in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) for fiscal years (FY) 2016-2021. Grants included maternal health conditions or exposures across all pregnancy stages, but excluded grants that focused entirely on birth, neonatal, infant/childhood outcomes. Results were manually curated by reviewing the abstract and specific aims. Grants deemed to be relevant were grouped by category. Results: Between FY 2016-2021, overall Maternal Health grants remained unchanged at an average of 1.4% of total DHHS grant funding. Maternal CVH-specific (MCVH) funding amounted to $278,926,105 for 755 grants, $191,344,649 was for 534 Type-1 grants, representing a twofold increase. Non-NIH DHHS agencies most commonly funded general Maternal Health related to CVH; NIH focused funding classified as hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, maternal morbidity and mortality, obesity, and diabetes. Non-NIH DHSS Agencies most commonly funded clinical applied research. In addition to clinical applied grants, NIH funded substantial proportions of grants classified as basic research, clinical trials, and/or translational. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) MCVH grants studied participants in the pre-partum period (78.5%), followed by the post-partum period (50.5%), with relatively few in pre-pregnancy and peri-partum periods (10.8% and 9.7%, respectively); at the NIH level, the peri-partum period had better representation at 20.3%, whereas the pre-pregnancy period remained low at 9.9%. Conclusions: Federal grant funding for maternal health including MCVH increased at the same rate as its funding for overall research, and represented only 1.4% of overall total funding. The pre-pregnancy period was understudied in overall NIH funding and represents a gap area whereby funding agencies could further foster research advances.

Although chemical and radiological agents cause toxicity through different mechanisms, the multiorgan injuries caused by these threats share similarities that convene on the level of basic biological responses. This publication will discuss these areas of convergence and explore "multi-utility" approaches that could be leveraged to address common injury mechanisms underlying actions of chemical and radiological agents in a threat-agnostic manner. In addition, we will provide an overview of the current state of radiological and chemical threat research, discuss the US Government's efforts toward medical preparedness, and identify potential areas for collaboration geared toward enhancing preparedness and response against radiological and chemical threats. We also will discuss previous regulatory experience to provide insight on how to navigate regulatory paths for US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval/licensure/clearance for products addressing chemical or radiological/nuclear threats. This publication follows a 2022 trans-agency meeting titled, "Overlapping Science in Radiation and Sulfur Mustard Exposures of Skin and Lung: Consideration of Models, Mechanisms, Organ Systems, and Medical Countermeasures," sponsored by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Discussions from this meeting explored the overlapping nature of radiation and chemical injury and spurred increased interest in how preparedness for one threat leads to preparedness for the other. Herein, subject matter experts from the NIAID and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), a part of the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR), summarize the knowledge gained from recently funded biomedical research, as well as insights from the 2022 meeting. These topics include identification of common areas for collaboration, potential use of biomarkers of injury to identify injuries caused by both hazards, and common and widely available treatments that could treat damage caused by radiological or chemical threats.

The aim of this scoping review was to assist researchers who want to use survey data, either in academic or community settings, to identify and comprehend health disparities affecting Native Hawaiian (NH), Pacific Islander (PI), and/or Filipino populations, as these are groups with known and numerous health disparities. The scoping review methodology was used to identify survey datasets that disaggregate data for NH, PI, or Filipinos. Healthdata.gov was searched, as there is not an official index of databases. The website was established by the United States (US) Department and Health and Human Services to increase accessibility of health data for entrepreneurs, researchers, and policy makers, with the ultimate goal of improving health outcomes. Using the search term 'survey,' 332 datasets were retrieved, many of which were duplicates from different years. Datasets were included that met the following criteria: (1) related to health; (2) disaggregated NH, PI, and/or Filipino subgroups; (3) administered in the US; (4) publicly available; (5) individual-level data; (6) self-reported information; and (7) contained data from 2010 or later. Fifteen survey datasets met the inclusion criteria. Two additional survey datasets were identified by colleagues. For each dataset, the dataset name, data source, years of the data availability, availability of disaggregated NH, PI, and/or Filipino data, data on health outcomes and social determinants of health, and website information were documented. This inventory of datasets should be of use to researchers who want to advance understanding of health disparities experienced by NH, PI, and Filipino populations in the US., Competing Interests: None of the authors identify a conflict of interest., (©Copyright 2023 by University Health Partners of Hawai‘i (UHP Hawai‘i).)

Background: Over 1 million people in the United States have died of COVID-19. In response to this public health crisis, the US Department of Health and Human Services launched the We Can Do This public education campaign in April 2021 to increase vaccine confidence. The campaign uses a mix of digital, television, print, radio, and out-of-home channels to reach target audiences. However, the impact of this campaign on vaccine uptake has not yet been assessed., Objective: We aimed to address this gap by assessing the association between the We Can Do This COVID-19 public education campaign's digital impressions and the likelihood of first-dose COVID-19 vaccination among US adults., Methods: A nationally representative sample of 3642 adults recruited from a US probability panel was surveyed over 3 waves (wave 1: January to February 2021; wave 2: May to June 2021; and wave 3: September to November 2021) regarding COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine confidence, and sociodemographics. Survey data were merged with weekly paid digital campaign impressions delivered to each respondent's media market (designated market area [DMA]) during that period. The unit of analysis was the survey respondent-broadcast week, with respondents nested by DMA. Data were analyzed using a multilevel logit model with varying intercepts by DMA and time-fixed effects., Results: The We Can Do This digital campaign was successful in encouraging first-dose COVID-19 vaccination. The findings were robust to multiple modeling specifications, with the independent effect of the change in the campaign's digital dose remaining practically unchanged across all models. Increases in DMA-level paid digital campaign impressions in a given week from -30,000 to 30,000 increased the likelihood of first-dose COVID-19 vaccination by 125%., Conclusions: Results from this study provide initial evidence of the We Can Do This campaign's digital impact on vaccine uptake. The size and length of the Department of Health and Human Services We Can Do This public education campaign make it uniquely situated to examine the impact of a digital campaign on COVID-19 vaccination, which may help inform future vaccine communication efforts and broader public education efforts. These findings suggest that campaign digital dose is positively associated with COVID-19 vaccination uptake among US adults; future research assessing campaign impact on reduced COVID-19-attributed morbidity and mortality and other benefits is recommended. This study indicates that digital channels have played an important role in the COVID-19 pandemic response. Digital outreach may be integral in addressing future pandemics and could even play a role in addressing nonpandemic public health crises., (©Christopher J Williams, Elissa C Kranzler, Joseph N Luchman, Benjamin Denison, Sean Fischer, Thomas Wonder, Ronne Ostby, Monica Vines, Jessica Weinberg, Elizabeth L Petrun Sayers, Allison N Kurti, Sarah Trigger, Leah Hoffman, Joshua F A Peck. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 03.05.2023.)

To protect both patients and staff, healthcare personnel (HCP) were among the first groups in the United States recommended to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. We analyzed data reported to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Unified Hospital Data Surveillance System on COVID-19 vaccination coverage among hospital-based HCP. After vaccine introduction in December 2020, COVID-19 vaccine coverage rose steadily through April 2021, but the rate of uptake has since slowed; as of September 15, 2021, among 3,357,348 HCP in 2,086 hospitals included in this analysis, 70.0% were fully vaccinated. Additional efforts are needed to improve COVID-19 vaccine coverage among HCP., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Expert groups have recommended ongoing monitoring of the public health workforce to determine its ability to execute designated objectives. Resource- and time-intensive surveys have been a primary data source to monitor the workforce. We evaluated an administrative data source containing US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) aggregate federal civil service workforce-related data to determine its potential as a workforce surveillance system for this component of the workforce., Methods: We accessed FedScope, a publicly available online database containing federal administrative civilian HHS personnel data. Using established guidelines for evaluating surveillance systems and identified workforce characteristics, we evaluated FedScope attributes for workforce surveillance purposes., Results: We determined FedScope to be a simple, highly accepted, flexible, stable, and timely system to support analyses of federal civil service workforce-related data. Data can be easily accessed, analyzed, and monitored for changes across years and draw conclusions about the workforce. FedScope data can be used to calculate demographics (eg, sex, race or ethnicity, age group, and education level), employment characteristics (ie, supervisory status, work schedule, and appointment type), retirement projections, and characterize the federal workforce into standard occupational categories., Conclusions: This study indicates that an administrative data source containing HHS personnel data can function as a workforce surveillance system valuable to researchers, public health leaders, and decision makers interested in the federal civil service public health workforce. Using administrative data for workforce development is a model that can be applicable to federal and nonfederal public health agencies and ultimately support improvements in public health., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The gender pay gap in the United States (US) has narrowed over the last several decades, with the female/male earnings ratio in the US increased from about 60% before the 1980s to about 79% by 2014. However, the gender pay gap among the healthcare workforce persists. The objective of this study is to estimate the gender pay gap in the US federal governmental public health workforce during 2010-2018., Methods: We used an administrative dataset including annual pay rates and job characteristics of employees of the US Department of Health and Human Services. Employees' gender was classified based on first names. Regression analyses were used to estimate the gender pay gap using the predicted gender., Results: Female employees of the DHHS earned about 13% less than men in 2010, and 9.2% less in 2018. Occupation, pay plan, and location explained more than half of the gender pay gap. Controlling for job grade further reduces the gap. The unexplained portion of the gender pay gap in 2018 was between 1.0 and 3.5%. Female employees had a slight advantage in terms of pay increase over the study period., Conclusions: While the gender pay gap has narrowed within the last two decades, the pay gap between female and male employees in the federal governmental public health workforce persists and warrants continuing attention and research. Continued efforts should be implemented to reduce the gender pay gap among the health workforce.

Objective: To assess the validity of the US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) definition of multimorbidity using International Classification of Diseases, ninth edition (ICD-9) codes from administrative data., Design: Cross-sectional comparison of two ICD-9 billing code algorithms to data abstracted from medical records., Setting: Olmsted County, Minnesota, USA., Participants: An age-stratified and sex-stratified random sample of 1509 persons ages 40-84 years old residing in Olmsted County on 31 December 2010., Study Measures: Seventeen chronic conditions identified by the US DHHS as important in studies of multimorbidity were identified through medical record review of each participant between 2006 and 2010. ICD-9 administrative billing codes corresponding to the 17 conditions were extracted using the Rochester Epidemiology Project records-linkage system. Persons were classified as having each condition using two algorithms: at least one code or at least two codes separated by more than 30 days. We compared the ICD-9 code algorithms with the diagnoses obtained through medical record review to identify persons with multimorbidity (defined as ≥2, ≥3 or ≥4 chronic conditions)., Results: Use of a single code to define each of the 17 chronic conditions resulted in sensitivity and positive predictive values (PPV) ≥70%, and in specificity and negative predictive values (NPV) ≥70% for identifying multimorbidity in the overall study population. PPV and sensitivity were highest in persons 65-84 years of age, whereas NPV and specificity were highest in persons 40-64 years. The results varied by condition, and by age and sex. The use of at least two codes reduced sensitivity, but increased specificity., Conclusions: The use of a single code to identify each of the 17 chronic conditions may be a simple and valid method to identify persons who meet the DHHS definition of multimorbidity in populations with similar demographic, socioeconomic, and health care characteristics., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Medicaid is uniquely equipped to serve low-income populations. We identify four features that form the "soul" of Medicaid, explain how the administration is testing them, and explore challenges in accountability contributing to this struggle. We highlight the work of watchdogs acting to protect Medicaid and conclude with considerations for future health reform.

The federal bureaucracy played a critical role in implementing most aspects of the Affordable Care Act's private insurance coverage expansion. Through brief case studies, the authors review three dimensions of this role: the development of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, rulemaking in the formulation of the essential health benefits package, and the implementation of the federal website. They relate these to themes in the public administration literature. Politics-both through state decisions and through continuing congressional action (and inaction)-pervaded the implementation process. The challenges of staffing and situating the new bureaucracy effectively changed vertical boundaries within the Department of Health and Human Services, with long-lasting consequences. Finally, the complex design of the policy itself made passage of the legislation easier but implementation much more difficult. Ultimately, however, implementation was remarkably successful, achieving improvements in coverage consistent with the Congressional Budget Office's projections., (Copyright © 2020 by Duke University Press.)

Public health needs up-to-date information for surveillance and response. As healthcare application programming interfaces become widely available, a novel data gathering mechanism could provide public health with critical information in a timely fashion to respond to a fast-moving epidemic. In this article, we extrapolate from our experiences using a Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resource-based architecture for infectious disease surveillance for sexually transmitted diseases to its application to gather case information for an outbreak. One of the challenges with a fast-moving outbreak is to accurately assess its demand on healthcare resources, since information specific to comorbidities is often not available. These comorbidities are often associated with poor prognosis and higher resource utilization. If the comorbidity data and other clinical information were readily available to public health workers, they could better address community disruption and manage healthcare resources. The use of FHIR resources available through application programming and filtered through tools such as described herein will give public health the flexibility needed to investigate rapidly emerging disease while protecting patient privacy., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association 2020. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.)

A foreshadowing of changes for other populations and nursing specialties?

Recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) events have presented challenges to health care systems worldwide. Air medical movement of individuals with potential infectious disease poses unique challenges and threats to crews and receiving personnel. The US Department of Health and Human Services air medical evacuation teams of the National Disaster Medical System directly supported 39 flights, moving over 2,000 individuals. Infection control precautions focused on source and engineering controls, personal protective equipment, safe work practices to limit contamination, and containment of the area of potential contamination. Source control to limit transmission distance was used by requiring all passengers to wear masks (surgical masks for persons under investigation and N95 for known positives). Engineering controls used plastic sheeting to segregate and treat patients who developed symptoms while airborne. Crews used Tyvek (Dupont Richmond, VA) suits with booties and a hood, a double layer of gloves, and either a powered air-purifying respirator or an N95 mask with a face shield. For those outside the 6-ft range, an N95 mask and gloves were worn. Safe work practices were used, which included mandatory aircraft surface decontamination, airflow exchanges, and designated lavatories. Although most patients transported were stable, to the best of our knowledge, this represents the largest repatriation of potentially contagious patients in history without infection of any transporting US Department of Health and Human Services air medical evacuation crews., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Donor lung allocation in the United States focuses on decreasing waitlist mortality and improving recipient outcomes. The implementation of allocation policy to match deceased donor lungs to waitlisted patients occurs through a unique partnership between government and private organizations, namely the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network under the Department of Health and Human Services and the United Network for Organ Sharing. In 2005, the donor lung allocation algorithm shifted toward the prioritization of medical urgency of waitlisted patients instead of time accrued on the waitlist. This led to the Lung Allocation Score, which weighs over a dozen clinical variables to predict a 1-year estimate of survival benefit, and is used to prioritize waitlisted patients. In 2017, the use of local allocation boundaries was eliminated in favor of a 250 nautical mile radius from the donor hospital as the first unit of distance used in allocation. The next upcoming iteration of donor allocation policy is expected to use a continuous distribution algorithm where all geographic boundaries are eliminated. There are additional opportunities to improve donor lung allocation, such as for patients with high antibody titers with access to a limited number of donors., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)