Search

Policy PointsThe health care sector is increasingly investing in social conditions, including availability of safe, reliable, and adequate transportation, that contribute to improving health.In this paper, we suggest ways to advance the impact of transportation interventions and highlight the limitations of how health services researchers and practitioners currently conceptualize and use transportation.Incorporating a transportation justice framework offers an opportunity to address transportation and mobility needs more comprehensively and equitably within health care research, delivery, and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsThe commercial determinants of health (CDoH) concept, which currently focuses on markets that harm health, should be expanded to refer to the interface between commerce and health, which can sometimes have positive public health consequences.The regulatory stances framework helps us classify public health preferences for regulating specific markets related to CDoH, based on the intended effects of regulations on market size. The regulatory stances a jurisdiction can adopt can be classified as ranging from prohibitionist through contractionist, permissive, and expansionist, to universalist.The regulatory stances framework increases the usefulness of the CDoH concept by expanding the conversation beyond negative determinants of health and providing a fuller view of the tools at the disposal of society to alter markets and improve health. Context: The effects of commerce on the public health are omnipresent. The commercial determinants of health (CDoH) represent a burgeoning area of scholarly debate and activist policymaking to redress markets that adversely affect public health. The CDoH debate is a logical extension of the tobacco control movement, but, to its detriment, the CDoH conversation remains primarily focused policies and proposals that are analogous to historical tobacco control strategies. Methods: This paper argues that for the CDoH to develop further and broaden its appeal, it should expand to cover markets with conditional and positive impacts on health. To explain and order this conversation, a comparative framework for regulatory policy is introduced: the regulatory stances. The regulatory stances classify a regulatory policy based on the intended effect of policy on the size of a market in the future relative to the present. Findings: Some markets that interface between commerce and health do not inherently harm health. Regulatory policy toward these markets should be different in intent than regulatory policy for markets with negative health effects. Conclusions: By using the regulatory stances framework to encompass markets that have positive or conditional effects on health as well as those that have adverse health effects, the CDoH conversation can shift away from the exclusive focus on strategies to shrink markets with adverse health impacts to consider a wider array of policy options. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsHealth and civic engagement are reciprocally and longitudinally linked: Poor health is associated with less civic engagement. Well‐established social drivers of health and health inequality such as inadequate access to health care, poverty, racism, housing instability, and food insecurity are also drivers of lower civic engagement.A robust primary care system can play a key role in advancing civic engagement (e.g., voting, volunteerism, community service, and political involvement) at the population level but has received little attention.Policy and practice solutions at the individual and structural levels should support and leverage potential synergies among health equity, civic engagement, and primary care. Context: Health and civic engagement are linked. Healthier people may be able to participate more fully in civic life, although those with poorer health may be motivated to address the roots of their health challenges using collective action. In turn, civically active people may experience better health, and societies with more equitable health and health care may experience healthier civic life. Importantly, a robust primary care system is linked to greater health equity. However, the role of primary care in advancing civic engagement has received little study. Methods: We synthesize current literature on the links among health, civic engagement, and primary care. We propose a conceptual framework to advance research and policy on the role of primary care in supporting civic engagement as a means for individuals to actualize their health and civic futures. Findings: Current literature supports relationships between health equity and civic engagement. However, this literature is primarily cross‐sectional and confined to voting. Our integrative conceptual framework highlights the interconnectedness of primary care structures, health equity, and civic engagement and supports the crucial role of primary care in advancing both civic and health outcomes. Primary care is a potentially fruitful setting for cultivating community and individual health and power by supporting social connectedness, self‐efficacy, and collective action. Conclusions: Health and civic engagement are mutually reinforcing. Commonalities between social determinants of health and civic engagement constitute an important convergence for policy, practice, and research. Responsibility for promoting both health and civic engagement is shared by providers, community organizations, educators, and policymakers, as well as democratic and health systems, yet these entities rarely work in concert. Future work can inform policy and practice to bolster primary care as a means for promoting health and civic engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsCountries have adopted different strategies to support aging populations, which are broadly reflected in social, economic, and contextual environments. Referred to as "societal adaptation to aging," these factors affect countries' capacity to support older adults.Results from our study show that countries with more robust societal adaptation to aging had lower depression prevalence. Reductions in depression prevalence occurred among every investigated sociodemographic group and were most pronounced among the old‐old.Findings suggest that societal factors have an underacknowledged role in shaping depression risk. Policies that improve societal approaches to aging may reduce depression prevalence among older adults. Context: Countries have adopted various formal and informal approaches to support older adults, which are broadly reflected in different policies, programs, and social environments. These contextual environments, broadly referred to as "societal adaptation to aging," may affect population health. Methods: We used a new theory‐based measure that captured societal adaptation to aging, the Aging Society Index (ASI), which we linked with harmonized individual‐level data from 89,111 older adults from 20 countries. Using multi‐levels models that accounted for differences in the population composition across countries, we estimated the association between country‐level ASI scores and depression prevalence. We also tested if associations were stronger among the old‐old and among sociodemographic groups that experience more disadvantage (i.e., women, those with lower educational attainment, unmarried adults). Findings: We found that countries with higher ASI scores, indicating more comprehensive approaches to supporting older adults, had lower depression prevalence. We found especially strong reductions in depression prevalence among the oldest adults in our sample. However, we did not find stronger reductions among sociodemographic groups who may experience more disadvantage. Conclusions: Country‐level strategies to support older adults may affect depression prevalence. Such strategies may become increasingly important as adults grow older. These results offer promising evidence that improvements in societal adaptation to aging—such as through adoption of more comprehensive policies and programs targeting older adults—may be one avenue to improve population mental health. Future research could investigate observed associations using longitudinal and quasi‐experimental study designs, offering additional information regarding a potential causal relationship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsA large body of scientific work examines the mechanisms through which social determinants of health (SDOH) shape health inequities. However, the nuances described in the literature are infrequently reflected in the applied frameworks that inform health policy and programming.We synthesize extant SDOH research into a heuristic framework that provides policymakers, practitioners, and researchers with a customizable template for conceptualizing and operationalizing key mechanisms that represent intervention opportunities for mitigating the impact of harmful SDOH.In light of scarce existing SDOH mitigation strategies, the framework addresses an important research‐to‐practice translation gap and missed opportunity for advancing health equity. Context: The reduction of health inequities is a broad and interdisciplinary endeavor with implications for policy, research, and practice. Health inequities are most often understood as associated with the social determinants of health (SDOH). However, policy and programmatic frameworks for mitigation often rely on broad SDOH domains, without sufficient attention to the operating mechanisms, and effective SDOH mitigation strategies remain scarce. To expand the cadre of effective SDOH mitigation strategies, a practical, heuristic framework for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers is needed that serves as a roadmap for conceptualizing and targeting the key mechanisms of SDOH influence. Methods: We conduct a critical review of the extant conceptual and empirical SDOH literature to identify unifying principles of SDOH mechanisms and to synthesize an integrated framework for conceptualizing such mechanisms. Findings: We highlight eight unifying principles of SDOH mechanisms that emerge from landmark SDOH research. Building on these principles, we introduce and apply a conceptual model that synthesizes key SDOH mechanisms into one organizing, heuristic framework that provides policymakers, practitioners, and researchers with a customizable template for conceptualizing and operationalizing the key SDOH mechanisms that represent intervention opportunities to maximize potential impact for mitigating a given health inequity. Conclusions: Our synthesis of the extant SDOH research into a heuristic framework addresses a scarcity of peer‐reviewed organizing frameworks of SDOH mechanisms designed to inform practice. The framework represents a practical tool to facilitate the translation of scholarly SDOH work into evidence‐based and targeted policy and programming. Such tools designed to close the research‐to‐practice translation gap for effective SDOH mitigation are sorely needed, given that health inequities in the United States and in many other parts of the world have widened over the past two decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsPolicies that redress oppressive social, economic, and political conditions are essential for improving population health and achieving health equity. Efforts to remedy structural oppression and its deleterious effects should account for its multilevel, multifaceted, interconnected, systemic, and intersectional nature.The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services should facilitate the creation and maintenance of a national publicly available, user‐friendly data infrastructure on contextual measures of structural oppression.Publicly funded research on social determinants of health should be mandated to (a) analyze health inequities in relation to relevant data on structural conditions and (b) deposit the data in the publicly available data repository. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsThe commercial determinants of health (CDH) framework can inform public health policy, practice, and research in ways that contribute to overcoming the world's most serious public health challenges.By documenting the pathways by which commercial actors shape health, the CDH framework can provide a unifying focus for collective action to prevent and ameliorate global health crises.To realize these opportunities, CDH proponents need to find synergies in the multiple emerging streams of research, practice, and advocacy and create a body of scientific evidence, methodologies, and ideas that can inform a public health practice for the 21st century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsWe reviewed some of the recent advances in education and health, arguing that attention to social contextual factors and the dynamics of social and institutional change provide critical insights into the ways in which the association is embedded in institutional contexts.Based on our findings, we believe incorporating this perspective is fundamentally important to ameliorate current negative trends and inequality in Americans' health and longevity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsCurrent pay‐for‐performance and other payment policies ignore hospital transfers for emergency conditions, which may exacerbate disparities.No conceptual framework currently exists that offers a patient‐centered, population‐based perspective for the structure of hospital transfer networks.The hospital transfer network equity‐quality framework highlights the external and internal factors that determine the structure of hospital transfer networks, including structural inequity and racism. Context: Emergency care includes two key components: initial stabilization and transfer to a higher level of care. Significant work has focused on ensuring that local facilities can stabilize patients. However, less is understood about transfers for definitive care. To better understand how transfer network structure impacts population health and equity in emergency care, we proposea conceptual framework, the hospital transfer network equity‐quality model (NET‐EQUITY). NET‐EQUITY can help optimize population outcomes, decrease disparities, and enhance planning by supporting a framework for understanding emergency department transfers. Methods: To develop the NET‐EQUITY framework, we synthesized work on health systems and quality of health care (Donabedian, the Institute of Medicine, Ferlie, and Shortell) and the research framework of the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities with legal and empirical research. Findings: The central thesis of our framework is that the structure of hospital transfer networks influences patient outcomes, as defined by the Institute of Medicine, which includes equity. The structure of hospital transfer networks is shaped by internal and external factors. The four main external factors are the regulatory, economic environment, provider, and sociocultural and physical/built environment. These environments all implicate issues of equity that are important to understand to foster an equitable population‐based system of emergency care. The framework highlights external and internal factors that determine the structure of hospital transfer networks, including structural racism and inequity. Conclusions: The NET‐EQUITY framework provides a patient‐centered, equity‐focused framework for understanding the health of populations and how the structure of hospital transfer networks can influence the quality of care that patients receive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) seeks to develop evidence‐based alternative payment models (APM) to improve health care quality and reduce costs, but its performance in achieving these goals has been mixed. In October 2021, CMMI released its Innovation Strategy Refresh to highlight challenges faced by payment models and suggest new strategic approaches for the upcoming decade. While a welcome recast of organizational goals, the Refresh leaves space for how CMMI will address persistent issues. These include how CMMI can best engage physicians and patients in APMs, minimize conflicting incentives among APMs, reduce selection bias in model participation, and, ultimately, transition away from the fee‐for‐service framework that underlies much of Medicare reimbursement. This article provides guidance to CMMI's vision by examining challenges within CMMI's strategy for model building and offering solutions to mitigate these issues. These strategies include engaging beneficiaries in APM incentives, expanding operational flexibility to improve clinical behaviors (e.g., waivers), rectifying issues with conflicting model incentives, building voluntary short‐term and mandatory long‐term incentives to mitigate selection bias, and transitioning to an overriding population‐based model to constrain net costs. Policy PointsThe Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) seeks to develop evidence‐based alternative payment models (APM) to improve care quality and reduce health care cost, but its performance in achieving these goals has been mixed.In October 2021, CMMI released a "strategic refresh" of its goals but left space for how persistent issues to model development would be addressed.We propose strategies to engage physicians and patients in APMs, minimize conflicting incentives among APMs, reduce selection bias in model participation, and, ultimately, transition away from the fee‐for‐service framework that underlies much of Medicare reimbursement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsIn 2021, four major pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors reached a proposed settlement agreement with 46 state Attorneys General of $26 billion to address their liabilities in fueling the US opioid epidemic. It raises important questions about abatement conceptualization and measurement for allocating settlement funds among substate entities.We outline the political economy tensions undergirding the settlement and allocation, introduce an abatement conceptual framework, describe how an abatement formula was developed for Pennsylvania to allocate settlement funds, and summarize considerations for future settlement allocation efforts.Documenting the challenges and experiences of this task is essential to inform future efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsIn order to achieve successful operationalization of trauma‐informed care (TIC), TIC policies must include conceptual clarity regarding the definition of both trauma and TIC. Furthermore, TIC requires clear and cohesive policies that address operational factors such as clearly delineated roles of service providers, protocol for positive trauma screens, necessary financial infrastructure, and mechanisms of intersectoral collaboration.Additionally, policy procedures need to be considered for how TIC is provided at the program and service level as well as what TIC means at the organizational, system, and intersectoral level. Context: Increased recognition of the epidemiology of trauma and its impact on individuals within and across human service delivery systems has contributed to the development of trauma‐informed care (TIC). How TIC can be conceptualized and implemented, however, remains unclear. This study seeks to review and analyze the TIC literature from within and across systems of care and to generate a conceptual framework regarding TIC. Methods: Our study followed a critical interpretive synthesis methodology. We searched multiple databases (Campbell Collaboration, Econlit, Health Systems Evidence, Embase, ERIC, HealthSTAR, IPSA, JSTOR, Medline, PsychINFO, Social Sciences Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts and Web of Science),as well as relevant gray literature and information‐rich websites. We used a coding tool, adapted to the TIC literature, for data extraction. Findings: Electronic database searches yielded 2,439 results and after inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied, a purposive sample of 98 information‐rich articles was generated. Conceptual clarity and definitional understanding of TIC is lacking in the literature, which has led to poor operationalization of TIC. Additionally, infrastructural and ideological barriers, such as insufficient funding and service provider "buy‐in," have hindered TIC implementation. The resulting conceptual framework defines trauma and depicts critical elements of vertical TIC, including the bidirectional relationship between the trauma‐affected individual and the system, and horizontal TIC, which requires intersectoral collaboration, an established referral network, and standardized TIC language. Conclusions: Successful operationalization of TIC requires policies that address current gaps in systems arrangements, such as the lack of funding structures for TIC, and political factors, such as the role of policy legacies. The emergent conceptual framework acknowledges critical factors affecting operationalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsClarifications to Senate Bill (SB) 1152 are necessary to address the differences between inpatient and emergency department (ED) discharge processes, determine how frequently an ED must deliver the SB 1152 bundle of services to a single patient, and establish expectations for compliance during off‐hours when social services are unavailable.Because homelessness cannot be resolved in a single ED visit, the state should provide funding to support housing‐focused case workers that will follow patients experiencing homelessness (PEH) through the transition from temporary shelters to permanent supportive housing. Medi‐Cal could fund the delivery of the SB 1152 bundle of services to defray the costs to public hospitals that provide care for high numbers of PEH.California legislators should consider complementary legislation to increase funding for shelters so that sufficient capacity is available to accept PEH from EDs and hospitals, and to fund alternative strategies to prevent poverty and the upstream root causes of homelessness itself. Context: Prompted by stories of "patient dumping," California enacted Senate Bill (SB) 1152, which mandates that hospitals offer patients experiencing homelessness (PEH) a set of resources at discharge to ensure safety and prevent dumping. Methods: To evaluate interventions to meet the requirements of SB 1152 across three emergency departments (EDs) of a Los Angeles County public hospital system with a combined annual census of 260,000 visits, we used an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach, focusing first on quantitative evaluation and then using information from qualitative interviews to explain the quantitative findings. Findings: In total, 2.9% (1,515/52,607) of encounters involved PEH. Documentation of compliance with the eight required components of SB 1152 was low, ranging from 9.0% to 33.9%. Twenty‐five provider interviews confirmed support for providing assistance to PEH in the ED, but the participants described barriers to compliance, including challenges in implementing universal screening for homelessness, incongruity of the requirements with the ED setting, the complexity of the patients, and the limitations of SB 1152 as a health policy. Conclusions: Despite operationalizing universal screening for homelessness, we found poor compliance with SB 1152 and identified multiple barriers to implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsLooking for a way to curtail market power abuses in health care and rein in prices, 20 states have restricted most‐favored‐nation (MFN) clauses in some health care contracts.Little is known as to whether restrictions on MFN clauses slow health care price growth.Banning MFN clauses between insurers and hospitals in highly concentrated insurer markets seems to improve competition and lead to lower hospital prices. Context: Most‐favored‐nation (MFN) contract clauses have recently garnered attention from both Congress and state legislatures looking for ways to curtail market power abuses in health care and rein in prices. In health care, a typical MFN contract clause is stipulated by the insurer and requires a health care provider to grant the insurer the lowest (i.e., the most‐favored) price among the insurers it contracts with. As of August 2020, 20 states restrict the use of MFN clauses in health care contracts (19 states ban their use in at least some health care contracts), with 8 states prohibiting their use between 2010 and 2016. Methods: Using event study and difference‐in‐differences research designs, we compared prices for a standardized hospital admission in states that banned MFN clauses between 2010 and 2016 with standardized hospital admission prices in states without MFN bans. Findings: Our results show that bans on MFN clauses reduced hospital price growth in metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) with highly concentrated insurer markets. Specifically, we found that mean hospital prices in MSAs with highly concentrated insurer markets would have been $472 (2.8%) lower in 2016 had the MSAs been in states that banned MFN clauses in 2010. In 2016, the population in our sample that resided in MSAs with highly concentrated insurer markets was just under 75 million (23% of the US population). Hence, banning MFN clauses in all MSAs in our sample with highly concentrated insurer markets in 2010 would have generated savings on hospital expenditures in the range of $2.4 billion per year. Conclusions: Our empirical findings suggest banning MFN clauses between insurers and providers in highly concentrated insurer markets would improve competition and lead to lower prices and expenditures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsRealist evaluation (RE) is an emerging and promising research approach for evaluating integrated care, addressing what works, how, for whom, and in what circumstances.The rich philosophical foundation of RE, critical realism, can help to systematically unravel an integrated care program's initial theory prior to implementation, as a first step within RE.RE can be considered a robust methodological asset in integrated care research by facilitating a deeper level of insight into program functioning than traditional forms of evaluation do and by shaping a realist‐informed monitoring and evaluation process. Context: The complexity of integrated care and the need for transferable evaluation insights ask for a suitable evaluation paradigm. Realist evaluation (RE), underpinned by the philosophy of critical realism, is a theory‐driven approach that addresses what works, how, for whom, and in what circumstances. The current study illustrates the process needed for RE's first step: eliciting the initial program theory (IPT). The TARGET program, a Dutch primary care initiative to facilitate more integrated care for chronically ill patients, i.e., care that is efficient, tailored, and holistic, was taken as a real‐world case. Methods: An RE approach informed the phased IPT elicitation: (1) identifying an abstract theory framework; (2) formulating the preliminary IPT, building on the abstract theory and informed by previous scientific studies that underpin TARGET; and (3) refining the preliminary IPT, informed by RE expert interviews (n = 7). An RE heuristic tool, specifying the interplay between intervention‐context‐actors‐mechanisms‐outcomes (ICAMO) and retroductive reasoning, was applied to synthesize the underlying theory of individual TARGET components into TARGET's IPT. Findings: Separate but related IPTs were identified for the two main types of actors involved in TARGET: primary care professionals (PCPs) and patients. For both actors, two sorts of mechanisms are assumed to be activated by TARGET, which—via instrumental outcomes—contribute to long‐term quadruple aim targets. The first is confidence to enhance PCPs' person‐centered conversational skills and to increase patients' active engagement in TARGET. The second is mutual trust, between PCPs and patients and between PCPs and their network partners. A supportive context is assumed crucial for activating these mechanisms—for example, sufficient resources to invest in integrated care. Conclusions: Although the IPT elicitation process is time intensive and requires a mind shift, it facilitates a deeper insight into program functioning than accommodated by the prevailing experimental designs in integrated care. Furthermore, the design of a realist‐informed evaluation process can be informed by the IPT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]