Infectious diseases, immune status, and health insurance among child care providers in Houston, Texas

The objectives of this study were to compare female child-care providers with female university workers and with mothers of children in child-care centers for: (1) frequency of illness and work loss days due to infectious diseases, (2) prevalence of antibodies against measles, rubella, mumps, hepatitis B, hepatitis A, chickenpox and cytomegalovirus (CMV), and (3) status regarding health insurance and job benefits.^ Subjects from twenty child-care centers and twenty randomly selected departments of a university in Houston, Texas were studied in a cross-sectional fashion.^ A cluster sample of 281 female child-care providers from randomly selected child-care centers, a cluster sample of 286 university workers from randomly selected departments and a systematic sample of 198 mothers of children from randomly selected child-care centers.^ Main outcome measures were: (1) self-reported frequency of infectious diseases and number of work-days lost due to infectious diseases; (2) presence of antibodies in blood; and (3) self-reported health insurance and job benefits.^ In comparison to university workers, child-care providers reported a higher prevalence of infectious diseases in the past 30 days; lost three times more work-days due to infectious diseases; and were more likely to have anti-core antibodies against hepatitis B (odds ratio = 3.16 95% CI 1.27-7.85) and rubella (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.02-3.45). Child-care providers had less health insurance and job-related benefits than mothers of children attending child-care centers.^ Regulations designed to reduce transmission of vaccine and non-vaccine preventable diseases in child-care centers should be strictly enforced. In addition policies to improve health insurance and job benefits of child-care providers are urgently needed. ^

Hispanic incorporation and access to health care in Houston and Harris County, Texas: Adopting an Hispanic perspective to the Aday and Andersen model

This study examines Hispanic levels of incorporation and access to health care. Applying the Aday and Andersen framework for the study of access, the study examined the relationship between two levels of Hispanic incorporation into U.S. society, i.e., mainstream versus ethnic, and potential and realized measures of access to health care. Data for the study were drawn from a 1992 telephone survey of 600 randomly selected Hispanics in Houston and Harris County.^ The hypotheses tested were: (1) Hispanics who are incorporated into mainstream society are more likely to have better potential and realized access to health care than those who are incorporated into ethnic-group enclaves regardless of their socioeconomic status (SES), health status and health needs, and (2) there is no interaction between the levels of incorporation (mainstream or ethnic) and SES, health status, and health needs in predicting potential and realized access.^ The data analysis supported Hypothesis One for the two measures of potential access. The results of bivariate and multiple logistic regression analyses indicated that for Hispanics in Houston and Harris County, being in the "mainstream" incorporation category increased their potential access to care, having "health insurance" and a "regular place of care". For the selected measure of realized access, having a "regular check-up", the analysis did not demonstrate statistically significant differences in having a regular check-up among Hispanics incorporated in the ethnic or mainstream incorporation categories.^ Hypothesis Two, that there is no interaction between the levels of incorporation and socioeconomic characteristics, health status, and health needs in predicting potential and realized access among Hispanics was supported by the data. The results of the logistic regression analysis showed that, after adjusting for socioeconomic status, health status, and health needs, the association between "level of incorporation" and the two measures of potential access ("health insurance" and having a "usual place of care") was not modified by the control variables nor by their interaction with level of incorporation. That is, the effect of incorporation on Hispanics' health insurance coverage, and having a usual place of care, was homogenous across Hispanics with different SES and health status.^ The main research implication of this dissertation is the employment of a theoretical framework for the assessment of cultural factors essential to research on migrating heterogeneous subpopulations. It also provided strategies to solve practical and methodological difficulties in the secondary analyses of data on these populations. ^

FAMILY MEDICINE RESIDENT SURVEY ON HEALTH PROMOTION (PERSONAL EXPECTATIONS, BEHAVIORS, PERCEIVED SELF-EFFICACY, COGNITIVE ASSESSMENT, OUTCOME EXPECTANCY)

This study was designed to test the theoretical predictors of personal efficacy expectations among family medicine resident physicians for helping their patients change thirteen high risk health behaviors. A survey questionnaire was sent to 781 family medicine residents in the six state south central region. The response rate was 60 percent. The hypothesized relationship between lower levels of difficulty and higher personal efficacy expectations was supported by the data. Effort was a significant predictor of perceived self efficacy for health behaviors considered less difficult to change. Situational support did not prove to be a significant predictor for many of the health behaviors. Rate and pattern of success were consistent and significant predictors of perceived self efficacy for helping patients change all thirteen of the health behaviors. Modeling of effective methods by faculty was a significant predictor of efficacy expectations for several but not all of the behaviors. Personal modeling was a significant predictor of perceived efficacy for helping patients change behaviors related to alcohol misuse and exercise. The respondents personally modeled positive health behaviors more consistently than their older colleagues or the general population.^ The results of this study lend substantially to the usefulness of the cognitive-behavioral theory of perceived self efficacy and provide a mechanism for assessing the predictors of personal efficacy expectations of family medicine resident physicians. The findings are expected to have direct implications for faculty to institute systematic programs of interventions designed to increase residents' perceptions of efficacy in facilitating more positive health behaviors among their patients. ^