Policy analysis of Texas Senate Bill 532 and the regulation of nurse practitioners in the convenience care model

Background. Retail clinics, also called convenience care clinics, have become a rapidly growing trend since their initial development in 2000. These clinics are coupled within a larger retail operation and are generally located in "big-box" discount stores such as Wal-mart or Target, grocery stores such as Publix or H-E-B, or in retail pharmacies such as CVS or Walgreen's (Deloitte Center for Health Solutions, 2008). Care is typically provided by nurse practitioners. Research indicates that this new health care delivery system reduces cost, raises quality, and provides a means of access to the uninsured population (e.g., Deloitte Center for Health Solutions, 2008; Convenient Care Association, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c; Hansen-Turton, Miller, Nash, Ryan, Counts, 2007; Salinsky, 2009; Scott, 2006; Ahmed & Fincham, 2010). Some healthcare analysts even suggest that retail clinics offer a feasible solution to the shortage of primary care physicians facing the nation (AHRQ Health Care Innovations Exchange, 2010). ^ The development and performance of retail clinics is heavily dependent upon individual state policies regulating NPs. Texas currently has one of the most highly regulated practice environments for NPs (Stout & Elton, 2007; Hammonds, 2008). In September 2009, Texas passed Senate Bill 532 addressing the scope of practice of nurse practitioners in the convenience care model. In comparison to other states, this law still heavily regulates nurse practitioners. However, little research has been conducted to evaluate the impact of state laws regulating nurse practitioners on the development and performance of retail clinics. ^ Objectives. (1). To describe the potential impact that SB 532 has on retail clinic performance. (2). To discuss the effectiveness, efficiency, and equity of the convenience care model. (3). To describe possible alternatives to Texas' nurse practitioner scope of practice guidelines as delineated in Texas Senate Bill 532. (4). To describe the type of nurse practitioner state regulation (i.e. independent, light, moderate, or heavy) that best promotes the convenience care model. ^ Methods. State regulations governing nurse practitioners can be characterized as independent, light, moderate, and heavy. Four state NP regulatory types and retail clinic performance were compared and contrasted to that of Texas regulations using Dunn and Aday's theoretical models for conducting policy analysis and evaluating healthcare systems. Criteria for measurement included effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. Comparison states were Arizona (Independent), Minnesota (Light), Massachusetts (Moderate), and Florida (Heavy). ^ Results. A comparative states analysis of Texas SB 532 and alternative NP scope of practice guidelines among the four states: Arizona, Florida, Massachusetts, and Minnesota, indicated that SB 532 has minimal potential to affect the shortage of primary care providers in the state. Although SB 532 may increase the number of NPs a physician may supervise, NPs are still heavily restricted in their scope of practice and limited in their ability to act as primary care providers. Arizona's example of independent NP practice provided the best alternative to affect the shortage of PCPs in Texas as evidenced by a lower uninsured rate and less ED visits per 1,000 population. A survey of comparison states suggests that retail clinics thrive in states that more heavily restrict NP scope of practice as opposed to those that are more permissive, with the exception of Arizona. An analysis of effectiveness, efficiency, and equity of the convenience care model indicates that retail clinics perform well in the areas of effectiveness and efficiency; but, fall short in the area of equity. ^ Conclusion. Texas Senate 532 represents an incremental step towards addressing the problem of a shortage of PCPs in the state. A comparative policy analysis of the other four states with varying degrees of NP scope of practice indicate that a more aggressive policy allowing for independent NP practice will be needed to achieve positive changes in health outcomes. Retail clinics pose a temporary solution to the shortage of PCPs and will need to expand their locations to poorer regions and incorporate some chronic care to obtain measurable health outcomes. ^

INFANT MORTALITY IN THE MEXICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY: AN ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENTIALS IN INFANT, NEONATAL, AND POSTNEONATAL MORTALITY BY ETHNICITY AND PARENTAL NATIVITY, 1974-75 SINGLE LIVE BIRTH COHORT, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

The paradoxically low infant mortality rates for Mexican Americans in Texas have been attributed to inaccuracies in vital registration and idiosyncracies in Mexican migration in rural areas along the U.S.-Mexico border. This study examined infant (IMR), neonatal (NMR), and postneonatal (PNMR) mortality rates of Mexican Americans in an urban, non-border setting, using linked birth and death records of the 1974-75 single live birth cohort (N = 68,584) in Harris County, Texas, which includes the city of Houston and is reported to have nearly complete birth and death registration. The use of parental nativity with the traditional Spanish surname criterion made it possible to distinguish infants of Mexican-born immigrants from those of Blacks, Anglos, other Hispanics, and later-generation, more Anglicized Mexican Americans. Mortality rates were analyzed by ethnicity, parental nativity, and cause of death, with respect to birth weight, birth order, maternal age, legitimacy status, and time of first prenatal care.^ While overall IMRs showed Spanish surname rates slightly higher than Anglo rates, infants of Mexican-born immigrants had much lower NMRs than did Anglos, even for moderately low birth weight infants. However, among infants under 1500 grams, presumably unable to be discharged home in the neonatal period, Mexican Americans had the highest NMR. The inconsistency suggested unreported deaths for Mexican American low birth weight infants after hospital discharge. The PNMR of infants of Mexican immigrants was also lower than for Anglos, and the usual mortality differentials were reversed: high-risk categories of high birth order, high maternal age, and late/no prenatal care had the lowest PNMRs. Since these groups' characteristics are congruent with those of low-income migrants, the data suggested the possibility of migration losses. Cause of death analysis suggested that prematurity and birth injuries are greater problems than heretofore recognized among Mexican Americans, and that home births and "shoebox burials" may be unrecorded even in an urban setting.^ Caution is advised in the interpretation of infant mortality rates for a Spanish surname population of Mexican origin, even in an urban, non-border area with reportedly excellent birth and death registration. ^