Conceptual Bases of the Planning Process in Family Preservation/Family Support State Plans

Congress and the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) intend for the Family Preservation and Support Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-66) to catalyze major reforms in state human services systems. DHHS and numerous other institutions developed conceptual and procedural guidance for the states' planning processes. Review of the planning dimensions of participation and expertise reveals that major emphases on stakeholder participation and technical planning processes obscure the need for expertise in family preservation and family support.

The effect of the shift from HMO to PPO plans on the prevalence of hospital bad debt in the insured population: A case study in two Houston-area hospitals

In spite of the dramatic increase and general concern with U.S. hospital bad debt expense (AMNews, January 12, 2004; Philadelphia Business Journal, April 30, 2004; WSJ, July 23, 2004), there appears to be little available analysis of the precise sources and causes of its growth. This is particularly true in terms of the potential contribution of insured patients to bad debt expense in light of the recent shift in managed care from health maintenance organization (HMO) plans to preferred provider organization (PPO) plans (Kaiser Annual Survey Report, 2003). This study examines and attempts to explain the recent dramatic growth in bad debt expense by focusing on and analyzing data from two Houston-area hospital providers within one healthcare system. In contrast to prior studies in which self-pay was found to be the primary source of hospital bad debt expense (Saywell, R. M., et al., 1989; Zollinger, T. W., 1991; Weissman, Joel S., et al., 1999), this study hypothesizes that the growing hospital bad debt expense is mainly due to the shifting trend away from HMOs to PPOs as a conscious decision by employers to share costs with employees. Compared to HMO plans, the structure of PPOs includes higher co-pays, coinsurance, and deductibles for the patient-pay portion of medical bills, creating the potential for an increase in bad debt for hospital providers (from a case study). This bad debt expense has a greater impact in the community hospital than in the Texas Medical Center hospital. ^

A model for use by local public health departments to evaluate pandemic influenza plans

The events of the 1990's and early 2000's demonstrated the need for effective planning and response to natural and man-made disasters. One of those potential natural disasters is pandemic flu. Once defined, the CDC stated that program, or plan, effectiveness is improved through the process of program evaluation. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1999) Program evaluation should be accomplished not only periodically, but in the course of routine administration of the program. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1999) Accomplishing this task for a "rare, but significant event" is challenging. (Herbold, John R., PhD., 2008) To address this challenge, the RAND Corporation (under contract to the CDC) developed the "Facilitated Look-Backs" approach that was tested and validated at the state level. (Aledort et al., 2006).^ Nevertheless, no comprehensive and generally applicable pandemic influenza program evaluation tool or model is readily found for use at the local public health department level. This project developed such a model based on the "Facilitated Look-Backs" approach developed by RAND Corporation. (Aledort et al., 2006) Modifications to the RAND model included stakeholder additions, inclusion of all six CDC program evaluation steps, and suggestions for incorporating pandemic flu response plans in seasonal flu management implementation. Feedback on the model was then obtained from three LPHD's—one rural, one suburban, and one urban. These recommendations were incorporated into the final model. Feedback from the sites also supported the assumption that this model promotes the effective and efficient evaluation of both pandemic flu and seasonal flu response by reducing redundant evaluations of pandemic flu plans, seasonal flu plans, and funding requirement accountability. Site feedback also demonstrated that the model is comprehensive and flexible, so it can be adapted and applied to different LPHD needs and settings. It also stimulates evaluation of the major issues associated with pandemic flu planning. ^ The next phase in evaluating this model should be to apply it in a program evaluation of one or more LPHD's seasonal flu response that incorporates pandemic flu response plans.^

Goals, plans, and behavior changes: A relevant part of the post-treatment cancer experience

Background. Colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors have to manage treatment side effects, psychosocial issues, and co-morbidities, as well as modify their lifestyles to decrease risk of recurrence and prolong life. Identifying survivors’ goals and key factors that influence their goals will highlight the issues cancer survivors face post-treatment and the resources needed to help them engage in health-promoting behaviors.^ Objectives and methods. This dissertation examines the health-related goals of post-treatment CRC survivors using two studies: (1) a qualitative study to identify and describe the health goals of CRC survivors during the transition from active treatment to post-treatment survivorship and follow-up care; and (2) a cross-sectional survey to identify CRC survivors’ goals, and key factors that influence their goals.^ Results. (1) The 41 qualitative interviews indicated participants’ health-related goals were to be healthy, get back to normal, and not have a cancer recurrence. Most of the CRC survivors reported they maintained healthy behaviors, made healthy behavior changes, or had goals to change their behavior. Respondents were empowered to improve their health by maintaining follow-up care and regular health screenings, and many were managing treatment side effects in an effort to improve functional abilities. (2) The cross-sectional study found that CRC survivors’ most prevalent goals were related to healthy behaviors (i.e., eat a healthy diet and engage in physical activity), and cancer care or disease management (i.e., keep up with health screenings and monitor symptoms). Goals that survivors identified as important were similar to goals they perceived were important to their providers (i.e., goals related to cancer care, disease management). Certain goals were statistically associated with age, barriers to achieving goals, social support and health-related quality of life.^ Conclusions. CRC survivors have health-promoting goals post-treatment and are interested in making health behavior changes. Goals ranged from cancer care/surveillance and disease management to healthy lifestyle modifications. Patients may need help resolving or managing treatment side effects or co-morbidities prior to implementing health promoting behaviors. Healthcare providers’ recommendations may be a powerful resource to encourage survivors to engage in health-promoting behaviors. Self-management and goal setting support could be an appropriate strategy to assist patients with achieving their post-treatment health goals.^

"I understood what she meant when she said '21st century medicine'": A qualitative analysis of patient responses for plans for colorectal cancer screening following a recommendation from their physician

Although physician recommendation has been significantly associated with colorectal cancer screening (CRCS), it still does not motivate all patients to get CRCS. Although improved physician recommendation for CRCS has been shown to increase patient CRCS screening, questions remain about what elements of that discussion may lead to screening. The objective of this study is to describe patients' perceptions and interpretations about their physician's recommendation for CRCS during their annual wellness exam. A subset of patients (n=51) participating in a supplement study of a behavioral intervention trial designed to increase CRCS completed a follow-up, open-ended interview two to four weeks after their annual wellness visit. Using qualitative methods, transcripts of these interviews were analyzed. Findings suggest that most patients would follow their physician's recommendation for CRCS despite not engaging in much discussion. Patients may refrain from CRCS discussion because of a commitment to CRCS, awareness of screening guidelines, and trust in physician's honesty and beneficence. Yet many patients left their wellness exams with questions, refraining because of future plans to consult with their physicians, perceived time constraints or a lack of a patient-physician relationship. If patients are leaving their wellness exams with unanswered questions, interventions should prepare physicians for patient reticence, teaching physicians how to assure patients that CRCS is a primary care activity where all questions and concerns, including cost and scheduling, may be resolved.^