Local Health Departments as Clinical Safety Net in Rural Communities

Introduction: The appropriate role of local health departments (LHDs) as a clinical service provider remains a salient issue. This study examines differences in clinical service provision among rural/urban LHDs for early periodic screening, diagnosis, and treatment (EPSDT) and prenatal care services...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hale, Nathan, Klaiman, Tamar, Beatty, Kate E., Meit, Michael B.
Published: Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:https://dc.etsu.edu/etsu-works/6824
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2016.05.012
id ndltd-ETSU-oai-dc.etsu.edu-etsu-works-8076
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-ETSU-oai-dc.etsu.edu-etsu-works-80762020-07-20T05:05:21Z Local Health Departments as Clinical Safety Net in Rural Communities Hale, Nathan Klaiman, Tamar Beatty, Kate E. Meit, Michael B. Introduction: The appropriate role of local health departments (LHDs) as a clinical service provider remains a salient issue. This study examines differences in clinical service provision among rural/urban LHDs for early periodic screening, diagnosis, and treatment (EPSDT) and prenatal care services. Methods: Data collected from the 2013 National Association of County and City Health Officials Profile of Local Health Departments Survey was used to conduct a cross-sectional analysis of rural/urban differences in clinical service provision by LHDs. Profile data were linked with the 2013 Area Health Resource File to derive other county-level measures. Data analysis was conducted in 2015. Results: Approximately 35% of LHDs in the analysis provided EPSDT services directly and 26% provided prenatal care. LHDs reporting no others providing these services in the community were four times more likely to report providing EPSDT services directly and six times more likely to provide prenatal care services directly. Rural LHDs were more likely to provide EPSDT (OR=1.46, 95% CI=1.07, 2.00) and prenatal care (OR=2.43, 95% CI=1.70, 3.47) services than urban LHDs. The presence of a Federally Qualified Health Center in the county was associated with reduced clinical service provision by LHDs for EPSDT and prenatal care. Conclusions: Findings suggest that many LHDs in rural communities remain a clinical service provider and a critical component of the healthcare safety net. The unique position of rural LHDs should be considered in national policy discussions around the organization and delivery of public health services, particularly as they relate to clinical services. 2016-11-01T07:00:00Z text https://dc.etsu.edu/etsu-works/6824 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2016.05.012 ETSU Faculty Works Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University local health departments rural Health Services Management and Policy Public Health
collection NDLTD
sources NDLTD
topic local health departments
rural
Health Services Management and Policy
Public Health
spellingShingle local health departments
rural
Health Services Management and Policy
Public Health
Hale, Nathan
Klaiman, Tamar
Beatty, Kate E.
Meit, Michael B.
Local Health Departments as Clinical Safety Net in Rural Communities
description Introduction: The appropriate role of local health departments (LHDs) as a clinical service provider remains a salient issue. This study examines differences in clinical service provision among rural/urban LHDs for early periodic screening, diagnosis, and treatment (EPSDT) and prenatal care services. Methods: Data collected from the 2013 National Association of County and City Health Officials Profile of Local Health Departments Survey was used to conduct a cross-sectional analysis of rural/urban differences in clinical service provision by LHDs. Profile data were linked with the 2013 Area Health Resource File to derive other county-level measures. Data analysis was conducted in 2015. Results: Approximately 35% of LHDs in the analysis provided EPSDT services directly and 26% provided prenatal care. LHDs reporting no others providing these services in the community were four times more likely to report providing EPSDT services directly and six times more likely to provide prenatal care services directly. Rural LHDs were more likely to provide EPSDT (OR=1.46, 95% CI=1.07, 2.00) and prenatal care (OR=2.43, 95% CI=1.70, 3.47) services than urban LHDs. The presence of a Federally Qualified Health Center in the county was associated with reduced clinical service provision by LHDs for EPSDT and prenatal care. Conclusions: Findings suggest that many LHDs in rural communities remain a clinical service provider and a critical component of the healthcare safety net. The unique position of rural LHDs should be considered in national policy discussions around the organization and delivery of public health services, particularly as they relate to clinical services.
author Hale, Nathan
Klaiman, Tamar
Beatty, Kate E.
Meit, Michael B.
author_facet Hale, Nathan
Klaiman, Tamar
Beatty, Kate E.
Meit, Michael B.
author_sort Hale, Nathan
title Local Health Departments as Clinical Safety Net in Rural Communities
title_short Local Health Departments as Clinical Safety Net in Rural Communities
title_full Local Health Departments as Clinical Safety Net in Rural Communities
title_fullStr Local Health Departments as Clinical Safety Net in Rural Communities
title_full_unstemmed Local Health Departments as Clinical Safety Net in Rural Communities
title_sort local health departments as clinical safety net in rural communities
publisher Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University
publishDate 2016
url https://dc.etsu.edu/etsu-works/6824
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2016.05.012
work_keys_str_mv AT halenathan localhealthdepartmentsasclinicalsafetynetinruralcommunities
AT klaimantamar localhealthdepartmentsasclinicalsafetynetinruralcommunities
AT beattykatee localhealthdepartmentsasclinicalsafetynetinruralcommunities
AT meitmichaelb localhealthdepartmentsasclinicalsafetynetinruralcommunities
_version_ 1719329719455842304