Cooperative Extension as a Framework for Health Extension: The Michigan State University Model.

PROBLEM: The Affordable Care Act charged the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to create the Primary Care Extension Program, but did not fund this effort. The idea to work through health extension agents to support health care delivery systems was based on the nationally known Cooperative Extension System (CES). Instead of creating new infrastructure in health care, the CES is an ideal vehicle for increasing health-related research and primary care delivery. APPROACH: The CES, a long-standing component of the land-grant university system, features a sustained infrastructure for providing education to communities. The Michigan State University (MSU) Model of Health Extension offers another means of developing a National Primary Care Extension Program that is replicable in part because of the presence of the CES throughout the United States. A partnership between the MSU College of Human Medicine and MSU Extension formed in 2014, emphasizing the promotion and support of human health research. The MSU Model of Health Extension includes the following strategies: building partnerships, preparing MSU Extension educators for participation in research, increasing primary care patient referrals and enrollment in health programs, and exploring innovative funding. OUTCOMES: Since the formation of the MSU Model of Health Extension, researchers and extension professionals have made 200+ connections, and grants have afforded savings in salary costs. NEXT STEPS: The MSU College of Human Medicine and MSU Extension partnership can serve as a model to promote health partnerships nationwide between CES services within land-grant universities and academic health centers or community-based medical schools.

A randomized trial of behavioral management for continence with older rural women.

Urinary incontinence (UI) is a commonly underreported and underdiagnosed condition. The purpose of this trial was to implement and evaluate behavioral management for continence (BMC), an intervention to manage symptoms of UI with older rural women in their homes. Participants were randomized into BMC or a control group, and 178 were followed for between 6 and 24 months. The intervention involved self-monitoring, bladder training, and pelvic muscle exercise with biofeedback. The primary outcome variable-severity of urine loss-was evaluated by pad test. Secondary variables were episodes of urine loss, micturition frequency, voiding interval, quality of life, and subjective report of severity. Urine loss severity at baseline evaluation was not significantly different in the two groups. But using the generalized linear mixed model analysis, at the four follow-ups, severity of urine loss, episodes of urine loss, quality of life, and subjective report of severity were significantly different. At 2 years the BMC group UI severity decreased by 61%; the control group severity increased by 184%. Self-monitoring and bladder training accounted for most of the improvement. The results support the use of simple strategies based on bladder diaries before implementing more complex treatments.