Primary Care-Based Housing Program Reduced Outpatient Visits; Patients Reported Mental And Physical Health Benefits.

Screening for housing instability has increased as health systems move toward value-based care, but evidence on how health care-based housing interventions affect patient outcomes comes mostly from interventions that address homelessness. In this mixed-methods evaluation of a primary care-based housing program in Boston, Massachusetts, for 1,139 patients with housing-related needs that extend beyond homelessness, we found associations between program participation and health care use. Patients enrolled in the program between October 2018 and March 2021 had 2.5 fewer primary care visits and 3.6 fewer outpatient visits per year compared with those who were not enrolled, including fewer social work, behavioral health, psychiatry, and urgent care visits. Patients in the program who obtained new housing reported mental and physical health benefits, and some expressed having stronger connections to their health care providers. Many patients attributed improvements in mental health to compassionate support provided by the program's housing advocates. Health care-based housing interventions should address the needs of patients facing imminent housing crises. Such interventions hold promise for redressing health inequities and restoring dignity to the connections between historically marginalized patient populations and health care institutions.

Sustaining and scaling a clinic-based approach to address health-related social needs.

Objective: Scaling evidence-based interventions (EBIs) from pilot phase remains a pressing challenge in efforts to address health-related social needs (HRSN) and improve population health. This study describes an innovative approach to sustaining and further spreading DULCE (Developmental Understanding and Legal Collaboration for Everyone), a universal EBI that supports pediatric clinics to implement the American Academy of Pediatrics' Bright Futures™ guidelines for infants' well-child visits (WCVs) and introduces a new quality measure of families' HRSN resource use. Methods: Between August 2018 and December 2019, seven teams in four communities in three states implemented DULCE: four teams that had been implementing DULCE since 2016 and three new teams. Teams received monthly data reports and individualized continuous quality improvement (CQI) coaching for six months, followed by lighter-touch support via quarterly group calls (peer-to-peer learning and coaching). Run charts were used to study outcome (percent of infants that received all WCVs on time) and process measures (percent of families screened for HRSN and connected to resources). Results: Integrating three new sites was associated with an initial regression of outcome: 41% of infants received all WCVs on time, followed by improvement to 48%. Process performance was sustained or improved: among 989 participating families, 84% (831) received 1-month WCVs on time; 96% (946) were screened for seven HRSN, 54% (508) had HRSN, and 87% (444) used HRSN resources. Conclusion: An innovative, lighter-touch CQI approach to a second phase of scale-up resulted in sustainment or improvements in most processes and outcomes. Outcomes-oriented CQI measures (family receipt of resources) are an important addition to more traditional process-oriented indicators.

Benefits of a Universal Intervention in Pediatric Medical Homes to Identify and Address Health-Related Social Needs: An Observational Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Compare rates of identification of families with health-related social needs (HRSN) and connection to resources by targeted versus universal, pediatric clinic-based interventions. METHODS: This observational cohort study included 1677 families that received care (January 2017-May 2020) at 8 pediatric medical homes in 3 states implementing Developmental Understanding and Legal Collaboration for Everyone (DULCE)-a universal, evidence-based intervention that addresses HRSN for families with infants. We divided the cohort into 2 groups using 4 common risk criteria in targeted programs serving families with infants; 862 families had no high-risk characteristics (Risk Criteria Absent [RCA]); 815 families had high-risk characteristics (Risk Criteria Present [RCP]). We compared both groups by prevalence of HRSN and connection to supports and estimated the performance of high-risk criteria to identify HRSN. RESULTS: DULCE identified 990 families with HRSN, compared to an estimated 274 families, if a risk-targeted approach had been used. More than half of RCA families had HRSN, 11% used resources at enrollment, and 42.5% accessed resources through DULCE. Simultaneously, 68.8% of RCP families had ongoing HRSN although 46.0% used resources at enrollment; 63.9% accessed additional resources through DULCE. Commonly used risk criteria had a sensitivity of 55.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.2%-58.5%), specificity of 61.1% (95% CI, 57.2%-64.9%), positive predictive value of 68.8% (95% CI, 65.4%-72.0%), and negative predictive value of 46.9% (95% CI, 43.5%-50.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Risk criteria commonly used to identify families for targeted interventions are imperfect proxies for HRSN. Universal, medical home-based approaches can play a key role in supporting families with infants.

Choosing the best child assessment instrument for a specific context: a methodology for engaging local experts applied in Chile.

OBJECTIVE: Chile is considering expanding its system for early childhood development to include 5- to 7-year olds, but it has no consensus about how to identify at-risk children. This study facilitated a process for incorporating local priorities and best practices to choose a child assessment instrument. METHODS: Using the priority-setting method of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI), 21 Chilean experts defined and weighted ideal assessment instrument characteristics; 130 instruments were scored according to how closely they matched experts' ideal definitions. Instruments were ranked by score under different inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Experts weighted instrument quality highest (95 on 1-100 scale), followed by administration site (87), domains assessed (82), cost (80), administrator (76), Spanish version (75), time (75), and prior use in Chile (53). Experts agreed that an ideal instrument (1) would reliably assess language, socioemotional well-being, mental health, and parenting abilities, (2) could be administered at schools or home, and (3) could be administered by teachers or parents. No single instrument matched all Chilean priorities. Three instruments met 11 of 13 priorities (age; quality; administration at school, home, or waiting rooms; assess language and socioemotional domains; administered by teachers, parents, or psychologists; time ≤30 minutes). Including mental health or parenting abilities ranked instruments whose composite scores were 35% lower. CONCLUSION: Decisions about how to assess children at developmental risk should be informed by local context. The CHNRI method provided a useful process that made explicit mutually exclusive priorities, quantified trade-offs of different assessment strategies, and identified 3 of the instruments that best met local needs and priorities.

Lessons from the Chilean earthquake: how a human rights framework facilitates disaster response.

The earthquake of 2010 in Chile holds important lessons about how a rights-based public health system can guide disaster response to protect vulnerable populations. This article tells the story of Chile Grows With You (Chile Crece Contigo), an intersectoral system created three years before the earthquake for protection of child rights and development, and its role in the disaster response. The creation of Chile Grows With You with an explicit rights-oriented mandate established intersectoral mechanisms, relationships, and common understanding between governmental groups at the national and local levels. After the earthquake, Chile Grows With You organized its activities according to its founding principles: it provided universal access and support for all Chilean children, with special attention and services for those at greatest risk. This tiered approach involved public health and education materials for all children and families; epidemiologic data for local planners about children in their municipalities at-risk before the earthquake; and an instrument developed to assist in the assessment and intervention of children put at risk by the earthquake. This disaster response illustrates how a rights-based framework defined and operationalized in times of stability facilitated organization, prioritization, and sustained action to protect and support children and families in the acute aftermath of the earthquake, despite a change in government from a left-wing to a right-wing president, and into the early recovery period.