Physician Training in Cancer Prevention and Control: A Population Health Imperative.

Cancer is the second leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the U.S. Although reducing the number of new cancer cases is a national health goal, the continuing growth of the older adult population ensures that the burden of cancer will increase. Despite documentation of the shortage of oncologists to meet the growing need, relatively limited attention has been focused on increasing the physician workforce trained in the prevention and control of cancer. The existing physician workforce with such specialized training in cancer prevention and control is small, aging, increasing at a low rate, and likely to decrease because of an imbalance between retiring physicians and new entrants. This commentary addresses the imperative for increasing the number of physicians trained in preventive medicine with a specialization in cancer prevention and control by first providing a brief overview of U.S. cancer morbidity and mortality, then describing the status of, and trends in, physician training in cancer prevention and control, and concluding by suggesting opportunities for bolstering physician training in cancer prevention and control.

Prevalence of dementia subtypes in United States Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, 2011-2013.

INTRODUCTION: Rapid growth of the older adult population requires greater epidemiologic characterization of dementia. We developed national prevalence estimates of diagnosed dementia and subtypes in the highest risk United States (US) population. METHODS: We analyzed Centers for Medicare & Medicaid administrative enrollment and claims data for 100% of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries enrolled during 2011-2013 and age ≥68 years as of December 31, 2013 (n = 21.6 million). RESULTS: Over 3.1 million (14.4%) beneficiaries had a claim for a service and/or treatment for any dementia subtype. Dementia not otherwise specified was the most common diagnosis (present in 92.9%). The most common subtype was Alzheimer's (43.5%), followed by vascular (14.5%), Lewy body (5.4%), frontotemporal (1.0%), and alcohol induced (0.7%). The prevalence of other types of diagnosed dementia was 0.2%. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to document concurrent prevalence of primary dementia subtypes among this US population. The findings can assist in prioritizing dementia research, clinical services, and caregiving resources.

Prevention of chronic disease in the 21st century: elimination of the leading preventable causes of premature death and disability in the USA.

With non-communicable conditions accounting for nearly two-thirds of deaths worldwide, the emergence of chronic diseases as the predominant challenge to global health is undisputed. In the USA, chronic diseases are the main causes of poor health, disability, and death, and account for most of health-care expenditures. The chronic disease burden in the USA largely results from a short list of risk factors--including tobacco use, poor diet and physical inactivity (both strongly associated with obesity), excessive alcohol consumption, uncontrolled high blood pressure, and hyperlipidaemia--that can be effectively addressed for individuals and populations. Increases in the burden of chronic diseases are attributable to incidence and prevalence of leading chronic conditions and risk factors (which occur individually and in combination), and population demographics, including ageing and health disparities. To effectively and equitably address the chronic disease burden, public health and health-care systems need to deploy integrated approaches that bundle strategies and interventions, address many risk factors and conditions simultaneously, create population-wide changes, help the population subgroups most affected, and rely on implementation by many sectors, including public-private partnerships and involvement from all stakeholders. To help to meet the chronic disease burden, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) uses four cross-cutting strategies: (1) epidemiology and surveillance to monitor trends and inform programmes; (2) environmental approaches that promote health and support healthy behaviours; (3) health system interventions to improve the effective use of clinical and other preventive services; and (4) community resources linked to clinical services that sustain improved management of chronic conditions. Establishment of community conditions to support healthy behaviours and promote effective management of chronic conditions will deliver healthier students to schools, healthier workers to employers and businesses, and a healthier population to the health-care system. Collectively, these four strategies will prevent the occurrence of chronic diseases, foster early detection and slow disease progression in people with chronic conditions, reduce complications, support an improved quality of life, and reduce demand on the health-care system. Of crucial importance, with strengthened collaboration between the public health and health-care sectors, the health-care system better uses prevention and early detection services, and population health is improved and sustained by solidifying collaborations between communities and health-care providers. This collaborative approach will improve health equity by building communities that promote health rather than disease, have more accessible and direct care, and focus the health-care system on improving population health.

Law, public health, and the diabetes epidemic.

The prevalence of new cases of diabetes continues to increase, and the health burden for those with diabetes remains high. This is attributable, in part, to low adoption of evidence-based interventions for diabetes prevention and control. Law is a critical tool for health improvement, yet assessments reported in this paper indicate that federal, state, and local laws give only partial support to guidelines and evidence-based interventions relevant to diabetes prevention and control. Public health practitioners and policymakers who are concerned with the human, fiscal, and economic costs of the epidemic can explore new ways to translate the evidence base for diabetes prevention and control into effective laws and policies.

Multiple chronic conditions among Medicare beneficiaries: state-level variations in prevalence, utilization, and cost, 2011.

OBJECTIVES: Individuals with multiple (>2) chronic conditions (MCC) present many challenges to the health care system, such as effective coordination of care and cost containment. To assist health policy makers and to fill research gaps on MCC, we describe state-level variation of MCC among Medicare beneficiaries, with a focus on those with six or more conditions. METHODS: Using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services administrative data for 2011, we characterized a beneficiary as having MCC by counting the number of conditions from a set of fifteen conditions, which were identified using diagnosis codes on the claims. The study population included fee-for-service beneficiaries residing in the 50 U.S. states and Washington, DC. RESULTS: Among beneficiaries with six or more chronic conditions, prevalence rates were lowest in Alaska and Wyoming (7%) and highest in Florida and New Jersey (18%); readmission rates were lowest in Utah (19%) and highest in Washington, DC (31%); the number of emergency department visits per beneficiary were lowest in New York and Florida (1.6) and highest in Washington, DC (2.7); and Medicare spending per beneficiary was lowest in Hawaii ($24,086) and highest in Maryland, Washington, DC, and Louisiana (over $37,000). CONCLUSION: These findings expand upon prior research on MCC among Medicare beneficiaries at the national level and demonstrate considerable state-level variation in the prevalence, health care utilization, and Medicare spending for beneficiaries with MCC. State-level data on MCC is important for decision making aimed at improved program planning, financing, and delivery of care for individuals with MCC.

Managing multiple chronic conditions: a strategic framework for improving health outcomes and quality of life.

The escalating problem of multiple chronic conditions (MCC) among Americans is now a major public health and medical challenge, associated with suboptimal health outcomes and rising health-care expenses. Despite this problem's growth, the delivery of health services has continued to employ outmoded "siloed" approaches that focus on individual chronic diseases. We describe an action-oriented framework--developed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services with additional input provided by stakeholder organizations--that outlines national strategies for maximizing care coordination and for improving health and quality of life for individuals with MCC. We note how the framework's potential can be optimized through some of the provisions of the new Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and through public-private partnerships.

The scientific basis for law as a public health tool.

Systematic reviews are generating valuable scientific knowledge about the impact of public health laws, but this knowledge is not readily accessible to policy makers. We identified 65 systematic reviews of studies on the effectiveness of 52 public health laws: 27 of those laws were found effective, 23 had insufficient evidence to judge effectiveness, 1 was harmful, and 1 was found to be ineffective. This is a valuable, scientific foundation-that uses the highest relevant standard of evidence-for the role of law as a public health tool. Additional primary studies and systematic reviews are needed to address significant gaps in knowledge about the laws' public health impact, as are energetic, sustained initiatives to make the findings available to public policy makers.

Law, liability, and public health emergencies.

According to many experts, a public health emergency arising from an influenza pandemic, bioterrorism attack, or natural disaster is likely to develop in the next few years. Meeting the public health and medical response needs created by such an emergency will likely involve volunteers, health care professionals, public and private hospitals and clinics, vaccine manufacturers, governmental authorities, and many others. Conducting response activities in emergency circumstances may give rise to numerous issues of liability, and medical professionals and other potential responders have expressed concern about liability exposure. Providers may face inadequate resources, an insufficient number of qualified personnel, overwhelming demand for services, and other barriers to providing optimal treatment, which could lead to injury or even death in some cases. This article describes the different theories of liability that may be used by plaintiffs and the sources of immunity that are available to public health emergency responders in the public sector, private sector, and as volunteers. It synthesizes the existing immunity landscape and analyzes its gaps. Finally, the authors suggest consideration of the option of a comprehensive immunity provision that addresses liability protection for all health care providers during public health emergencies and that, consequently, assists in improving community emergency response efforts.

Addressing gaps in health care sector legal preparedness for public health emergencies.

Health care providers and their legal counsel play pivotal roles in preparing for and responding to public health emergencies. Lawyers representing hospitals, health systems, and other health care provider components are being called upon to answer complex legal questions regarding public health preparedness issues that most providers have not previously faced. Many of these issues are legal issues with which public health officials should be familiar, and that can serve as a starting point for cross-sector legal preparedness planning involving both the public health and health care communities. This article examines legal issues that health care providers face in preparing for public health emergencies, and steps that providers, their legal counsel, and others can take to address those issues and to strengthen community preparedness.

Mutual aid agreements: essential legal tools for public health preparedness and response.

Mutual aid is the sharing of supplies, equipment, personnel, and information across political boundaries. States must have agreements in place to ensure mutual aid to facilitate effective responses to public health emergencies and to detect and control potential infectious disease outbreaks. The 2005 hurricanes triggered activation of the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC), a mutual aid agreement among the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands. Although EMAC facilitated the movement of an unprecedented amount of mutual aid to disaster areas, inadequacies in the response demonstrated a need for improvement. Mutual aid may also be beneficial in circumstances where EMAC is not activated. We discuss the importance of mutual aid, examine obstacles, and identify legal "gaps" that must be filled to strengthen preparedness.

Strengthening capacity in developing countries for evidence-based public health: the data for decision-making project.

Public health officials and the communities they serve need to: identify priority health problems; formulate effective health policies; respond to public health emergencies; select, implement, and evaluate cost-effective interventions to prevent and control disease and injury; and allocate human and financial resources. Despite agreement that rational, data-based decisions will lead to improved health outcomes, many public health decisions appear to be made intuitively or politically. During 1991-1996, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention implemented the US Agency for International Development funded Data for Decision-Making (DDM) Project. DDM goals were to: (a) strengthen the capacity of decision makers to identify data needs for solving problems and to interpret and use data appropriately for public health decisions; (b) enhance the capacity of technical advisors to provide valid, essential, and timely data to decision makers clearly and effectively; and (c) strengthen health information systems (HISs) to facilitate the collection, analysis, reporting, presentation, and use of data at local, district, regional, and national levels. Assessments were conducted to identify important health problems, problem-driven implementation plans with data-based solutions as objectives were developed, interdisciplinary, in-service training programs for mid-level policy makers, program managers, and technical advisors in applied epidemiology, management and leadership, communications, economic evaluation, and HISs were designed and implemented, national staff were trained in the refinement of HISs to improve access to essential data from multiple sources, and the effectiveness of the strategy was evaluated. This strategy was tested in Bolivia, Cameroon, Mexico, and the Philippines, where decentralization of health services led to a need to strengthen the capacity of policy makers and health officers at sub-national levels to use information more effectively. Results showed that the DDM strategy improved evidence-based public health. Subsequently, DDM concepts and practices have been institutionalized in participating countries and at CDC.

Cómo comunicar información para la acción en salud pública / Communicating information for action in public health

La comunicación eficaz de los resultados de la vigilancia de salud pública es el vínculo clave para trasladar la información científica a la práctica de la salud pública. El conocimiento de los componentes principales de este proceso, incluidos el medio, el mensaje, el público, la respuesta y su evaluación, es esencial para completar el círculo de comunicación

Cómo comunicar información para la acción en salud pública / Communicating information for action in public health

La comunicación eficaz de los resultados de la vigilancia de salud pública es el vínculo clave para trasladar la información científica a la práctica de la salud pública. El conocimiento de los componentes principales de este proceso, incluidos el medio, el mensaje, el público, la respuesta y su evaluación, es esencial para completar el círculo de comunicación

Este texto constitutye el capítulo 7 del libro "Principles and practice of public health surveillance, compilado por S. M. Teutsch y R. Elliot Churchill (Nueva York, Oxford University Press, 1994)