Assessing the Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities of Public Health Professionals in Big City Governmental Health Departments.

OBJECTIVE: To identify essential knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) for and characterize gaps in KSAs of professionals working in large, urban health departments. DESIGN: A survey was disseminated to potentially eligible supervisors within 26 of 28 health departments in the largest, most urban jurisdictions in the country. A supervisor was eligible to participate if he or she supervised at least 1 staff member whose highest level of education was a master's degree. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 645 eligible supervisors participated in the workforce survey for a response rate of 27.1% and cooperation rate of 55.2%. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Supervisors were asked to rate the importance of KSAs to their masters-level staffs' work and indicate their staffs' proficiency. RESULTS: Fifty-eight percent of supervisors reported supervising staff with a master of public health/master of science in public health degree. More than 30% of supervisors indicated that all of the 30 KSAs were essential. Four of the top 10 KSAs rated as essential by supervisors pertained to the ability to communicate. The top skills gaps perceived by supervisors were professional staffs' ability to apply quality improvement concepts to their work (38.0%), understanding of the political system (37.7%), and ability to anticipate changes (33.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Public health practitioners receive training in methods, theories, and evidence-based approaches, yet further investment in the workforce is necessary to advance population health. A focus should be placed developing strategic skills rather than advancing narrow specialties. Findings from this research can guide the creation and implementation of training curricula and professional development programs offered within local health departments or targeted to their staff, as well as satisfaction of accreditation requirements. By focusing on building strategic skills, we can ensure a public health workforce that is equipped with the KSAs necessary to practice Public Health 3.0 and leaders who are able to serve as their communities' chief health strategists.

Impact of a Mobile Phone Intervention to Reduce Sedentary Behavior in a Community Sample of Adults: A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Greater time spent sedentary is linked with increased risk of breast, colorectal, ovarian, endometrial, and prostate cancers. Given steadily increasing rates of mobile phone ownership, mobile phone interventions may have the potential to broadly influence sedentary behavior across settings. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the short-term impact of a mobile phone intervention that targeted sedentary time in a diverse community sample. METHODS: Adults participated in a quasi-experimental evaluation of a mobile phone intervention designed to reduce sedentary time through prompts to interrupt periods of sitting. Participants carried mobile phones and wore accelerometers for 7 consecutive days. Intervention participants additionally received mobile phone prompts during self-reported sitting and information about the negative health impact of prolonged sedentariness. The study was conducted from December 2012 to November 2013 in Dallas, Texas. Linear mixed model regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the influence of the intervention on daily accelerometer-determined estimates of sedentary and active time. RESULTS: Participants (N=215) were predominantly female (67.9%, 146/215) and nonwhite (black: 50.7%, 109/215; Latino: 12.1%, 26/215; other: 5.6%, 12/215). Analyses revealed that participants who received the mobile phone intervention had significantly fewer daily minutes of sedentary time (B=-22.09, P=.045) and more daily active minutes (B=23.01, P=.04) than control participants. CONCLUSIONS: A simple mobile phone intervention was associated with engaging in less sedentary time and more physical activity. Findings underscore the potential impact of mobile phone interventions to positively influence sedentary behavior and physical activity.

Financial incentives for abstinence among socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals in smoking cessation treatment.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the effectiveness of offering adjunctive financial incentives for abstinence (contingency management [CM]) within a safety net hospital smoking cessation program. METHODS: We randomized participants (n = 146) from a Dallas County, Texas, Tobacco Cessation Clinic from 2011 to 2013 to usual care (UC; cessation program; n = 71) or CM (UC + 4 weeks of financial incentives; n = 75), and followed from 1 week before the quit date through 4 weeks after the quit date. A subset (n = 128) was asked to attend a visit 12 weeks after the scheduled quit date. RESULTS: Participants were primarily Black (62.3%) or White (28.1%) and female (57.5%). Most participants were uninsured (52.1%) and had an annual household income of less than $12 000 (55.5%). Abstinence rates were significantly higher for those assigned to CM than UC at all visits following the quit date (all Ps < .05). Point prevalence abstinence rates in the CM and UC groups were 49.3% versus 25.4% at 4 weeks after the quit date and 32.8% versus 14.1% at 12 weeks after the quit date. CM participants earned an average of $63.40 ($150 possible) for abstinence during the first 4 weeks after the scheduled quit date. CONCLUSIONS: Offering small financial incentives for abstinence might be an effective means to improve abstinence rates among socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals participating in smoking cessation treatment.

Everyday discrimination is associated with nicotine dependence among African American, Latino, and White smokers.

INTRODUCTION: Discrimination is a commonly perceived stressor among African Americans and Latinos, and previous research has linked stress with substance dependence. Although studies have shown a link between discrimination and smoking, little is known about the relationship between discrimination and nicotine dependence. METHODS: A total of 2,376 African American (33.4%; n = 794), Latino (33.1%; n = 786), and White (33.5%; n = 796) smokers completed an online survey. Everyday discrimination experiences were described in total and by race/ethnicity. Covariate-adjusted linear regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the associations between everyday discrimination and indicators of nicotine dependence. RESULTS: Most participants (79.1%), regardless of race/ethnicity, reported experiencing everyday discrimination. However, total scores on the discrimination measure were higher among Latinos and African Americans than among Whites (p < .001). Race/ethnicity/national origin was the most commonly perceived reason for everyday discrimination among African Americans and Latinos, whereas physical appearance was the most commonly perceived reason among Whites. Regression analyses indicated that everyday discrimination was positively associated with indicators of nicotine dependence, including the Heaviness of Smoking Index (HSI; p < .001) and the Brief Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (WISDM) scales (all ps < .001). There was a significant interaction between race/ethnicity and discrimination, such that discrimination was associated with the HSI only among Latinos. Similarly, discrimination was most strongly associated with the WISDM scales among Latinos. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses indicated that discrimination is a common stressor associated with nicotine dependence. Findings suggest that greater nicotine dependence is a potential pathway through which discrimination may influence health.

Smoking policy change at a homeless shelter: attitudes and effects.

Homeless adults are exposed to more smokers and smoke in response to environmental tobacco cues more than other socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. Addressing the culture of smoking in homeless shelters through policy initiatives may support cessation and improve health in this vulnerable and understudied population. This study examined support for and expected/actual effects of a smoking ban at a homeless shelter. A 2-wave cross-sectional study with an embedded cohort was conducted in the summer of 2013 two weeks before (wave 1) and two months after (wave 2) a partial outdoor smoking ban was implemented. A total of 394 homeless adults were surveyed (i.e., wave 1 [n=155]; wave 2 [n=150]; and 89 additional participants completed both waves). On average, participants were 43 years old, primarily African American (63%), male (72%), and had been homeless for the previous 12 months (median). Most participants were smokers (76%) smoking 12 cigarettes per day on average. Most participants supported the creation of a large smoke-free zone on the shelter campus, but there was less support for a shelter-wide smoking ban. Average cigarettes smoked per day did not differ between study waves. However, participants who completed both study waves experienced a reduction in expired carbon monoxide at wave 2 (W1=18.2 vs. W2=15.8 parts per million, p=.02). Expected effects of the partial ban were similar to actual effects. Partial outdoor smoking bans may be well supported by homeless shelter residents and may have a positive impact on shelter resident health.