Automated Digital Notification of COVID-19 Diagnoses Through Text and Email Messaging - North Carolina, December 2020-January 2021.

During October 3, 2020-January 9, 2021, North Carolina experienced a 400% increase in daily reported COVID-19 cases (1). To handle the increased number of cases and rapidly notify persons receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result (patients), North Carolina state and local health departments moved from telephone call notification only to telephone call plus automated text and email notification (digital notification) beginning on December 24, 2020. Overall, among 200,258 patients, 142,975 (71%) were notified by telephone call or digital notification within the actionable period (10 days from their diagnosis date)* during January 2021, including at least 112,543 (56%) notified within 24 hours of report to North Carolina state and local health departments, a significantly higher proportion than the 25,905 of 175,979 (15%) notified within 24 hours during the preceding month (p<0.001). Differences in text notification by age, race, and ethnicity were observed. Automated digital notification is a feasible, rapid and efficient method to support timely outreach to patients, provide guidance on how to isolate, access resources, inform close contacts, and increase the efficiency of case investigation staff members.

The Supply and Distribution of the Preventive Medicine Physician Workforce.

CONTEXT: Preventive medicine physicians work at the intersection of clinical medicine and public health. A previous report on the state of the preventive medicine workforce in 2000 revealed an ongoing decline in preventive medicine physicians and residents, but there have been few updates since. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe trends in both the number of board-certified preventive medicine physicians and those physicians who self-designate preventive medicine as a primary or secondary specialty and examine the age, gender distribution, and geographic distribution of this workforce. DESIGN: Analysis of the supply of preventive medicine physicians using data derived from board certification files of the American Board of Preventive Medicine and self-designation data from the American Medical Association Masterfile. SETTING: The 50 US states and District of Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Board-certified and self-designated preventive medicine physicians in the United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number, demographics, and location of preventive medicine physicians in United States. RESULTS: From 1999 to 2018, the total number of physicians board certified in preventive medicine increased from 6091 to 9270; the number of self-identified preventive medicine physicians has generally decreased since 2000, with a leveling off in the past 4 years matching the trend of preventive medicine physicians per 100 000 population; there is a recent increase in women in the specialty; the practice locations of preventive medicine physicians do not match the US population in rural or micropolitan areas; and the average age of preventive medicine physicians is increasing. CONCLUSIONS: The number of preventive medicine physicians is not likely to match population needs in the United States in the near term and beyond. Assessing the preventive medicine physician workforce in the United States is complicated by difficulties in defining the specialty and because less than half of self-designated preventive medicine physicians hold a board certification in the specialty.

Preventive Medicine Physicians' Role in Health Care Organizations' Pursuit of the Triple Aim.

CONTEXT: The Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Triple Aim is rooted in improving population health and therefore requires a focus on prevention as well as management of disease. Preventive medicine (PM) physicians are uniquely trained in clinical medicine as well as health care delivery and systems-based practice, thus potentially positioning them to lead population health and contribute to the Triple Aim. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to (1) describe PM physicians' contributions related to the Triple Aim and (2) describe PM physician satisfaction with these activities. DESIGN: A survey was administered to physicians graduating from a single Preventive Medicine Residency program between 1975 and 2015. Physicians were asked about work in 3 specific emerging areas that relate to the Triple Aim's focus on population health improvement: population health; health system transformation; and integration between primary care and public health. PM physicians were also asked about their job, career, and specialty satisfaction. RESULTS: Most respondents (74%) practiced population health, with the majority (63%) defining this as improving the health of the population at large versus for a defined clinical population (37%). Approximately half (59%) of PM physicians are involved in health system transformation leadership. Most respondents practice both public health and primary care, but only 32% report having had positions that involve integration of these activities. PM physicians reported high specialty satisfaction levels, particularly among those involved in population health and health care transformation. CONCLUSION: PM physicians already make substantial contributions to population health and lead work related to the Triple Aim. High satisfaction among PM physicians suggests that they can contribute to a stable and sustainable population health workforce.

Twenty Year Trends and Sex Differences in Young Adults Hospitalized With Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Sex differences are known to exist in the management of older patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Few studies have examined the incidence and risk factors of AMI among young patients, or whether clinical management differs by sex. METHODS: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Surveillance study conducts hospital surveillance of AMI in 4 US communities (MD, MN, MS, and NC). AMI was classified by physician review, using a validated algorithm. Medications and procedures were abstracted from the medical record. Our study population was limited to young patients aged 35 to 54 years. RESULTS: From 1995 to 2014, 28 732 weighted hospitalizations for AMI were sampled among patients aged 35 to 74 years. Of these, 8737 (30%) were young. The annual incidence of AMI hospitalizations increased for young women but decreased for young men. The overall proportion of AMI admissions attributable to young patients steadily increased, from 27% in 1995 to 1999 to 32% in 2010 to 2014 ( P for trend=0.002), with the largest increase observed in young women. History of hypertension (59% to 73%, P for trend<0.0001) and diabetes mellitus (25% to 35%, P for trend<0.0001) also increased among young AMI patients. Compared to young men, young women presenting with AMI were more often black and had a greater comorbidity burden. In adjusted analyses, young women had a lower probability of receiving lipid-lowering therapies (relative risk [RR]=0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-0.94), nonaspirin antiplatelets (RR=0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.91), beta blockers (RR=0.96; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99), coronary angiography (RR=0.93; 95% CI, 0.86-0.99) and coronary revascularization (RR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.87). However, 1-year all-cause mortality was comparable for women versus men (HR=1.10; 95% CI, 0.83-1.45). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of AMI hospitalizations attributable to young patients increased from 1995 to 2014 and was especially pronounced among women. History of hypertension and diabetes among young patients admitted with AMI increased over time as well. Compared with young men, young women presenting with AMI had a lower likelihood of receiving guideline-based AMI therapies. A better understanding of factors underlying these changes is needed to improve care of young patients with AMI.

Multiple COVID-19 Clusters on a University Campus - North Carolina, August 2020.

Preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), in institutes of higher education presents a unique set of challenges because of the presence of congregate living settings and difficulty limiting socialization and group gatherings. Before August 2020, minimal data were available regarding COVID-19 outbreaks in these settings. On August 3, 2020, university A in North Carolina broadly opened campus for the first time since transitioning to primarily remote learning in March. Consistent with CDC guidance at that time (1,2), steps were taken to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 on campus. During August 3-25, 670 laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19 were identified; 96% were among patients aged <22 years. Eighteen clusters of five or more epidemiologically linked cases within 14 days of one another were reported; 30% of cases were linked to a cluster. Student gatherings and congregate living settings, both on and off campus, likely contributed to the rapid spread of COVID-19 within the university community. On August 19, all university A classes transitioned to online, and additional mitigation efforts were implemented. At this point, 334 university A-associated COVID-19 cases had been reported to the local health department. The rapid increase in cases within 2 weeks of opening campus suggests that robust measures are needed to reduce transmission at institutes of higher education, including efforts to increase consistent use of masks, reduce the density of on-campus housing, increase testing for SARS-CoV-2, and discourage student gatherings.

A Feasibility Study of Supply and Demand for Diabetes Prevention Programs in North Carolina.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes Prevention Programs (DPPs) have shown that healthy eating and moderate physical activity are effective ways of delaying and preventing type 2 diabetes in people with impaired glucose tolerance. We assessed willingness to pay for DPPs from the perspective of potential recipients and the cost of providing these programs from the perspective of community health centers and local health departments in North Carolina. METHODS: We used contingent valuation to determine how much potential recipients would be willing to pay to participate in DPPs under 3 different models: delivered by registered professionals (traditional model), by community health workers, or online. By using information on the minimum reimbursement rate at which public health agencies would be prepared to provide the 3 models, we estimated the marginal costs per person of supplying the programs. Matching supply and demand, we estimated the degree of cost sharing between recipients and providers. RESULTS: Potential program recipients (n = 99) were willing to pay more for programs led by registered professionals than by community health workers, and they preferred face-to-face contact to an online format. Socioeconomic status (measured by education and employment) and age played the biggest roles in determining willingness to pay. Leaders of public health agencies (n = 27) reported up to a 40% difference in the cost of providing the DPP, depending on the delivery model. CONCLUSION: By using willingness to pay to understand demand for DPPs and computing the provider's marginal cost of providing these services, we can estimate cost sharing and market coverage of these services and thus compare the viability of alternate approaches to scaling up and sustaining DPPs with available resources.

Weathering the seasons of cancer survivorship: mind-body therapy use and reported reasons and outcomes by stages of cancer survivorship.

PURPOSE: Mind-body therapies (MBTs), a subset of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), are used by cancer survivors to manage symptoms related to their cancer experience. MBT use may differ by cancer survivorship stage (i.e., acute, short-term, long-term) because each stage presents varying intensities of medical activities, associated emotions, and treatment effects. We examined the relationship between MBT use and survivorship stage (acute <1 year; short-term 1 to 5 years; long-term >5 years since diagnosis) using the CAM supplement of the 2012 National Health Interview Survey. We also examined reported reasons for and outcomes of MBT use and frequency of MBT types. METHODS: The sample included cancer survivors (N = 3076) and non-cancer controls (N = 31,387). Logistic regression tested the relationship of MBT use and survivorship stage. Weighted percentages were calculated by survivorship stage for reported reasons and outcomes of use and frequency of MBT types. RESULTS: MBT use varied by cancer survivorship stage (p = 0.02): acute (8.3 %), short-term (15.4 %), long-term (11.7 %) survivorship and non-cancer controls (13.2 %). In the adjusted model, short-term survivors had 35 % greater odds of MBT use than did controls (95 % CI 1.00, 1.83). Reasons for and outcomes of MBT use varied among the survivorship stages, with more acute survivors reporting medical-related reasons and more short-term survivors reporting to manage symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: MBT may fulfill different symptom management needs at varying stages of survivorship. These findings can help inform supportive care services of survivors' use of MBT for symptom burden at each stage and the allocation of these services.

Measuring public health practice and outcomes in chronic disease: a call for coordination.

A strategic opportunity exists to coordinate public health systems and services researchers' efforts to develop local health department service delivery measures and the efforts of divisions within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP) to establish outcome indicators for public health practice in chronic disease. Several sets of outcome indicators developed by divisions within NCCDPHP and intended for use by state programs can be tailored to assess outcomes of interventions within smaller geographic areas or intervention settings. Coordination of measurement efforts could potentially allow information to flow from the local to the state to the federal level, enhancing program planning, accountability, and even subsequent funding for public health practice.

Biases and limitations in observational studies of Long COVID prevalence and risk factors: A rapid systematic umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies form the foundation of Long COVID knowledge, however combining data from Long COVID observational studies has multiple methodological challenges. This umbrella review synthesizes estimates of Long COVID prevalence and risk factors as well as biases and limitations in the primary and review literatures. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A systematic literature search was conducted using multiple electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, LitCOVID) from Jan 1, 2019 until June 9, 2023. Eligible studies were systematic reviews including adult populations assessed for at least one Long COVID symptom four weeks or more after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Overall and subgroup prevalence and risk factors as well as risk of bias (ROB) assessments were extracted and descriptively analyzed. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023434323). Fourteen reviews of 5-196 primary studies were included: 8 reported on Long COVID prevalence, 5 on risk/protective factors, and 1 on both. Prevalence of at least 1 Long COVID symptom ranged from 21% (IQR: 8.9%-35%) to 74.5% (95% CI: 55.6%-78.0%). Risk factor reviews found significant associations between vaccination status, sex, acute COVID-19 severity, and comorbidities. Both prevalence and risk factor reviews frequently identified selection and ascertainment biases. Using the AMSTAR 2 criteria, the quality of included reviews, particularly the prevalence reviews, were concerning for the adequacy of ROB assessments and justifications for conducting meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: A high level of heterogeneity render the interpretation of pooled prevalence estimates of Long COVID challenging, further hampered by the lack of robust critical appraisals in the included reviews. Risk factor reviews were of higher quality overall and suggested consistent associations between Long COVID risk and patient characteristics.

Implementation of Session Zero as a Recruitment Strategy in the National Diabetes Prevention Program's Lifestyle Change Program.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to understand the extent to which organizations offering the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Diabetes Prevention Program (National DPP) lifestyle change program implement session zero (a pre-enrollment session designed to recruit, engage, and enroll participants in programs), the stated purpose(s) for offering session zero, the content of session zero, and best practices for using session zero for recruitment. METHODS: Researchers conducted a survey of all organizations offering the National DPP lifestyle change program that were registered with the CDC's Diabetes Prevention Recognition Program and their affiliated delivery locations. RESULTS: Most (79.5%) delivery locations reported implementing session zero; of these, most used session zero as a recruitment strategy (81.1%) and orientation session (72.8%), whereas few (17.7%) used session zero solely to complete participant enrollment paperwork. Most (60.7%) delivery locations that implement session zero offer all their sessions at the same location, offer one session per upcoming participant cohort (66.7%), and use a consistent agenda (83.0%). Out of a list of activities informed by behavior change theory, the most common was offering an opportunity to enroll in the year-long lifestyle change program at the end of session zero (71.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Most National DPP delivery locations implement session zero as a recruitment and orientation session. Most delivery locations reported including some activities informed by behavior change theory, but delivery locations could offer more theoretically informed activities during their session zero. The findings provide practice-based considerations for implementing session zero for recruitment into lifestyle change programs.

Advancing cervical cancer prevention in India: implementation science priorities.

Cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in India, accounting for 17% of all cancer deaths among women aged 30 to 69 years. At current incidence rates, the annual burden of new cases in India is projected to increase to 225,000 by 2025, but there are few large-scale, organized cervical cancer prevention programs in the country. We conducted a review of the cervical cancer prevention research literature and programmatic experiences in India to summarize the current state of knowledge and practices and recommend research priorities to address the gap in services. We found that research and programs in India have demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of cervical cancer prevention efforts and that screening strategies requiring minimal additional human resources and laboratory infrastructure can reduce morbidity and mortality. However, additional evidence generated through implementation science research is needed to ensure that cervical cancer prevention efforts have the desired impact and are cost-effective. Specifically, implementation science research is needed to understand individual- and community-level barriers to screening and diagnostic and treatment services; to improve health care worker performance; to strengthen links among screening, diagnosis, and treatment; and to determine optimal program design, outcomes, and costs. With a quarter of the global burden of cervical cancer in India, there is no better time than now to translate research findings to practice. Implementation science can help ensure that investments in cervical cancer prevention and control result in the greatest impact.

Advancing cervical cancer prevention in India: implementation science priorities.

Cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in India, accounting for 17% of all cancer deaths among women aged 30 to 69 years. At current incidence rates, the annual burden of new cases in India is projected to increase to 225,000 by 2025, but there are few large-scale, organized cervical cancer prevention programs in the country. We conducted a review of the cervical cancer prevention research literature and programmatic experiences in India to summarize the current state of knowledge and practices and recommend research priorities to address the gap in services. We found that research and programs in India have demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of cervical cancer prevention efforts and that screening strategies requiring minimal additional human resources and laboratory infrastructure can reduce morbidity and mortality. However, additional evidence generated through implementation science research is needed to ensure that cervical cancer prevention efforts have the desired impact and are cost-effective. Specifically, implementation science research is needed to understand individual- and community-level barriers to screening and diagnostic and treatment services; to improve health care worker performance; to strengthen links among screening, diagnosis, and treatment; and to determine optimal program design, outcomes, and costs. With a quarter of the global burden of cervical cancer in India, there is no better time than now to translate research findings to practice. Implementation science can help ensure that investments in cervical cancer prevention and control result in the greatest impact.

Linkages between clinical practices and community organizations for prevention: a literature review and environmental scan.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a literature review and environmental scan to develop a framework for interventions that utilize linkages between clinical practices and community organizations for the delivery of preventive services, and to identify and characterize these efforts. METHODS: We searched 4 major health services and social science electronic databases and conducted an Internet search to identify examples of linkage interventions in the areas of tobacco cessation, obesity, nutrition, and physical activity. RESULTS: We identified 49 interventions, of which 18 examples described their evaluation methods or reported any intervention outcomes. Few conducted evaluations that were rigorous enough to capture changes in intermediate or long-term health outcomes. Outcomes in these evaluations were primarily patient-focused and did not include organizational or linkage characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: An attractive option to increase the delivery of preventive services is to link primary care practices to community organizations; evidence is not yet conclusive, however, that such linkage interventions are effective. Findings provide recommendations to researchers and organizations that fund research, and call for a framework and metrics to study linkage interventions.

Systematic review: enhancing the use and quality of colorectal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: National guideline groups recommend screening and discussion of screening options for persons at average risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, emerging evidence suggests that CRC screening is simultaneously underused, overused, and misused and that adequate patient-provider discussions about screening are infrequent. PURPOSE: To summarize evidence on factors that influence CRC screening and strategies that increase the appropriate use and quality of CRC screening and CRC screening discussions. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for English-language publications describing studies conducted in the United States from January 1998 through September 2009. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently selected studies that addressed the study questions and met eligibility criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Information on study design, setting, intervention, outcomes, and quality were extracted by one reviewer and double-checked by another. Reviewers assigned a strength-of-evidence grade for intervention categories by using criteria plus a consensus process. DATA SYNTHESIS: Reviewers found evidence of simultaneous underuse, overuse, and misuse of CRC screening as well as inadequate clinical discussions about CRC screening. Several patient-level factors were independently associated with lower screening rates, including having low income or less education, being uninsured, being Hispanic or Asian, being less acculturated into the United States, or having limited access to care. Evidence that interventions that included patient reminders or one-on-one interactions (that is, between patients and nonphysician clinic staff), eliminated structural barriers (for example, simplifying access to fecal occult blood test cards), or made system-level changes (for example, using systematic screening as opposed to opportunistic screening) were effective in enhancing use of CRC screening was strong. Evidence on how best to enhance discussions about CRC screening options is limited. No studies focused on reducing overuse, and very few focused on misuse. LIMITATIONS: Reporting and publication bias may have affected our findings. The independent effect of individual elements of multicomponent interventions was often uncertain. CONCLUSION: Although CRC screening is underused overall, important problems of overuse and misuse also exist. System- and policy-level interventions that target vulnerable populations are needed to reduce underuse. Interventions aimed at reducing barriers by making the screening process easier are likely to be effective. Studies aimed at reducing overuse and misuse and at enhancing the quality and frequency of discussions about CRC screening options are needed. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Cancer Plan Index: a measure for assessing the quality of cancer plans.

OBJECTIVE: To (1) conduct an in-depth assessment of the content of comprehensive cancer control plans and (2) obtain data that can be used to provide guidance to grantees supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) as they refine their plans, and to other health professionals as similar planning is done. DESIGN: Through an iterative development process, a workgroup of subject matter experts from NCCCP and Research Triangle Institute International (RTI International) identified 11 core or essential components that should be considered in cancer plans on the basis of their professional experience and expertise. They also developed a tool, the Cancer Plan Index (CPI), to assess the extent to which cancer plans addressed the 11 core components. SETTING: Sixty-five comprehensive cancer control programs in states, tribes, territories, and jurisdictions funded by the NCCCP. DATA SOURCE: Raters reviewed and abstracted all available cancer plans (n = 66), which included plans from 62 funded programs and 4 states of the Federated States of Micronesia funded by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as a subcontractor of one funded program. Of the 66 plans, 3 plans were used to pilot test the CPI and the remaining 63 plans were subsequently reviewed and abstracted. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome measures are national-level component scores for 11 defined domains (global involvement of stakeholders, developing the plan, presentation of data on disease burden, goals, objectives, strategies, reduction of cancer disparities, implementation, funds for implementation of plan, evaluation, usability of plan), which represent an average of the component scores across all available cancer plans. RESULTS: To aid in the interpretation and usability of findings, the components were segmented into 3 tiers, representing a range high (average score = 2.01-4.00), moderate (average score = 1.01-2.00), and low (average score = 0-1.00) levels of description of the component. Programs overall provided relatively comprehensive descriptions of goals, objectives, and strategies; moderate description of the plan development process, presentation of data on disease burden, and plans on the reduction of cancer disparities; and little to no description of stakeholder involvement plans for implementation, funds for implementation, and evaluation of the plan. CONCLUSIONS: Areas of the CPI with low average component scores should stimulate technical assistance to the funded programs, either to increase program activities or to increase discussion of key activities in the plan.

Piloting performance measurement for Comprehensive Cancer Control programs.

OBJECTIVE: To implement a pilot test of performance measures for National Comprehensive Cancer Control (CCC) programs funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). DESIGN: A cross-sectional assessment conducted in 2008. SETTING: A total of 65 CCC-funded entities (51 states, 7 tribes, and 7 territories or jurisdictions) representing 69 CCC programs. PARTICIPANTS: Comprehensive Cancer Control program staff. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In a process that involved stakeholders from funded programs, academia, and nonprofit organizations, the CDC developed a framework for evaluation and a performance measures worksheet containing 11 performance measures for CCC programs that assessed grantee attainment of key components of CCC as required in the funding announcement. The framework was based on a CCC logic model. The performance measures worksheet contained detailed description of the measures, definitions, and suggested data sources for the 11 measures. RESULTS: Of the 69 programs, 61 completed the worksheets. The median time reported to complete the worksheet was 10 hours (interquartile range = 6-20). Almost all programs reported having representation of relevant populations in their coalition and having conducted a recent assessment of the burden of cancer. Less frequently, programs reported having a written evaluation plan or having enacted policy changes. Additional performance measures described non-CDC funding, the percentage of partners implementing CCC activities, and the percentage of implemented interventions that were evidence-based. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot test of the performance measures worksheet established the feasibility of conducting a standardized survey of CCC programs to identify issues of importance to developing and implementing the CCC program at national and program levels. The performance measures provided unique data on CCC grantees to the CDC funders and feedback on performance measures for improving questions on future surveys. Refinement of the performance measures will provide a tool for monitoring processes of action and accountability of grantees and will encourage a culture of quality improvement through systematic evaluation.

Public health case studies in diabetes prevention and control: innovation, partnerships, and funding.

BACKGROUND: In 2006, we conducted case studies of 4 North Carolina local health departments (LHDs) that scored highly on an index of diabetes prevention and control performance, to explore characteristics that may serve as barriers or facilitators of diabetes prevention and control services. METHODS: Case studies involving in-depth interviews were conducted at 4 LHDs. Sites were selected on the basis of 2 variables, known external funding for diabetes services and population size, that were associated with performance in diabetes prevention and control in a 2005 survey of all North Carolina LHDs. Fourteen interviews (individual and group) were conducted among 17 participants from the 4 LHDs. The main outcome measures were LHD characteristics that facilitate or hinder the performance of diabetes programs and services. RESULTS: Interviews revealed that all 4 high-performing LHDs had received some sort of funding from a source external to the LHD. Case study participants indicated that barriers to additional service delivery included low socioeconomic status of the population and lack of financial resources. Having a diabetes self-management education program that was recognized by the American Diabetes Association appeared to be a facilitator of diabetes services provision. Other facilitators were leadership and staff commitment, which appeared to facilitate the leveraging of partnerships and funding opportunities, leading to enhanced service delivery. LIMITATIONS: The small number of LHDs participating in the study and the cross-sectional study design were limitations. CONCLUSION: Leadership, staff commitment, partnership leveraging, and funding appear to be associated with LHD performance in diabetes prevention and control services. These factors should be further studied in future public health systems and services research.

Characteristics of Population Health Physicians and the Needs of Healthcare Organizations.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare organizations are transitioning from fee-for-service, volume-based care toward value-based care and the Triple Aim. Physicians have critical roles as leaders and practitioners in this emerging field of population health management; however, the competencies required of these physicians are not well described. The purpose of this study is to explore the approaches of healthcare systems to population health-related functions, the competencies needed, and the characteristics of physicians who lead or staff these functions. METHODS: Investigators conducted semistructured interviews with a convenience sample of 14 healthcare executives and 15 Preventive Medicine physicians and a focus group with 9 healthcare executives. Interviews and the focus group were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Themes and notable quotes were identified. Data were collected and analyzed in 2019. RESULTS: Population health was variously defined by the healthcare executives, often naming specific components or activities. The typical population health activities described by healthcare executives (e.g., quality measurement and process improvement) were reported along with the skills of physicians performing these functions (e.g., data analysis, informatics, leadership, business acumen). A total of 2 types of population health physicians were described: the clinician leader and the population health specialist. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study identified several useful competencies for population health physicians in healthcare systems. Findings point to opportunities to promote a more systematic approach to population health and to prepare Preventive Medicine and other physicians for population health management positions.

Building a Viable Weight Management Program in a Patient-Centered Medical Home.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The growing prevalence of obesity in the United States and globally highlights the need for innovative strategies to provide obesity treatment in primary care settings. This report describes and evaluates the Weight Management Program (WMP), an interprofessional program in an academic family medicine clinic delivering intensive behavioral therapy (IBT) following evidenced-based guidelines. METHODS: We extracted WMP participant health data from the electronic health record and evaluated retrospectively. Eligible participants completed at least four WMP visits and had a baseline weight, blood pressure, and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) recorded within 1 year prior to their first visit. Paired t tests were used to assess changes in, weight, HbA1c and systolic and diastolic blood pressures from baseline. RESULTS: WMP counseled 673 patients over 3,895 visits from September 2015 to June 2019. Of these, 186 met eligibility criteria (at least four visits), with a median of eight visits (mean=11.3, SD=8.1). Participants saw an average weight decrease during program participation of 9.7 lbs (P<.001), an average decrease in HbA1c of 0.2 points (P=.004), and an average blood pressure reduction of 2.8 mmHg systolic (P=.002) and 1.9 mmHg diastolic (P=.03). One-third of participants (n=60) achieved clinically significant weight loss (>5%) at 18 months. The program has become financially sustainable through billing for preventive counseling services and a $125 out-of-pocket enrollment fee. CONCLUSIONS: WMP provides one model for primary care practices to develop a financially sustainable and evidence-based behavioral therapy weight management program for their patients with obesity. Future work will include assessment of longer-term program benefits, quality metrics, and health care costs.