State statutes and regulations related to human papillomavirus vaccination.

A cross-sectional analysis of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine statutes and regulations from states and the District of Columbia in the United States (U.S.) was conducted from September-November 2018 to advance analyses of policy impact on HPV vaccination uptake. A search was conducted using WestlawNext, a legal research database. Statutes and regulations relevant to the study were analyzed and coded based on their legal attributes into ten broad coding questions and several sub-questions. Of the 212 laws identified by the initial search string, 93 (43.9%) reference HPV vaccination in statute or regulation. An additional three laws were added following subsequent review. There was a total of 52 statutes and 44 regulations from 34 states and the District of Columbia. Most laws were related to developing and distributing HPV vaccination materials for parents, and mechanisms to fund and reimburse for the vaccination. This study can be used by policymakers in jurisdictions that are considering establishing HPV vaccination promotion interventions in state law and highlighting the limited statutory and regulatory efforts that have been implemented to promote HPV vaccination. Importantly, this study can also be used to conduct evaluations of the efficacy of statutory and regulatory strategies in increasing HPV vaccination rates.

Association of State Laws With Influenza Vaccination of Hospital Personnel.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare personnel influenza vaccination can reduce influenza illness and patient mortality. State laws are one tool promoting healthcare personnel influenza vaccination. METHODS: A 2016 legal assessment in 50 states and Washington DC identified (1) assessment laws: mandating hospitals assess healthcare personnel influenza vaccination status; (2) offer laws: mandating hospitals offer influenza vaccination to healthcare personnel; (3) ensure laws: mandating hospitals require healthcare personnel to demonstrate proof of influenza vaccination; and (4) surgical masking laws: mandating unvaccinated healthcare personnel to wear surgical masks during influenza season. Influenza vaccination was calculated using data reported in 2016 by short-stay acute care hospitals (n=4,370) to the National Healthcare Safety Network. Hierarchical linear modeling in 2018 examined associations between reported vaccination and assessment, offer, or ensure laws at the level of facilities nested within states, among employee and non-employee healthcare personnel and among employees only. RESULTS: Eighteen states had one or more healthcare personnel influenza vaccination-related laws. In the absence of any state laws, facility vaccination mandates were associated with an 11-12 percentage point increase in mean vaccination coverage (p<0.0001). Facility-level mandates were estimated to increase mean influenza vaccination coverage among all healthcare personnel by 4.2 percentage points in states with assessment laws, 6.6 percentage points in states with offer laws, and 3.1 percentage points in states with ensure laws. Results were similar in analyses restricted only to employees although percentage point increases were slightly larger. CONCLUSIONS: State laws moderate the effect of facility-level vaccination mandates and may help increase healthcare personnel influenza vaccination coverage in facilities with or without vaccination requirements.

Federal Indian Law as a Structural Determinant of Health.

Federal Indian law is the body of law that defines the rights, responsibilities, and relationships between three sovereigns, Tribes, states, and the federal government. This area of law has defined, oftentimes poorly, the contours of treaty rights, criminal and civil jurisdiction, economic development, among other issues. Much has been documented in terms of the implications of social, legal, political, and economic systems that perpetuate inequities amongst American Indian and Alaska Native populations. There has also been substantial research on health inequalities. Yet, there has been less discussion on the role of law in perpetuating these adverse health outcomes in these populations. The social and structural determinants of health are the factors and conditions, such as housing, education, and politics, that create health disparities. For years, law has been described as a tool to promote health and even a determinant of health. And while research has explored Tribal health laws and federal Indian health policies, more needs to be analyzed in terms of the role of foundational principles of federal Indian law in perpetuating health disparities. This article argues that federal Indian law is a structural determinant of health by linking health disparities to the constructs of this body of law.

The Latest in Vaccine Policies: Selected Issues in School Vaccinations, Healthcare Worker Vaccinations, and Pharmacist Vaccination Authority Laws.

This paper discusses recent changes to state legal frameworks for mandatory vaccination in the context of school and healthcare worker vaccination. It then discusses state laws that allow pharmacists the authority to vaccinate.

State Laws Requiring Hand Sanitation Stations at Animal Contact Exhibits-United States, March-April 2016.

In the United States, animal contact exhibits, such as petting zoos and agricultural fairs, have been sources of zoonotic infections, including infections with Escherichia coli, Salmonella, and Cryptosporidium (1-4). The National Association of State Public Health Veterinarians recommends handwashing after contact with animals as an effective prevention measure to disease transmission at these exhibits (4). This report provides a list of states that have used law, specifically statutes and regulations, as public health interventions to increase hand sanitation at animal contact exhibits. The report is based on an assessment conducted by CDC's Public Health Law Program, in collaboration with the Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases in CDC's National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases. The assessment found that seven states have used statutes or regulations to require hand sanitation stations at these exhibits (5). Jurisdictions seeking to improve rates of hand sanitation at animal contact exhibits can use this report as a resource in developing their own legal interventions.

State Public Health Enabling Authorities: Results of a Fundamental Activities Assessment Examining Core and Essential Services.

CONTEXT: Public health enabling authorities establish the legal foundation for financing, organizing, and delivering public health services. State laws vary in terms of the content, depth, and breadth of these fundamental public health activities. Given this variance, the Institute of Medicine has identified state public health laws as an area that requires further examination. To respond to this call for further examination, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Public Health Law Program conducted a fundamental activities legal assessment on state public health laws. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the legal assessment was to examine state laws referencing frameworks representing public health department fundamental activities (ie, core and essential services) in an effort to identify, catalog, and describe enabling authorities of state governmental public health systems. DESIGN: In 2013, Public Health Law Program staff compiled a list of state statutes and regulations referencing different commonly-recognized public health frameworks of fundamental activities. The legal assessment included state fundamental activities laws available on WestlawNext as of July 2013. The results related to the 10 essential public health services and the 3 core public health functions were confirmed and updated in June 2016. RESULTS: Eighteen states reference commonly-recognized frameworks of fundamental activities in their laws. Thirteen states have listed the 10 essential public health services in their laws. Eight of these states have also referenced the 3 core public health functions in their laws. Five states reference only the core public health functions. CONCLUSIONS: Several states reference fundamental activities in their state laws, particularly through use of the essential services framework. Further work is needed to capture the public health laws and practices of states that may be performing fundamental activities but without reference to a common framework.