Ohio Presents Opportunities For Understanding Hospital Alignment With Public Health Agencies On Community Health Assessments.

Multisector collaboration is critical for improving population health. Improving alignment between nonprofit hospitals and local health departments is one promising approach to achieving health improvement, and a number of states are exploring policies to facilitate such collaboration. Using public documents, we evaluated the alignment between Ohio nonprofit hospitals and local health departments in the community health needs they identify and those they prioritize. The top three needs identified by hospitals and health departments were mental health, substance use, and obesity. Alignment across organizations was high among the top needs, but it varied more among less commonly identified needs. Alignment related to social determinants of health was low, with health departments being more responsive to social determinants than hospitals. Given the different strengths and capacities of hospitals and health departments, this divergence may be in the best interests of the communities they serve. Community benefit policies should consider how to promote collaboration between hospitals and health departments while also encouraging organizations to use their own expertise to meet community needs.

New insights about community benefit evaluation: Using the Community Health Implementation Evaluation Framework to assess what hospitals are measuring.

BACKGROUND: Nonprofit hospitals are required to conduct community health needs assessments (CHNA) every 3 years and develop corresponding implementation plans. Implemented strategies must address the identified community needs and be evaluated for impact. PURPOSE: Using the Community Health Implementation Evaluation Framework (CHIEF), we assessed whether and how nonprofit hospitals are evaluating the impact of their CHNA-informed community benefit initiatives. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a content analysis of 83 hospital CHNAs that reported evaluation outcomes drawn from a previously identified 20% random sample ( n = 613) of nonprofit hospitals in the United States. Through qualitative review guided by the CHIEF, we identified and categorized the most common evaluation outcomes reported. RESULTS: A total of 485 strategies were identified from the 83 hospitals' CHNAs. Evaluated strategies most frequently targeted behavioral health ( n = 124, 26%), access ( n = 83, 17%), and obesity/nutrition/inactivity ( n = 68, 14%). The most common type of evaluation outcomes reported by CHIEF category included system utilization ( n = 342, 71%), system implementation ( n = 170, 35%), project management ( n = 164, 34%), and social outcomes ( n = 163, 34%). PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: CHNA evaluation strategies focus on utilization (the number of individuals served), with few focusing on social or health outcomes. This represents a missed opportunity to (a) assess the social and health impacts across individual strategies and (b) provide insight that can be used to inform the allocation of limited resources to maximize the impact of community benefit strategies.

Alignment of substance use community benefit prioritization and service lines in US hospitals: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Non-profit hospitals in the U.S. are required by the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) to conduct a community health needs assessment (CHNA) every three years and to formulate an implementation strategy in response to those needs. Hospitals often identify substance use as a need relevant to their communities in their CHNAs and then must determine whether to create strategies to address such a need within their implementation strategies. The aim of this study is to assess the relationship between a hospital's prioritization of substance use within its community benefit documents and its substance use service offerings, while considering other hospital and community characteristics. METHODS: This study of a national sample of U.S. hospitals utilizes data collected from publicly available CHNAs and implementation strategies produced by hospitals from 2018 to 2021. This cross-sectional study employs descriptive statistics and multivariable analysis to assess relationships between prioritization of substance use on hospital implementation strategies and the services offered by hospitals, with consideration of community and hospital characteristics. Hospital CHNA and strategy documents were collected and then coded to identify whether the substance use needs were prioritized by the hospital. The collected data were incorporated into a data set with secondary data sourced from the 2021 AHA Annual Survey. RESULTS: Multivariable analysis found a significant and positive relationship between the prioritization of substance use as a community need on a hospital's implementation strategy and the number of the services included in this analysis offered by the hospital. Significant and positive relationships were also identified for five service categories and for hospital size. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of service offerings is related both to a hospital's prioritization of substance use and to its size, indicating that these factors are likely inter-related regarding a hospital's sense of its ability to address substance use as a community need. Policymakers should consider why a hospital may not prioritize a need that is prevalent within their community; e.g., whether the organization believes it lacks resources to take such steps. This study also highlights the value of the assessment and implementation strategy process as a way for hospitals to engage with community needs.

Differential impact of hospital and community factors on breadth and depth of hospital population health partnerships.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to identify hospital and county characteristics associated with variation in breadth and depth of hospital partnerships with a broad range of organizations to improve population health. DATA SOURCES: The American Hospital Association Annual Survey provided data on hospital partnerships to improve population health for the years 2017-2019. DESIGN: The study adopts the dimensional publicness theory and social capital framework to examine hospital and county characteristics that facilitate hospital population health partnerships. The two dependent variables were number of local community organizations that hospitals partner with (breadth) and level of engagement with the partners (depth) to improve population health. The independent variables include three dimensions of publicness: Regulative, Normative and Cultural-cognitive measured by various hospital factors and presence of social capital present at county level. Covariates in the multivariate analysis included hospital factors such as bed-size and system membership. METHODS: We used hierarchical linear regression models to assess various hospital and county factors associated with breadth and depth of hospital-community partnerships, adjusting for covariates. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Nonprofit and public hospitals provided a greater breadth (coefficient, 1.61; SE, 0.11; p < 0.001 and coefficient, 0.95; SE, 0.14; p < 0.001) and depth (coefficient, 0.26, SE, 0.04; p < 0.001 & coefficient, 0.13; SE, 0.05; p < 0.05) of partnerships than their for-profit counterparts, partially supporting regulative dimension of publicness. At a county level, we found community social capital positively associated with breadth of partnerships (coefficient, 0.13; SE, 0.08; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An environment that promotes collaboration between hospitals and organizations to improve population health may impact the health of the community by identifying health needs of the community, targeting social determinants of health, or by addressing patient social needs. However, findings suggest that publicness dimensions at an organizational level, which involves a culture of public value, maybe more important than county factors to achieve community building through partnerships.

Rural-urban disparities in the availability of hospital-based screening, medications for opioid use disorder, and addiction consult services.

INTRODUCTION: Hospitals are an ideal setting to stage opioid-related interventions with patients who are hospitalized due to overdose or other substance use-related complications. Transitional opioid programs-which initiate care and provide linkages upon discharge, such as screening, initiation of medications for opioid use disorder, and addiction consult services-have become the gold standard, but implementation has been uneven. The purpose of this study was to assess disparities in the availability of hospital-based transitional opioid programs, across rural and urban hospital settings in the United States. METHODS: Using hospital administrative data paired with county-level demographic data, we conducted bivariate and regression analyses to assess rural-urban differences in the availability of transitional opioid services including screening, addiction consult services, and MOUD in U.S general medical centers, controlling for hospital- and community-level factors. Our sample included 2846 general medical hospitals that completed the 2021 American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey of Hospitals. Our primary outcomes were five self-reported measures: whether the hospital provided screening in the ED; provided screening in the inpatient setting; whether the hospital provided addiction consult services in the ED; provided addiction consult services in the inpatient setting; and whether the hospital provided medications for opioid use disorder. RESULTS: Rural hospitals did not have lower odds of screening for OUD or other SUDs than urban hospitals, but both micropolitan rural counties and noncore rural counties had significantly lower odds of having addiction consult services in either the ED (OR: 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.58, 0.95; OR: 0.68, 95 % CI: 0.50, 0.91) or inpatient setting (OR: 0.76, 95 % CI: 0.59, 0.97; OR: 0.68, 95 % CI: 0.50, 0.93), respectively, or of offering MOUD (OR: 0.69, 95 % CI: 0.52, 0.90; OR: 0.52, 95 % CI: 0.37, 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that evidence-based interventions, such as medications for opioid use disorder and addiction consult services, are less often available in rural hospitals, which may contribute to rural-urban disparities in health outcomes secondary to OUD. A priority for population health improvement should be developing implementation strategies to support rural hospital adoption of transitional opioid programs.

Alzheimer's Centers in US Hospitals: Enough to Adequately Address Dementia Care Nationwide?

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the availability of Alzheimer's Centers (ACs) in US hospitals. METHODS: Utilizing the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, Area Health Resource File, and US Census (n = 3251), we employed multivariable logistic regression to examine hospital, county, and regional predictors of AC availability. RESULTS: Large hospitals (>399 beds) had approximately 14 times higher odds of having an AC than small hospitals (<50 beds; OR = 14.0; 95% CI = 6.44 - 30.46). Counties with a higher proportion of Latino residents, relative to non-Latino Whites, had lower odds of having an AC (OR = .05; 95% CI = .01 - .41). Northeastern (OR = 1.92; 95% CI = 1.15 - 3.22) and Midwestern (OR = 2.12; 95% CI = 1.34 - 3.37) hospitals had higher odds of having an AC than Southern hospitals. DISCUSSION: To address dementia needs and disparities, investment in a national infrastructure is critical.

Substance Use Disorder Program Availability in Safety-Net and Non-Safety-Net Hospitals in the US.

Importance: Safety-net hospitals (SNHs) are ideal sites to deliver addiction treatment to patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), but the availability of these services within SNHs nationwide remains unknown. Objective: To examine differences in the delivery of different SUD programs in SNHs vs non-SNHs across the US and to determine whether these differences are increased in certain types of SNHs depending on ownership. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis used data from the 2021 American Hospital Association Annual Survey of Hospitals to examine the associations of safety-net status and ownership with the availability of SUD services at acute care hospitals in the US. Data analysis was performed from January to March 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: This study used 2 survey questions from the American Hospital Association survey to determine the delivery of 5 hospital-based SUD services: screening, consultation, inpatient treatment services, outpatient treatment services, and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Results: A total of 2846 hospitals were included: 409 were SNHs and 2437 were non-SNHs. The lowest proportion of hospitals reported offering inpatient treatment services (791 hospitals [27%]), followed by MOUD (1055 hospitals [37%]), and outpatient treatment services (1087 hospitals [38%]). The majority of hospitals reported offering consultation (1704 hospitals [60%]) and screening (2240 hospitals [79%]). In multivariable models, SNHs were significantly less likely to offer SUD services across all 5 categories of services (screening odds ratio [OR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.48-0.76]; consultation OR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.47-0.83]; inpatient services OR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55-0.97]; outpatient services OR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.59-0.99]; MOUD OR, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.46-0.78]). With the exception of MOUD, public or for-profit SNHs did not differ significantly from their non-SNH counterparts. However, nonprofit SNHs were significantly less likely to offer all 5 SUD services compared with their non-SNH counterparts (screening OR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.41-0.66]; consultation OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.44-0.73]; inpatient services OR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.33-0.61]; outpatient services OR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.44-0.76]; MOUD OR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.46-0.79]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of SNHs and non-SNHs, SNHs had significantly lower odds of offering the full range of SUD services. These findings add to a growing body of research suggesting that SNHs may face additional barriers to offering SUD programs. Further research is needed to understand these barriers and to identify strategies that support the adoption of evidence-based SUD programs in SNH settings.

Trends in the Prioritization and Implementation of Substance Use Programs by Nonprofit Hospitals: 2015-2021.

OBJECTIVES: Hospitalizations are an important opportunity to address substance use through inpatient services, outpatient care, and community partnerships, yet the extent to which nonprofit hospitals prioritize such services across time remains unknown. The objective of this study is to examine trends in nonprofit hospitals' prioritization and implementation of substance use disorder (SUD) programs. METHODS: We assessed trends in hospital prioritization of substance use as a top five community need and hospital implementation of SUD programing at nonprofit hospitals between 2015 and 2021 using two waves (wave 1: 2015-2018; wave 2: 2019-2021) by examining hospital community benefit reports. We utilized t or χ 2 tests to understand whether there were significant differences in the prioritization and implementation of SUD programs across waves. We used multilevel logistic regression to evaluate the relation between prioritization and implementation of SUD programs, hospital and community characteristics, and wave. RESULTS: Hospitals were less likely to have prioritized SUD but more likely to have implemented SUD programs in the most recent 3 years compared, even after adjusting for the local overdose rate and hospital- and community-level variables. Although most hospitals consistently prioritized and implemented SUD programs during the 2015-2021 period, a 11% removed and 15% never adopted SUD programs at all, despite an overall increase in overdose rates. CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified gaps in hospital SUD infrastructure during a time of elevated need. Failing to address this gap reflects missed opportunities to engage vulnerable populations, provide linkages to treatment, and prevent complications of substance use.

From microbe to metaphor: virus-like problems in organizations.

Despite the important role of problem-solving in organizations, our understanding of the fundamental nature of problems is limited. To generate insights and discussion on this topic, we introduce the metaphor of a "virus-like" problem, which is a special kind of problem that often escapes the awareness of organizational leaders. Virus-like problems differ from other problems in organizations because, just like actual viruses, they are hidden, their source is difficult to identify, and they can quickly spread to others. Integrating the public health and organizational psychology fields, we draw lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic and how it was (mis) managed by public officials to offer a new perspective on problems in organizations and offer practical ideas for how leaders can address virus-like problems of their own.

Evaluation of Community Benefit Activities Among Nonprofit Hospitals, 2018-2021.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined approaches that nonprofit hospitals use to evaluate community benefit activities in the Community Health Needs Assessment/Implementation Plan (CHNA/IP) process. DESIGN: Content analysis of CHNAs/IPs completed between 2018 and 2021 from a 20% stratified random sample (n = 503) of US nonprofit hospitals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A coding sheet was used to record details about the evaluation content reported by hospitals in their CHNAs/IPs. Evaluation was coded into 4 categories: (1) no mention of evaluation; (2) description of evaluation without reporting any measures; (3) reporting reach (number of people served) only; and (4) reporting social/health outcomes. For logistic regression analyses, categories 1 and 2 were grouped together into "no evaluation measures" and categories 3 and 4 were grouped into "evaluation measures" for binary comparison. Multinomial logistic regression was also used to individually examine categories 3 and 4 compared with no evaluation measures. RESULTS: While a majority of nonprofit hospitals (71.4%, n = 359) mentioned evaluation in their CHNAs, almost half (49.7%, n = 250) did not report any evaluation measures. Among the 50.3% (n = 253) of hospitals that reported evaluation measures, 67.2% (n = 170) only reported reach. Fewer than 1 in 5 hospitals (16.5%, n = 83) reported social/health outcomes. Hospitals that hired a consultant (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-2.43) and system members (AOR = 1.76; 95% CI, 1.12-2.75) had higher odds of reporting evaluation measures. Using hospitals that reported no measures as the base category, system members (AOR = 7.71; 95% CI, 2.97-20.00) also had significantly higher odds of reporting social/health outcomes, while rural locations had lower odds (AOR = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Although hospitals are required to evaluate the impact of actions taken to address the health needs identified in their CHNAs, few hospitals are reporting social/health outcomes of such activities. This represents a missed opportunity, as health/social outcomes could be used to inform the allocation of resources to maximize community benefits and the expansion of successful community initiatives.

Hospital Community Benefit Reporting: How Group Reporting Practices Limit Accountability.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the prevalence of group reporting of hospital community benefit efforts to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and understand hospital and community characteristics associated with this practice. DESIGN: The study was based on data collected from publicly available community benefit reports from 2010 to 2019, as well as secondary data from the 2020 American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey. The sample was drawn from the entire nonprofit US hospital population reporting community benefit activities. The analytic plan employed descriptive statistics and bivariate analysis. SETTING: The United States. PARTICIPANTS: All data are self-reported by US hospitals, either through the publication of community benefit reports (IRS Form 990 Schedule H) or a response to the AHA Annual Survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Analyzed variables include whether a hospital reported its community benefit expenditures individually or as a group member; community benefit spending as a percentage of hospital operating expenses; and whether the hospital was part of a multihospital system, with consideration of hospital and community characteristics. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2019, more than 40% of hospitals participated in group reporting, with most doing so consistently. System membership and hospital size were significantly and positively tied to group reporting, with state community benefit policy tied to the lower prevalence of group reporting. CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence of group reporting limits accountability to communities and restricts an accurate assessment of community benefit expenditures, counter to policy intentions. Stakeholders should consider what modifications to reporting rules could be made to promote transparency and to ensure that the effects of community benefit policies align with intentions.

Efforts by critical access hospitals to increase health equity through greater engagement with social determinants of health.

PURPOSE: Greater health care engagement with social determinants of health (SDOH) is critical to improving health equity. However, no national studies have compared programs to address patient social needs among critical access hospitals (CAHs), which are lifelines for rural communities. CAHs generally have fewer resources and receive governmental support to maintain operations. This study considers the extent to which CAHs engage in community health improvement, particularly upstream SDOH, and whether organizational or community factors predict involvement. METHODS: Using descriptive statistics and Poisson regression, we compared 3 types of programs (screening, in-house strategies, and external partnerships) to address the patient social needs between CAHs and non-CAHs, independent of key organizational, county, and state factors. FINDINGS: CAHs were less likely than non-CAHs to have programs to screen patients for social needs, address unmet social needs of patients, and enact community partnerships to address SDOH. When we stratified hospitals according to whether they endorsed an equity-focused approach as an organization, CAHs matched their non-CAH counterparts on all 3 types of programs. CONCLUSIONS: CAHs lag relative to their urban and non-CAH counterparts in their ability to address nonmedical needs of their patients and broader communities. While the Flex Program has shown success in offering technical assistance to rural hospitals, this program has mainly focused on traditional hospital services to address patients' acute health care needs. Our findings suggest that organizational and policy efforts surrounding health equity could bring CAHs in line with other hospitals in terms of their ability to support rural population health.

The public availability of hospital CHNA reports: limitations and potential to study hospital investments in the next phase of public health.

Nonprofit hospitals have been required to complete and make publicly available their community benefit reports for more than a decade, a sign of changing expectations for private health care organizations to explicitly collaborate with public health departments to improve community health. Despite these important changes to practice and policy, no governmental agency provides statistics regarding compliance with this process. To better understand the nature and usefulness of the data provided through these processes, we led a research team that collected and coded Community Health Needs Assessment (CHNA) and Implementation Strategy (IS) Reports for a nationally representative sample of hospitals between 2018 and 2022. We utilized descriptive statistics to understand the frequency of noncompliance; t-tests and chi-square tests were employed to identify characteristics associated with incomplete documents. Approximately 95% of hospitals provided a public CHNA, and approximately 86% made their IS available. The extent of compliance with the CHNA/IS mandate indicates that these documents, paired with existing public health and policy data, offer considerable potential for understanding the investments nonprofit hospitals make to improve health outcomes and health equity in the communities they serve.

For-Profit Hospital Reflections on Community Relationships in the Time of COVID-19.

GOALS: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals and their staffs have been pushed to their limits. Hospitals have had to rethink how they support community health while also providing critical acute care services to combat the morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19. As anchor institutions, hospitals have a significant effect on not only community health and well-being but also on local economies as primary employers and contractors. This study aimed to understand how the pandemic reshaped interactions with community members, staff, and other community organizations and changed the nature of hospital-community engagement among for-profit hospitals. METHODS: We recruited leaders of for-profit hospitals, systems, and a business association that represents for-profit hospitals. We interviewed 28 participants in various leadership roles via telephone or videoconferencing and then thematically coded interview transcriptions. The themes identified in early interviews guided the structure of forthcoming interviews. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: For-profit hospitals appear motivated to address community health needs as anchor institutions in their communities, and these efforts have strengthened and changed in important ways as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, three themes emerged regarding the influence of COVID-19 on hospital-community relationships: Hospitals refocused outreach and engagement efforts to support employees, found essential new ways to safely engage with the community through partnerships and collaborations, and were reminded of the critical roles of social and cultural factors in the health and well-being of individuals and communities. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Hospitals may be able to use lessons learned during the pandemic to support the growing need for community engagement and attention to social determinants of health. The themes that emerged from this study present valuable opportunities for hospitals to carry forward the lessons learned over the course of the pandemic, as they have the potential to improve the delivery of healthcare and community engagement in day-to-day operations as well as in crises.

Association of Medicaid expansion and 1115 waivers for substance use disorders with hospital provision of opioid use disorder services: a cross sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid-related hospitalizations have risen dramatically, placing hospitals at the frontlines of the opioid epidemic. Medicaid expansion and 1115 waivers for substance use disorders (SUDs) are two key policies aimed at expanding access to care, including opioid use disorder (OUD) services. Yet, little is known about the relationship between these policies and the availability of hospital based OUD programs. The aim of this study is to determine whether state Medicaid expansion and adoption of 1115 waivers for SUDs are associated with hospital provision of OUD programs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of a random sample of hospitals (n = 457) from the American Hospital Association's 2015 American Hospital Directory, compiled with the most recent publicly available community health needs assessment (2015-2018). RESULTS: Controlling for hospital characteristics, overdose burden, and socio-demographic characteristics, both Medicaid policies were associated with hospital adoption of several OUD programs. Hospitals in Medicaid expansion states had significantly higher odds of implementing any program related to SUDs (OR: 1.740; 95% CI: 1.032-2.934) as well as some specific activities such as programs for OUD treatment (OR: 1.955; 95% CI: 1.245-3.070) and efforts to address social determinants of health (OR: 6.787; 95% CI: 1.308-35.20). State 1115 waivers for SUDs were not significantly associated with any hospital-based SUD activities. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansion was associated with several hospital programs for addressing OUD. The differential availability of hospital-based OUD programs may indicate an added layer of disadvantage for low-income patients with SUD living in non-expansion states.

For-profit hospitals could play a distinctive role as anchor institutions.

RATIONALE: Hospitals have a longstanding presence in United States communities and contribute to economic development and community well-being through widespread employment, purchasing and direct community engagement. Most of the data on anchor institutions to date, however, has focused on nonprofit organisations, especially nonprofit hospitals, colleges and universities. The aim of this study is to better understand if for-profit hospitals engage in explicit anchor activities, and whether these organisations adopt unique strategies in carrying out this study. METHODS: We used an inductive, qualitative approach to understand how for-profit hospitals perceive their anchoring efforts as distinct as compared to nonprofits. We conducted in-depth interviews with 23 hospital leaders, researchers and members of advocacy organisations, representing 11 different hospital organisations and 10 communities; and used thematic analysis to generate study findings. RESULTS: For-profit hospitals do see at least three primary differences that render them distinctive in their efforts to anchor themselves within their communities-namely, barriers that for-profits encounter that nonprofits may not; their emphasis on strategic and synergistic practices; and their status as hospitals that also support their communities economically as tax-paying entities. CONCLUSION: With a better understanding of their unique contributions as for-profit organisations, policymakers can identify ways to leverage these hospitals to support their communities through outreach and engagement.

Overview of the Most Commonly Identified Public Health Needs and Strategies in a Nationally Representative Sample of Nonprofit Hospitals.

Nonprofit hospitals have been required to conduct Community Health Needs Assessments and develop implementation strategies for almost a decade, yet little is known about this process on the national level. Using a nationally representative dataset of 2019 to 2021 nonprofit hospital community benefit reports, we assessed patterns in hospital identification of community health needs and investments in corresponding programs. The five most common needs identified by hospitals were mental health (identified by 87% of hospitals), substance use (76%), access (73%), social determinants of health (69%), and chronic disease (67%). The five most common needs addressed were: mental health (87%), access (81%), substance use (77%), chronic disease (72%), and obesity (71%). Institutional and community-level factors were associated with whether hospitals identified and addressed health needs. Hospitals often addressed needs that they did not identify, particularly related to the provision of medical services-which has important implications for population health improvement.

Comparison of Nonprofit Hospital Community Benefit Substance Abuse Identification and Practice Implementation in Appalachian and Non-Appalachian Counties.

CONTEXT: As substance use continues to be a public health crisis nationally, it disproportionately affects the Appalachian region. OBJECTIVES: Our research seeks to explore whether there is a greater substance use burden in Appalachia and whether that burden is being prioritized in local hospital systems' community health needs assessments (CHNAs) and implementation strategies (ISs). SETTING: The setting for this study is the 13 states that are represented within the Appalachian region. PARTICIPANTS: This study examines CHNAs and ISs of a stratified random sample (n = 140) representing 20% of the hospital population within the identified states (those with counties within the Appalachian region). Each sampled hospital is labeled as Appalachian or non-Appalachian based on its county designation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Our main outcome measures were the percentage of hospitals listing substance abuse in their CHNAs, with comparisons between Appalachian and non-Appalachian subgroups, and percent addressing substance use in their ISs in Appalachia and non-Appalachia. DESIGN: Community health needs assessments and ISs produced between the years 2018 and 2021 were gathered for each hospital within the sample; each document was then coded for the inclusion of substance use. Chi-square tests and logistic regression were employed to conduct the analysis and draw conclusions. RESULTS: Although all non-Appalachian Counties that had substance use listed as a need within a CHNA correspondingly addressed that need in their ISs, only 75% of Appalachian counties that listed substance use a need went on to prioritize substance use in an IS. In addition, logistic regression indicated no significant link between overdose rates and addressing substance use. CONCLUSIONS: These findings further support other literature that suggests that lack of resources is limiting Appalachian health care organizations' ability to address substance use issues.

Community Engagement in Nonprofit Hospital Community Health Needs Assessments and Implementation Plans.

CONTEXT: Nonprofit hospitals are required to provide community benefits in exchange for their tax-exempt status. This includes a community health needs assessment (CHNA) to identify community needs and an implementation plan (IP) with strategies to address top needs every 3 years. In addition, hospitals are required to engage community members in these assessments. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore community engagement and representation in CHNAs and IPs. DESIGN: The researchers conducted a content analysis of CHNAs and IPs from a nationally representative sample of 503 nonprofit hospitals between 2018 and 2021. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For CHNAs, a coding sheet was used to record the types of community members engaged by hospitals. For IPs, the team coded whether community engagement was reported at all and then performed an in-depth analysis to identify categories of community members, engagement methods used, and roles of community input. Finally, frequencies of categories across IPs were quantified. RESULTS: Eighty-nine percent of hospitals (n = 449) engaged community members in their CHNA, but only 14% (n = 71) engaged community members in their IP. An in-depth look at these IPs found that hospitals engaged underserved/minority populations, low-income populations, high school students, public health experts, and stakeholder organizations. Community members were involved in multiple steps, including brainstorming ideas, narrowing down needs, developing strategies, and reacting to proposed strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Although IPs are intended to benefit the community, there is a lack of community involvement reported in IPs. Hospitals may need incentives, resources, and personnel support to ensure representation of community members throughout the entire CHNA and IP process.