A qualitative inquiry to explore management of distal radius fracture by certified hand therapists.

BACKGROUND: Distal radius fractures (DRF) are extremely common in middle-aged and elderly. Certified Hand Therapists (CHT) are experts in managing hand injuries including DRF. PURPOSE: Using qualitative methodology, this study examined practice patterns among CHT and understand prevalent common patterns in managing DRF. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive qualitative study. METHODS: This study utilized a qualitative descriptive method with an inductive approach to discern the practices of CHT in managing DRF. A purposive sample of practicing CHT was assembled. A semi-structured interview guide facilitated qualitative interviews using open-ended questions to assess practices of CHT in the domains of assessment, interventions, and appropriateness for discharge. Two student physical therapists transcribed the interviews, which were verified by a third rater for accuracy. Thematic content analysis guided the coding and analyses of the interview data. A two-phase coding process was conducted using Nvivo software. Two study authors developed initial codebook and completed subsequent analysis of transcripts. RESULTS: Of the 12 participants, five were PT and seven were OT with an average experience of 14.1 years as a CHT. Practice patterns across domains were largely consistent among CHT. All CHTs reported inquiring about severity of displacement of DRF, orthopedic management, comorbidities, and medical history as well as examining wrist/hand range of motion (ROM), grip strength (GS), and wrist functions (n = 12). A large majority administered outcome measures and performed sensory and integumentary assessment. Patient education regarding injury and exercises was the key element for interventions. Adequate gains in GS, wrist functions, wrist ROM, and ability to use wrist/hand for functional tasks were the key benchmarks for discharge from care. DISCUSSION: Most practice behaviors were common among CHTs while managing DRF. Some variations exist depending whether their primary discipline is PT or OT. The results highlight knowledge-to-action gap, where most CHTs do not integrate fall-risk management in DRF. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified common practice patterns among CHTs in managing DRF while also identifying opportunity to improve practice by integrating assessment of balance and fall-risk.

Community Engagement in Behavioral Medicine: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral medicine has made key contributions toward improving health outcomes. Engaging community partners in research is critical to addressing persistent health inequities. The aim of this scoping review was to explore how researchers engaged community partners within the field of behavioral medicine research from 2005 to 2023. METHOD: Publication databases and gray literature were searched for research that engaged community partners to address questions relevant to behavioral medicine. Articles were screened by title and abstract, and then by full text. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were coded using the framework provided by the Engagement Navigator to identify engagement approaches, methods, and tools and when they were used during the research. RESULTS: Of 1486 articles initially identified, 58 met the inclusion criteria. Most articles used well-known approaches (e.g., community-based participatory research; 67%), methods (e.g., advisory committees; 59%), and tools (e.g., interviews; 41%), and engaged with healthcare service providers (62%) and/or patients (53%). Community partners were most often included in research planning and design (79%), and less often in dissemination (45%). CONCLUSION: Community engagement has considerable potential to address health inequities. Our assessment of the approaches, methods, and tools used by behavioral medicine researchers to engage with a diverse range of community partners points toward promising strategies for enhancing the impact of community engagement. Researchers should incorporate explicit descriptions of community engagement strategies in publications, an outcome that could be facilitated by clear publishing guidelines, structured reporting tools, and clear messaging from funders about the value of community engagement in behavioral medicine research.

Association of Health Insurance with Contraceptive Use and Interpersonal Quality of Contraceptive Care in the Southeast United States.

OBJECTIVES: Health insurance remains an important dimension of contraceptive access. This study investigated the role of insurance in contraceptive use, access, and quality in South Carolina and Alabama. METHODS: The study used a cross-sectional statewide representative survey that assessed reproductive health experiences and contraceptive use among reproductive-age women in South Carolina and Alabama. The primary outcomes were current contraceptive method use, barriers to access (inability to afford wanted method, delay/trouble obtaining wanted method), receipt of any contraceptive care in the past 12 months, and perceived quality of care. The independent variable was insurance type. Generalized linear models were applied to estimate prevalence ratios for each outcome's association with insurance type while adjusting for potentially confounding variables. RESULTS: Nearly 1 in 5 women (17.6%) was uninsured, and 1 in 4 women (25.3%) reported not using a contraceptive method at the time of the survey. Compared with women with private insurance, women with no insurance had a lower likelihood of current method use (adjusted prevalence ratio 0.75; 95% confidence interval 0.60-0.92) and receipt of contraceptive care in the past 12 months (adjusted prevalence ratio 0.61; 95% confidence interval 0.45-0.82). These women also were more likely to experience cost barriers to access care. The insurance type was not significantly associated with the interpersonal quality of contraceptive care. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the need for expanding Medicaid in states that did not do so under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, interventions to increase the number of providers who accept Medicaid patients, and protections to Title X funding as key elements for enhancing contraceptive access and population health outcomes.

Contraceptive care service provision via telehealth early in the COVID-19 pandemic at rural and urban federally qualified health centers in 2 southeastern states.

PURPOSE: To investigate telehealth use for contraceptive service provision among rural and urban federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Alabama (AL) and South Carolina (SC) during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This is a mixed-methods study using data from the FQHC Contraceptive Care Survey and key informant interviews with FQHC staff in AL and SC conducted in 2020. Differences between rural and urban clinics in telehealth use for contraceptive service provision were assessed with a chi-square test of independence. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and coded to identify facilitators and barriers to telehealth. FINDINGS: Telehealth for contraceptive care increased during the early months of the pandemic relative to prepandemic. Fewer rural clinics than urban clinics provided telehealth for contraceptive counseling (16.3% vs 50.6%) (P = .0002), emergency contraception (0.0% vs 16.1%) (P = .004), and sexually transmitted infection care (16.3% vs 34.6%) (P = .031). Key facilitators of telehealth were reimbursement policy, electronic infrastructure and technology, and funding for technology. Barriers included challenges with funding for telehealth, limited electronic infrastructure, and reduced staffing capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in telehealth service provision for contraceptive care between rural and urban FQHCs highlight the need for supportive strategies to increase access to care for low-income rural populations, particularly in AL and SC. It is essential for public and private entities to support the implementation and continuation of telehealth among rural clinics, particularly, investing in widespread and clinic-level electronic infrastructure and technology for telehealth, such as broadband and electronic health record systems compatible with telehealth technology.

Telehealth for Contraceptive Care During the Initial Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic at Local Health Departments in 2 US States: A Mixed-Methods Approach.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined implementation of telehealth for contraceptive care among health departments (HDs) in 2 Southern US states with centralized/largely centralized governance structures during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustaining access to contraceptive care for underserved communities during public health emergencies is critical. Identifying facilitators and barriers to adaptive service provision helps inform state-level decision making and has implications for public health policy and practice, particularly in states with centralized HD governance. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study including a survey of HD clinic administrators and key informant interviews with clinic- and system-level staff in 2 states conducted in 2020. SETTING: Health department clinics in 2 Southern US states. PARTICIPANTS: Clinic administrators (survey) and clinic- and system-level respondents (key informant interviews). Participation in the research was voluntary and de-identified. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Telehealth implementation for contraceptive care assessed by survey and measured by the percentage of clinics reporting telehealth service provision during the pandemic; and (2) facilitators and barriers to telehealth implementation for contraceptive care assessed by key informant interviews. For survey data, bivariate differences between the states in telehealth implementation for contraceptive care were assessed using χ2 and Fisher exact tests. Interview transcripts were coded, with emphasis on interrater reliability and consensus coding, and analyzed for emerging themes. RESULTS: A majority of HD clinics in both states (60% in state 1 and 81% in state 2) reported a decrease in contraceptive care patient volume during March-June 2020 compared with the average volume in 2019. More HD clinics in state 1 than in state 2 implemented telehealth for contraceptive services, including contraceptive counseling, initial and refill hormonal contraception, emergency contraception and sexually transmitted infection care, and reported facilitators of telehealth. Medicaid reimbursement was a predominant facilitator of telehealth, whereas lack of implementation policies and procedures and reduced staffing capacity were predominant barriers. Electronic infrastructure and technology also played a role. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of telehealth for contraceptive services varied between state HD agencies in the early phase of the pandemic. Medicaid reimbursement policy and directives from HD agency leadership are key to telehealth service provision among HDs in centralized states.

Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama.

This study operationalized the five dimensions of health care access in the context of contraceptive service provision and used this framework to examine access to contraceptive care at health department (HD) (Title X funded) and federally qualified health center (FQHC) (primarily non-Title X funded) clinics in South Carolina and Alabama. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2017/18 that assessed clinic-level characteristics, policies, and practices related to contraceptive provision. Provision of different contraceptive methods was examined between clinic types. Survey items were mapped to the dimensions of access and internal consistency for each scale was tested with Cronbach's alpha. Scores of access were developed and differences by clinic type were evaluated with an independent t-test. The overall response rate was 68.3% and the sample included 235 clinics. HDs (96.9%) were significantly more likely to provide IUDs and/or Impants on-site than FQHCs (37.4%) (P < 0.0001). Scales with the highest consistency were Availability: Clinical Policy (24 items) (alpha = 0.892) and Acceptability (43 items) (alpha = 0.834). HDs had higher access scores than FQHCs for the Availability: Clinical Policy scale (0.58, 95% CL 0.55, 0.61) vs (0.29, 95% CL 0.25, 0.33) and Affordability: Administrative Policy scale (0.86, 95% CL 0.83, 0.90) vs (0.47, 95% CL 0.41, 0.53). FQHCs had higher access scores than HDs for Affordability: Insurance Policy (0.78, 95% CL 0.72, 0.84) vs (0.56, 95% CL 0.53, 0.59). These findings highlight strengths and gaps in contraceptive care access. Future studies must examine the impact of each dimension of access on clinic-level contraceptive utilization.

Contraceptive Access at Federally Qualified Health Centers During the South Carolina Choose Well Initiative: A Qualitative Analysis of Staff Perceptions and Experiences.

Introduction: Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) provide essential contraceptive services to low-income individuals; yet, access to all method options, notably intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants, may be limited at non-Title X FQHCs. The South Carolina (SC) Choose Well initiative is a statewide contraceptive access initiative that was launched in 2017 and extends into 2022. Choose Well established a collaborative network between training and clinical partners and is aimed at facilitating implementation of contraceptive care best practices through capacity-building and training of clinical and administrative staff in partner organizations. The initiative provided funding for workforce expansion and contraceptive methods. We examined perceptions of staff from Choose Well-participating FQHCs regarding contraceptive access during the first 2 years of the initiative, including factors that facilitated or posed access challenges as well as sustaining factors. This study informs the process evaluation of Choose Well while providing data critical for uncovering and scaling up contraceptive access initiatives. Materials and Methods: Interviews were conducted with FQHC staff (n = 34) in 2018 and 2019 to assess Choose Well implementation and were recorded, transcribed, and double-coded via at least 80% interrater reliability or consensus coding. Data were analyzed according to clinical and administrative factors influencing contraceptive access. Results: Increased capacity for contraceptive counseling and provision through training and external funding for IUDs and implants were the most noted clinical factors facilitating access. Streamlining workflow processes was also a facilitator. Buy-in and engagement among staff and leadership emerged as a facilitator at some clinics and as a barrier at others. Policy/structural factors related to costs of devices and insurance coverage were identified as threats to sustainability. Conclusions: The Choose Well initiative contributed to the perception of an increase in contraceptive access at participating FQHCs in SC. Statewide contraceptive access initiatives have the potential to support FQHCs in meeting their clients' contraceptive needs. Organizational buy-in, sustainability of funding, and training are key to realizing the full potential of these initiatives.