Policy implementation and outcome evaluation: establishing a framework and expanding capacity for advocacy organizations to assess the impact of their work in public policy.

Advocacy organizations can play a crucial role in evaluating whether legislation or regulation has had its intended effect by supporting robust public policy implementation and outcome evaluation. The American Heart Association, working with expert advisors, has developed a framework for effective evaluation that can be used by advocacy organizations, in partnership with researchers, public health agencies, funders, and policy makers to assess the health and equity impact of legislation and regulation over time. Advocacy organizations can use parts of this framework to evaluate the impact of policies relevant to their own advocacy and public policy efforts and inform policy development and guide their organizational resource allocation. Ultimately, working in partnership, advocacy organizations can help bring capacity, commitment and funding to this important implementation and outcome evaluation work that informs impactful public policy for equitable population health and well-being.

Addressing Structural Racism Through Public Policy Advocacy: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the American Heart Association created a new 2024 Impact Goal with health equity at its core, in recognition of the increasing health disparities in our country and the overwhelming evidence of the damaging effect of structural racism on cardiovascular and stroke health. Concurrent with the announcement of the new Impact Goal was the release of an American Heart Association presidential advisory on structural racism, recognizing racism as a fundamental driver of health disparities and directing the American Heart Association to advance antiracist strategies regarding science, business operations, leadership, quality improvement, and advocacy. This policy statement builds on the call to action put forth in our presidential advisory, discussing specific opportunities to leverage public policy in promoting overall well-being and rectifying those long-standing structural barriers that impede the progress that we need and seek for the health of all communities. Although this policy statement discusses difficult aspects of our past, it is meant to provide a forward-looking blueprint that can be embraced by a broad spectrum of stakeholders who share the association's commitment to addressing structural racism and realizing true health equity.

Value-Based Payment for Clinicians Treating Cardiovascular Disease: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association.

Clinician payment is transitioning from fee-for-service to value-based payment, with reimbursement tied to health care quality and cost. However, the overarching goals of value-based payment-to improve health care quality, lower costs, or both-have been largely unmet. This policy statement reviews the current state of value-based payment and provides recommended best practices for future design and implementation. The policy statement is divided into sections that detail different aspects of value-based payment: (1) key program design features (patient population, quality measurement, cost measurement, and risk adjustment), (2) the role of equity during design and evaluation, (3) adjustment of payment, and (4) program implementation and evaluation. Each section introduces the topic, describes important considerations, and lists examples from existing programs. Each section includes recommended best practices for future program design. The policy statement highlights 4 key themes for successful value-based payment. First, programs should carefully weigh the incentives between lowering cost and improving quality of care and ensure that there is adequate focus on quality of care. Second, the expansion of value-based payment should be a tool for improving equity, which is central to quality of care and should be a focal point of program design and evaluation. Third, value-based payment should continue to move away from fee for service toward more flexible funding that allows clinicians to focus resources on the interventions that best help patients. Last, successful programs should find ways to channel clinicians' intrinsic motivation to improve their performance and the care for their patients. These principles should guide the future development of clinician value-based payment models.

Public policy for healthy living: How COVID-19 has changed the landscape.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had a transformational impact on public policy as governments played a leading role, working alongside and coordinating with business/industry, healthcare, public health, education, transportation, researchers, non-governmental organizations, philanthropy, and media/communications. This paper summarizes the impact of the pandemic on different areas of public policy affecting healthy living and cardiovascular health including prevention (i.e., nutrition, physical activity, air quality, tobacco use), risk factors for chronic disease (hypertension, diabetes, obesity, substance abuse), access to health care, care delivery and payment reform, telehealth and digital health, research, and employment policy. The paper underscores where public policy is evolving and where there are needs for future evidence base to inform policy development, and the intersections between the public and private sectors across the policy continuum. There is a continued need for global multi-sector coordination to optimize population health.

The contribution of research to racial health equity? Blame and responsibility in navigating the status quo of anti-black systemic racism.

Thirty-seven years ago, the Secretary's Task Force on Black and Minority Health called attention to a "national paradox" of persistent Black-White health disparities despite overall health improvements for the nation (HHS, 1985). Subsequent updates to the "Heckler Report" came to the same conclusion; Black Americans continued to exhibit poorer health in comparison to White Americans (Satcher et al., 2005). Current population health statistics demonstrate Black-White health disparities comparable to 1985 (AHRQ, 2018; Shiels et al., 2021; Wall et al., 2018). Although psychological, behavioral, social, and economic factors all contribute to Black-White differences in health, there is a noticeable increase in discussions about the importance of systemic racism in producing racial health disparities. This article addresses three questions relevant to research on racism and the health of Black Americans: (1) Why has academic public health research on racism failed to reduce racial health disparities? (2) What can academic public health scientists do differently to reduce the impact of systemic racism on inequities among Black and White Americans? (3) What can Black Americans do in the face of present-day anti-Black systemic racism? We argue that to convert the vision of health equity into a visible reality, health equity research scientists must move beyond discussion, observation, and description. We also argue that to demonstrate progress in reducing racial health disparities, health equity scientists will need to work much more directly on eradicating racism as a fundamental cause of health differences between Black and White Americans. As scientists, the challenge we face is how to accomplish this mission without leaving the realm of science. Racism is a social determinant of Black health and social determinants are political problems. Political problems require political solutions.

Addressing social and racial justice in public policy for healthy living.

Long-standing health disparities stemming from the historical, inequitable distribution of wealth, power, and privilege in the United States exist across almost every health indicator and outcome. There is a need for equitable policy, systems, and environment changes that are rooted in an understanding of the historical arc of structural racism across obesity prevention and treatment, ending tobacco and nicotine addiction and increasing access to healthy, affordable foods and physical activity opportunities and infrastructure. This paper explores the influence of structural inequities on the proliferation of health-compromising social conditions, and opportunities to leverage the policymaking process at the local, state, and federal levels to cultivate environments that support healthy living. Policy makers, community change leaders and advocacy organizations, with powerful grassroots voices can catalyze movements, advocacy campaigns and equitable policy change that address race and social justice and support healthy living for all.

Maternal micronutrient status as a risk factor for perinatal mortality in a Tanzanian randomized controlled trial.

The objective of this study was to determine if maternal micronutrient status (specifically iron) during pregnancy is a risk factor for perinatal mortality among women in Tanzania. Secondary analysis of data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled vitamin A supplementation trial conducted between August 2010-March 2013 was used to assess iron intake among women who experienced a stillbirth or early neonatal death. The mean dietary iron intake (measured using a quantitative Food Frequency Questionnaire) for this population was 12.64 mg/day (SD = 6.32). There were 206 cases of perinatal mortality. Three classifications of dietary iron intake were devised and risk ratios were calculated using the Log Binomial Regression Model: <18 mg/day (RR: 2.13), 18-27 mg/day (RR: 2.63), & <27 mg/day (the reference group to which the first two classification groups were compared). There was neither a significant relationship found among women who consumed iron levels <18 mg/day or between 18-27 mg/day of iron compared to women who consumed more than 27 mg/day of iron, but on average there was twice the risk for perinatal mortality. The current study is consistent with previous literature findings and supports the need for more efficacious nutrition strategies.

Call to Action: Maternal Health and Saving Mothers: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association.

The United States has the highest maternal mortality rates among developed countries, and cardiovascular disease is the leading cause. Therefore, the American Heart Association has a unique role in advocating for efforts to improve maternal health and to enhance access to and delivery of care before, during, and after pregnancy. Several initiatives have shaped the time course of major milestones in advancing maternal and reproductive health equity in the United States. There have been significant strides in improving the timeliness of data reporting in maternal mortality surveillance and epidemiological programs in maternal and child health, yet more policy reforms are necessary. To make a sustainable and systemic impact on maternal health, further efforts are necessary at the societal, institutional, stakeholder, and regulatory levels to address the racial and ethnic disparities in maternal health, to effectively reduce inequities in care, and to mitigate maternal morbidity and mortality. In alignment with American Heart Association's mission "to be a relentless force for longer, healthier lives," this policy statement outlines the inequities that influence disparities in maternal outcomes and current policy approaches to improving maternal health and suggests additional potentially impactful actions to improve maternal outcomes and ultimately save mothers' lives.

Medication adherence: Importance, issues and policy: A policy statement from the American Heart Association.

Medications do not work in patients who do not take them. This true statement highlights the importance of medication adherence. Providers are often frustrated by the lack of consistent medication adherence in the patients they care for. Today with the time constraints that providers face, it becomes difficult to discover the extent of non-adherence. There are certainly many challenges in medication adherence not only at the patient-provider level but also within a healthy system and finally in insurers and payment systems. In a cross-sectional survey of unintentional nonadherence in over 24,000 adults with chronic illness, including hypertension, diabetes and hyperlipidemia, 62% forgot to take medications and 37% had run out of their medications within a year. These sobering data necessitate immediate policy and systems solutions to support patients in adherence. Medication adherence for cardiovascular diseases (CVD) has the potential to change outcomes, such as blood pressure control and subsequent events. The American Heart Association (AHA)/American Stroke Association (ASA) has a goal of improving medication adherence in CVD and stroke prevention and treatment. This paper will explore medication adherence with all its inherent issues and suggest policy and structural changes that must happen in order to transform medication adherence levels in the U.S. and achieve the AHA/ASA's health impact goals.

Advancing Healthcare Reform: The American Heart Association's 2020 Statement of Principles for Adequate, Accessible, and Affordable Health Care: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association.

The mission of the American Heart Association is to be a relentless force for a world of longer, healthier lives. The American Heart Association has consistently prioritized the needs and perspective of the patient in taking positions on healthcare reform while recognizing the importance of biomedical research, providers, and healthcare delivery systems in advancing the care of patients and the prevention of disease. The American Heart Association's vision for healthcare reform describes the foundational changes needed for the health system to serve the best interests of patients and to achieve health care and coverage that are adequate, accessible, and affordable for everyone living in the United States. The American Heart Association is committed to advancing the dialogue around healthcare reform and has prepared this updated statement of our principles, placed in the context of the advances in coverage and care that have occurred after the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the rapidly changing landscape of healthcare delivery systems, and our evolving recognition that efforts to prevent cardiovascular disease can have synergistic benefit in preventing other diseases and improving overall well-being. These updated principles focus on expanding access to affordable health care and coverage; enhancing the availability of evidence-based preventive services; eliminating disparities that limit the availability and equitable delivery of health care; strengthening the public health infrastructure to respond to social determinants of health; prioritizing and accelerating investments in biomedical research; and growing a diverse, culturally competent health and healthcare workforce prepared to meet the challenges of delivering high-value health care.