Title V Maternal and Child Health Services Block Grant Priority Needs and Linked Performance Measures: Current Patterns and Trends (2000-2015)

Impact of State Prioritization of Safe Infant Sleep Programs on Supine Sleep Positioning for Non-Hispanic White and Non-Hispanic Black Infants

OBJECTIVE

Investigate whether safe infant sleep prioritization by states through the Title V Maternal and Child Block Grant in 2010 differentially impacted maternal report of supine sleep positioning (SSP) for Non-Hispanic White (NHW) and Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) U.S.-born infants.

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed retrospective cross-sectional data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) from 2005 to 2015 from 4 states: WV and OK (Intervention) and AR and UT (Control). PRAMS is a population-based surveillance system of maternal perinatal experiences which is linked to infant birth certificates. Piece-wise survey linear regression models were used to estimate the difference in the change in slopes of SSP percents in the pre- (2005-2009) and post- (2011-2015) periods, controlling for maternal and infant characteristics. Models were also stratified by race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

From 2005 to 2015, for NHW infants, SSP improved from 61.5% and 70.2% to 82.8% and 82.3% for intervention and control states, respectively. For NHB infants, SSP improved from 30.6% and 26.5% to 64.5% and 53.1% for intervention and control states, respectively. After adjustment for maternal characteristics, there was no difference in the rate of SSP change from the pre- to post- intervention periods for either NHW or NHB infants in intervention or control groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared with control states that did not prioritize safe infant sleep in their 2010 Title V Block Grant needs assessment, intervention states experienced no difference in SSP improvement rates for NHW and NHB infants. While SSP increased for all infants during the study period, there was no causal relationship between states' prioritization of safe infant sleep and SSP improvement. More targeted approaches may be needed to reduce the racial/ethnic disparity in SSP and reduce the risk for sleep-associated infant death.

KEY POINTS

· Supine sleep positioning improved for Black and White infants in the U.S.. · State prioritization of safe infant sleep did not directly impact SSP for NHB or NHW infants.. · More targeted approaches may be needed to reduce racial/ethnic disparities in safe sleep practices.

Approaches, barriers, and facilitators to abortion-related work in U.S. health departments: perspectives of maternal and child heath and family planning professionals

BACKGROUND

Public health agencies in the United States have engaged in abortion-related activities for nearly 50 years. Prior research indicates that, while most state health departments engage in some abortion-related work, their efforts reflect what is required by law rather than the breadth of core public health activities. In contrast, local health departments appear to engage in abortion-related activities less often but, when they do, initiate a broader range of activities.

METHODS

This study aimed to: 1) describe the abortion-related activities undertaken by maternal and child health (MCH) and family planning professionals in state and local health departments; 2) understand how health departments approach their programmatic work on abortion, and 3) examine the facilitators and barriers to whether and how abortion work is implemented. Between November 2017 and June 2018, we conducted key informant interviews with 29 professionals working in 22 state and local health departments across the U.S. Interview data were thematically coded and analyzed using an iterative approach.

RESULTS

MCH and family planning professionals described a range of abortion-related activities undertaken within their health departments. We identified three approaches to this work: those mandated strictly by law or policy; those initiated when mandated by law but informed by public health principles (e.g., scientific accuracy, expert engagement, lack of bias, promoting access to care) in implementation; and those initiated by professionals within the department to meet identified needs. More state health departments engaged in activities when mandated, and more local health departments initiated activities based on identified needs. Key barriers and facilitators included political climate, funding opportunities and restrictions, and departmental leadership.

CONCLUSIONS

Although state health departments are tasked with implementing legally-required abortion-related activities, some agencies bring public health principles to their mandated work. Efforts are needed to engage public health professionals in developing and implementing best practices around engaging in abortion-related activities.