HRSA's Models That Work Program: implications for improving access to primary health care

Using Public-Private Partnerships to Mitigate Disparities in Access to Genetic Services: Lessons from Wisconsin

PURPOSE

This mixed-methods study reports on an outreach clinics program designed to deliver genetic services to medically underserved communities in Wisconsin.

METHODOLOGY

We show the geographic distribution, funding patterns, and utilization trends for outreach clinics over a 20-year period. Interviews with program planners and outreach clinic staff show how external and internal constraints limited the program's capacity. We compare clinic operations to the conceptual models guiding program design.

FINDINGS

Our findings show that state health officials had to scale back financial support for outreach clinic activities while healthcare providers faced increasing pressure from administrators to reduce investments in charity care. These external and internal constraints led to a decline in the overall number of patients served. We also find that redistribution of clinics to the Milwaukee area increased utilization among Hispanics but not among African-Americans. Our interviews suggest that these patterns may be a function of shortcomings embedded in the planning models.

IMPLICATIONS

Planning models have three shortcomings. First, they do not identify the mitigation of health disparities as a specific goal. Second, they fail to acknowledge that partners face escalating profit-seeking mandates that may limit their capacity to provide charity services. Finally, they underemphasize the importance of seeking trusted partners, especially in working with communities that have been historically marginalized.

CONTRIBUTION

There has been little discussion about equitably leveraging genetic advances that improve healthcare quality and efficacy. The role of State Health Agencies in mitigating disparities in access to genetic services has been largely ignored in the sociological literature.

A scoping literature review of collaboration between primary care and public health

AIM

The purpose of this scoping literature review was to determine what is known about: 1) structures and processes required to build successful collaborations between primary care (PC) and public health (PH); 2) outcomes of such collaborations; and 3) markers of their success.

BACKGROUND

Collaboration between PC and PH is believed to enable more effective individual and population services than what might be achieved by either alone.

METHODS

The study followed established methods for a scoping literature review and was guided by a framework that identifies systemic, organizational and interactional determinants for collaboration. The review was restricted to articles published between 1988 and 2008. Published quantitative and qualitative primary studies, evaluation research, systematic and other types of reviews, as well as descriptive accounts without an explicit research design, were included if they addressed either the structures or processes to build collaboration or the outcomes or markers of such collaboration, and were published in English.

FINDINGS

The combined search strategy yielded 6125 articles of which 114 were included. Systemic-level factors influencing collaboration included: government involvement, policy and fit with local needs; funding and resource factors, power and control issues; and education and training. Lack of a common agenda; knowledge and resource limitations; leadership, management and accountability issues; geographic proximity of partners; and shared protocols, tools and information sharing were influential at the organizational level. Interpersonal factors included having a shared purpose; philosophy and beliefs; clear roles and positive relationships; and effective communication and decision-making strategies. Reported benefits of collaboration included: improved chronic disease management; communicable disease control; and maternal child health. More research is needed to explore the conditions and contexts in which collaboration between PC and PH makes most sense and potential gains outweigh the associated risks and costs.

Improving quality of care and promoting health care system change: The role of community-based coalitions

As part of their community action plans, the Allies Against Asthma coalitions have developed efforts to improve quality of care and promote health care system change. All the coalitions have used an interdisciplinary collaborative approach to design these strategies and demonstrated a range of intervention approaches appropriate to their local context and circumstances. The coalitions' collective experience suggests that coalitions provide three key forces for quality improvement and change that may be lacking in the current fragmented U.S. health care system--motivation to change the status quo, integration across systems, and accountability for results. The collaborative and empowering processes that a coalition model encourages and the direct advocacy opportunity provided to the consumer appear to bring these forces into play.

Charity care programs: part of the solution or part of the problem?

Images