Exploring Relationships Between State-Level LGBTQ Inclusivity and BRFSS Indicators of Mental Health and Risk Behaviors: A Secondary Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Minority Stress Theory suggests that repeated exposure to enacted stigma adversely affects mental health. States have wide authority to enact policies affecting the level of inclusivity experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) residents. The purpose of this study was to explore relationships between states' level of LGBTQ inclusivity and indicators of mental health/risk behaviors among an LGBTQ sample.

METHODS

The 2018 Human Rights Campaign State Equality Index (SEI) and the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey (BRFSS) were used to examine relationships between states' levels of LGBTQ inclusivity (predictor variable) and indicators of mental health/risk behaviors (outcome variables). Relationships were explored using descriptive statistics and survey-weighted logistic regression.

RESULTS

Lower state inclusivity increased odds of fair/poor general health (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.48), increased odds of poor mental health days (AOR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.11-1.62), increased odds of smoking (AOR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.27-2.07), and increased odds of heavy drinking (AOR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.26-1.86) and binge drinking (AOR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.01-1.49). State inclusivity did not influence odds of a depressive disorder diagnosis or driving under the influence of alcohol.

CONCLUSIONS

LGBTQ persons in restrictive states had increased odds of experiencing several indicators of mental health and risk behaviors. More research is needed to determine whether state policies affect other domains of LGBTQ persons' health. Health care providers should be mindful of LGBTQ persons' mental health/risk behaviors and the state policy environment, and should seek to implement mitigating health care strategies such as the use of validated assessment.

The pros and cons of the implementation of a chronic care model in European rural primary care: the points of view of European rural general practitioners

INTRODUCTION

This article describes the views of European rural general practitioners regarding the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of the implementation of a chronic care model (CCM) in European rural primary care.

METHODS

This was a mixed-methods online survey. Data were collected from 227 general practitioners between May and December 2017. Categorical data were analysed using descriptive methods while free-text responses were analysed using qualitative methods. The setting was rural primary care in nine European countries (including Central and Eastern Europe). Main outcomes measures were respondents' evaluations of a chronic care model in their rural healthcare settings in terms of SWOT.

RESULTS

The SWOT analysis showed that the expertise of healthcare professionals and the strength of relationships and communications between professionals, caregivers and patients are positive components of the CCM system. However, ensuring adequate staffing levels and staff competency are issues that would need to be addressed. Opportunities included the need to enable patients to participate in decision making by ensuring adequate health literacy.

CONCLUSION

The CCM could certainly have benefits for health care in rural settings but staffing levels and staff competency would need to be addressed before implementation of CCM in such settings. Improving health literacy among patients and their carers will be essential to ensure their full participation in the implementation of a successful CCM.

Psychiatric-Mental Health Nursing: Data-Driven Policy Platform for a Psychiatric Mental Health Care Workforce

OBJECTIVE

To describe the development of a data-driven policy platform for psychiatric nurses roles and outcomes to alleviate the current mental health crisis in the United States.

METHOD

Drawing on census data, statistical reports, and analysis of the current psychiatric mental health nursing (PMHN) workforce, a data-driven policy platform is designed to recruit, train, and prepare psychiatric nurses for addressing the nation's mental health crises.

RESULTS

As noted by the Institute of Medicine's 2010 & 2016 reports on the future of nursing, the largest available health care workforce is not being used effectively, particularly to address the nation's mental health care needs. The development of a data-driven platform provides direction for psychiatric nurses in developing the workforce to meet the national mental health crisis.

CONCLUSIONS

From education through practice and research, psychiatric-mental health nursing must build and share a data-driven, relationship-to-care platform emphasizing how PMHN care affects patient outcomes. Using a data-based platform to grow supportive public opinion, psychiatric mental health nursing can build a workforce to modify national accreditation standards and laws supporting data-driven PMHN care. The specialty profession must also seek to modify the nursing profession's attitude toward embracing data-driven platform of care relationships to psychiatric mental health outcomes.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: impact on mental health services demand and provider availability

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) will greatly increase the demand for mental health (MH) services, as 62.5 million Americans from relatively high-need populations will be newly eligible for MH benefits. Consequently, the supply of MH care provider services is expected to proportionately decrease by 18% to 21% in 2014. ACA funding does not demonstrate the ability to increase turnout of psychiatrists sufficiently to meet the need. Available data indicate that the numbers of advanced practice psychiatric nurses (APPNs) continue to increase at a much greater rate, but information from either a clinical perspective or a market perspective is complicated by the weak distinctions that are made between nurse practitioners (NPs) and other nonphysician care professionals. The following recommendations are made: (a) some of the ACA funding for research into efficient and effective care delivery systems should be allocated to acquiring data on APPNs in leadership roles or clinical settings in which they are ultimately responsible for management of MH care, as differentiated from settings in which they provide support for psychiatrists; and (b) since the available data indicate nurse practitioners achieve good outcomes and are more economically viable than psychiatrists, placement of psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners in community settings should be recognized as a realistic solution to the shortfall of MH services.