Find Resources
Best Practices that show evidence of effectiveness in improving public health outcomes when implemented in multiple real-life settings, as indicated by achievement of aims consistent with the objectives of the activities.
RELEASE DATE:
Peer Review Study
This paper analyzes the policy components that contribute to the programmatic success of flu and Tdap pregnancy vaccine programs in three high-income countries, including the United States. Key pillars to increased vaccination coverage include Health Authority accountability, facilitated patient access to vaccination, healthcare professional accountability and engagement, awareness of the burden and severity of diseases, and finally, belief in the benefits of pregnancy vaccination. In the US, given the higher diversity of stakeholders, a multi-stakeholder approach with calls to action from the CDC and endorsement from other scientific societies were key to uptake of vaccinations in pregnancy. It is recommended that maternal task forces reinforce these messages, disseminate toolkits, and that partners address barriers that stand in the way of vaccination, including ensuring that vaccination clinics are convenient for pregnant woman. Successful programs do not require implementation of all components; instead, public health experts should use these as components as guiding tools that can be refined depending on the specificities of the healthcare system in place.
Best Practices that show evidence of effectiveness in improving public health outcomes when implemented in multiple real-life settings, as indicated by achievement of aims consistent with the objectives of the activities.
RELEASE DATE:
Peer Review Study, Summary Report/Recommendations
The guidance outlined in this report provides a roadmap for the ethical inclusion of pregnant women’s experiences in in the development and deployment of vaccines against emerging viruses. Recommendations include bolstering health information surveillance systems, stakeholder engagement with health care, women, families and communities, and changing the narrative about pregnancy and clinical research efforts. Recommendations require commitment of financial resources, addressing inequities in public health and whenever possible, the inclusion of perspectives of pregnant women. Lastly, the authors recommend that “When there is a limited supply of vaccine against a pathogenic threat that disproportionately affects pregnant women, their offspring, or both, or when only one vaccine among several is appropriate for use in pregnancy, then pregnant women should be among the priority groups to be offered the vaccine.” This prioritization process is key to addressing inequities and are guidance for future pandemic response efforts.
Novel Practices that show potential to achieve desirable public health outcomes in a specific real-life setting and are in the process of generating evidence of effectiveness or may not yet be tested.
RELEASE DATE:
Peer Review Study
A retrospective registry-based chart review examined the various demographic and clinical risk factors associated with COVID-19 severity among patients aged 18-29. The study was done within a metropolitan health care system in Houston, TX. In the cohort of 1,853 young adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection at a hospital encounter, including 226 pregnant women, 1,438 (78%) scored 0 on the Charlson Comorbidity Index, and 833 (45%) were obese (≥30 kg/m2). Within 30 days of their diagnostic encounter, 316 (17%) patients were diagnosed with pneumonia, 148 (8%) received other severe disease diagnoses, and 268 (14%) returned to the hospital after being discharged home. In multivariate logistic regression analyses, increasing age, male gender, Hispanic ethnicity, obesity, asthma history, congestive heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, and diabetes were predictive of severe disease diagnoses within 30 days. Non-Hispanic Black race, obesity, asthma history, myocardial infarction history, and household exposure were predictive of 30-day readmission.
Emerging Practices that show potential to achieve desirable public health outcomes in a specific real-life setting and produce early results that are consistent with the objectives of the activities and thus indicate effectiveness.
RELEASE DATE:
Peer Review Study
This study describes harm reduction and health services provided by the U.S. syringe services programs (SSPs) in 2019 and changes in provision of those services in 2020. Many SSPs that offered health services in 2019 and remained operational in 2020 increased telehealth provision of mental health and primary care services, increased MOUD provision, and expanded harm reduction services, but most SSPs reduced or stopped on-site HIV and HCV testing. With the record high opioid overdose fatality rates in 2020, sustaining the trajectory of SSP growth and innovation leading up to and through 2020 requires ensuring adequate and flexible funding to support the life-saving work of SSPs in preventing future overdose deaths and outbreaks of HIV and HCV.
Novel Practices that show potential to achieve desirable public health outcomes in a specific real-life setting and are in the process of generating evidence of effectiveness or may not yet be tested.
RELEASE DATE:
Peer Review Study
Blue Shield of California’s Community Health Advocates (CHA) Program was created to support whole person-health needs by helping individuals of all socio-economic statuses navigate and access community resources, social services, and medical systems. The Health Reimagined initiative embeds Community Health Advocates within physical health practices to increase access to social services and community resources, improve health outcomes, reduce medical costs, and improve overall patient experience. Interviews and focus groups were held and found value in adding CHA’s to the care team. During the pandemic, CHAs have been important. The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have made the need for holistic, community-integrated care even more urgent.
Best Practices that show evidence of effectiveness in improving public health outcomes when implemented in multiple real-life settings, as indicated by achievement of aims consistent with the objectives of the activities.
RELEASE DATE:
Peer Review Study
This study recommends that governments should continue to fund and prioritize use of Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) as major vaccine administration sites. This retrospective cohort study examines COVID-19 vaccination administration rates at FQHCs by race and ethnicity and also the racial and ethnic equity in vaccine receipt at FQHCs. The results of the study found that vaccine administration at FQHCs was equitable for American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, and Hispanic populations, but there were inequities for the Black population. FQHCs have provided critical access to COVID-19 vaccinations for patients from diverse racial and ethnic groups. This resource may help motivate governments to continue funding and prioritizing the use of FQHCs by showing that these health centers have provided access to COVID-19 vaccinations for patients from diverse economic, racial, and ethnic groups.