14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Local Health Department Accreditation Is Associated With Organizational Supports for Evidence-Based Decision Making

      brief-report

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction: Recent studies show that health department accreditation from the U.S. Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) drives performance management and quality improvement. PHAB standards call for agencies to use evidence in decision making. It is unknown whether accreditation is associated with organizational supports for evidence-based decision making (EBDM). Self-report data from a 2017 survey of U.S. local health departments were analyzed to test relationships of accreditation status with organizational supports for EBDM.

          Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in this observational study. A total of 579 local health departments were invited to complete an online survey; 350 (60.4%) provided complete data for the present study. The dependent variables were six factors of organizational supports for EBDM previously validated through confirmatory factor analyses. Accreditation status (PHAB-accredited, preparing, not preparing) was the independent variable of interest. Logistic regression analyses controlled for governance (presence of a local board of health; state, local, or shared state and local governance) and jurisdiction population size.

          Results: PHAB-accredited health departments were more likely to report higher capacity for EBDM, resource availability for EBDM, and evaluation capacity than health departments that reported not yet preparing for accreditation. Health departments that reported preparing for PHAB accreditation showed a non-significant pattern of higher perceived supports for EBDM compared to departments not preparing for accreditation.

          Conclusion: PHAB standards and the accreditation process may help stimulate health department organizational supports for EBDM.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Misinterpretation and misuse of the kappa statistic.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Fostering more-effective public health by identifying administrative evidence-based practices: a review of the literature.

            The aim of evidence-based decision-making in public health involves the integration of science-based interventions with community preferences to improve population health. Although considerable literature is available on the development and adoption of evidence-based guidelines and barriers to their implementation, the evidence base specific to public health administration is less developed. This article reviews the literature from public health and related disciplines to identify administrative evidence-based practices (A-EBPs; i.e., agency-level structures and activities that are positively associated with performance measures). A "review of reviews" was carried out to assess the evidence for the effectiveness of A-EBPs covering the time frame January 2000 through March 2012. The following steps were used: (1) select databases; (2) determine search parameters and conduct the search; (3) screen titles and abstracts; (4) obtain selected documents; (5) perform initial synthesis; (6) abstract data; and (7) synthesize evidence. In both the reviews and original empiric studies, the most common outcome reported was performance of the local health department or local public health system. On the basis of a synthesis of data from 20 reviews, a total of 11 high-priority A-EBPs were identified (i.e., practices that local public health systems potentially can modify within a few years). The A-EBPs covered five major domains of workforce development, leadership, organizational climate and culture, relationships and partnerships, and financial processes. As the body of practice-based research continues to grow and the ability to measure administrative evidence-based practices improves, this initial list can be further developed and improved. Copyright © 2012 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Training needs and supports for evidence-based decision making among the public health workforce in the United States

              Background Preparing the public health workforce to practice evidence-based decision making (EBDM) is necessary to effectively impact health outcomes. Few studies report on training needs in EBDM at the national level in the United States. We report competency gaps to practice EBDM based on four U.S. national surveys we conducted with the state and local public health workforce between 2008 and 2013. Methods We compared self-reported data from four U.S. national online surveys on EBDM conducted between 2008 and 2013. Participants rated the importance of each EBDM competency then rated how available the competency is to them when needed on a Likert scale. We calculated a gap score by subtracting availability scores from importance scores. We compared mean gaps across surveys and utilized independent samples t tests and Cohen’s d values to compare state level gaps. In addition, participants in the 2013 state health department survey selected and ranked three items that “would most encourage you to utilize EBDM in your work” and items that “would be most useful to you in applying EBDM in your work”. We calculated the percentage of participants who ranked each item among their top three. Results The largest competency gaps were consistent across all four surveys: economic evaluation, communicating research to policymakers, evaluation designs, and adapting interventions. Participants from the 2013 state level survey reported significantly larger mean importance and availability scores (p <0.001, d =1.00, and p <0.001, d = .78 respectively) and smaller mean gaps (p <0.01, d = .19) compared to the 2008 survey. Participants most often selected “leaders prioritizing EBDM” (67.9%) among top ways to encourage EBDM use. “EBDM training for specific areas” was most commonly ranked as important in applying EBDM (64.3%). Conclusion Perceived importance and availability of EBDM competencies may be increasing as supports for EBDM continue to grow through trends in funding, training, and resources. However, more capacity building is needed overall, with specific attention to the largest competency gaps. More work with public health departments to both situate trainings to boost competency in these areas and continued improvements for organizational practices (leadership prioritization) are possible next steps to sustain EBDM efforts.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Public Health
                Front Public Health
                Front. Public Health
                Frontiers in Public Health
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2296-2565
                17 December 2019
                2019
                : 7
                : 374
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Prevention Research Center, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis , St. Louis, MO, United States
                [2] 2Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine , St. Louis, MO, United States
                [3] 3Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis , St. Louis, MO, United States
                Author notes

                Edited by: Rosemary M. Caron, University of New Hampshire, United States

                Reviewed by: Angela Carman, University of Kentucky, United States; Liza C. Corso, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), United States; Donna Jeanne Petersen, University of South Florida, United States

                *Correspondence: Peg Allen pegallen@ 123456wustl.edu

                This article was submitted to Public Health Education and Promotion, a section of the journal Frontiers in Public Health

                Article
                10.3389/fpubh.2019.00374
                6928116
                31921739
                5eebd6b0-e4c3-40f0-acaf-e6e044e7c5cd
                Copyright © 2019 Allen, Mazzucca, Parks, Robinson, Tabak and Brownson.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 19 September 2019
                : 22 November 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 32, Pages: 7, Words: 5273
                Funding
                Funded by: National Institutes of Health 10.13039/100000002
                Award ID: 1P30DK092950
                Award ID: 5R01DK109913
                Award ID: P30DK020579
                Funded by: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 10.13039/100000030
                Award ID: U48DP006395-01-00
                Categories
                Public Health
                Brief Research Report

                accreditation,evidence-based decision making,evidence-based public health,governmental health departments,organization

                Comments

                Comment on this article