• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • No language data
  • Tagged with
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

Examining the Effectiveness of Training Protocols of Universal Newborn Hearing Screeners in the Appalachia region of the United States

Elangovan, Saravanan, Brown, Ashley, Harman, Molly, Bramlette, Shannon, Wilson, Diana 12 April 2019 (has links)
Universal Newborn Hearing Screenings have largely been successful since the National Institute if Health Consensus Development recommended, in 1996, that all infants should receive a newborn hearing screening prior to hospital discharge. Currently, the implementation of newborn hearing screening programs is varied across states and hospitals in the U.S. Due to this high variability, it is the responsibility of each individual hospital to formulate and consistently maintain a protocol for their newborn hearing screening program. This can create a great burden among hospitals as they must obtain the appropriate equipment, as well as employ and train screeners. However, national medical groups may be utilized to alleviate this burden. These medical groups supply the equipment, and more importantly, employ and train the screeners. This not only alleviates the burden on hospitals, but also provides a degree of standardization across newborn hearing screening programs which may reduce lost-to-follow-up statistics. Hospitals who do not utilize a national medical group may not have the expertise to formulate a comprehensive newborn hearing screening protocol. Our study is interested in examining if birthing hospitals that utilize a national medical group have more standardized medical protocols and have better (lower) lost-to-follow-up statistics. A survey was administered to current universal newborn hearing screeners employed at five hospitals across the eastern region of Tennessee. The survey examined various aspects of a typical newborn hearing screening program including training protocols and requirements, screening equipment, data recording and tracking, and methods of delivery of test results. In our presentation, we will be sharing the results of this study and interpret the data in light of determining best practices for newborn hearing screenings.
2

Patient Choice to Opt-In or Opt-Out of Telephonic Health-Related Social Need Navigation Program

Bailey, Sam, MPH, Hale, Nathan, PhD, MPH 12 April 2019 (has links)
Background: Ballad Health participates in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (CMS) Accountable Health Communities (AHC) model. The AHC model is evaluating if universal screening, referral, and navigation services for health-related social needs (HRSN) can improve outcomes and reduce unnecessary utilization and costs of health care services. To ensure the evaluation of the model has sufficient statistical power, navigation services are expected to be provided to a minimum number of individuals. The purpose of this study is to analyze the characteristics of Ballad Health’s AHC navigation services that could be modified to improve opt-in rates. Methods: The primary outcome measure was identified as whether a beneficiary contacted via telephone opted-in or –out of the navigation program. Andersen’s Behavioral Model for Health Service Use was used as the conceptual framework for selecting covariates of interest. Enabling factors were of primary interest because alternate interventions may be designed around them. Data was pulled for the time period of November 17, 2018 through February 14, 2019. Where possible, covariates were associated with data from CMS’ AHC Data Template v3.1 to accommodate replication for all AHC bridge organizations, though additional internally-collected data, which may not be available for all bridge organizations, were needed for some variables. Chi-squared tests were performed for each covariate. Results: No statistical differences were found for the primary covariates of interest. Opt-in rates by Navigator were lowest for Navigator 5 and highest for Navigator 4 (67.53% and 88.24%). Opt-in rates by weekday of decision were lowest on Thursdays and highest on Wednesdays (64.91% and 77.42%). Opt-in rates based on time of day were lowest between 8:00am and 9:59am, and highest between 12:00pm and 1:59pm (62.50% and 100%). Opt-in rates were lowest when the decision was made six days after the screening and highest when made the same day (53.57% and 83.33%). Opt-in rates were lowest when there were five weekdays between screening and navigation decision, and highest when there were three weekdays between the screening and decision (60% and 90%). Other non-process covariates of interest that were statistically significant for opt-in rates were the presence of either food, safety, or utility needs. Conclusions: Several groups had higher opt-in rates that were not statistically significant; small sample sizes may have impacted the significance of these differences. For example, opt-in rates were higher when made the same day as the screening than when made one day after (83.33% and 74.79%). However, only 18 beneficiary decisions were made on the same day, while 119 were made one day after. Increasing the number of same-day phone call attempts may be a method to improve opt-in rates. Importantly, date and time data for contact attempts before a beneficiary decides to opt-in or opt-out were unavailable as of the time of the analysis. These data are captured and will be added to the analysis when available, which could provide more insight into whether a beneficiary is more likely to opt-in or opt-out.
3

Patient Choice to Opt-In or Opt-Out of Telephonic Health-Related Social Need Navigation Program

Bailey, Sam, MPH, Hale, Nathan, PhD, MPH 12 April 2019 (has links)
Background: Ballad Health participates in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (CMS) Accountable Health Communities (AHC) model. The AHC model is evaluating if universal screening, referral, and navigation services for health-related social needs (HRSN) can improve outcomes and reduce unnecessary utilization and costs of health care services. To ensure the evaluation of the model has sufficient statistical power, navigation services are expected to be provided to a minimum number of individuals. The purpose of this study is to analyze the characteristics of Ballad Health’s AHC navigation services that could be modified to improve opt-in rates. Methods: The primary outcome measure was identified as whether a beneficiary contacted via telephone opted-in or –out of the navigation program. Andersen’s Behavioral Model for Health Service Use was used as the conceptual framework for selecting covariates of interest. Enabling factors were of primary interest because alternate interventions may be designed around them. Data was pulled for the time period of November 17, 2018 through February 14, 2019. Where possible, covariates were associated with data from CMS’ AHC Data Template v3.1 to accommodate replication for all AHC bridge organizations, though additional internally-collected data, which may not be available for all bridge organizations, were needed for some variables. Chi-squared tests were performed for each covariate. Results: No statistical differences were found for the primary covariates of interest. Opt-in rates by Navigator were lowest for Navigator 5 and highest for Navigator 4 (67.53% and 88.24%). Opt-in rates by weekday of decision were lowest on Thursdays and highest on Wednesdays (64.91% and 77.42%). Opt-in rates based on time of day were lowest between 8:00am and 9:59am, and highest between 12:00pm and 1:59pm (62.50% and 100%). Opt-in rates were lowest when the decision was made six days after the screening and highest when made the same day (53.57% and 83.33%). Opt-in rates were lowest when there were five weekdays between screening and navigation decision, and highest when there were three weekdays between the screening and decision (60% and 90%). Other non-process covariates of interest that were statistically significant for opt-in rates were the presence of either food, safety, or utility needs. Conclusions: Several groups had higher opt-in rates that were not statistically significant; small sample sizes may have impacted the significance of these differences. For example, opt-in rates were higher when made the same day as the screening than when made one day after (83.33% and 74.79%). However, only 18 beneficiary decisions were made on the same day, while 119 were made one day after. Increasing the number of same-day phone call attempts may be a method to improve opt-in rates. Importantly, date and time data for contact attempts before a beneficiary decides to opt-in or opt-out were unavailable as of the time of the analysis. These data are captured and will be added to the analysis when available, which could provide more insight into whether a beneficiary is more likely to opt-in or opt-out.

Page generated in 0.1577 seconds