Public health programs are increasingly offering health policy content to meet workforce demand for public health professionals with health policy analysis and communication skills. Undergraduate public health education in health policy and related curriculum is lacking. Existing work describes service- and experiential learning approaches, which may not be feasible in large courses or public health programs with limited administrative or financial resources. This article describes health policy curriculum, learning objectives, and course activities (i.e., individual writing assignment, mock policy debate, and policy analysis exercise) that integrate an active learning approach and use simulation to develop policy analysis and communication skills in an undergraduate classroom setting. An active learning approach can increase teaching effectiveness, critical thinking, peer interaction, and student engagement to cultivate these applied skills. The described curriculum has been used in various modalities (in-person, hybrid, and remote) with positive reception in a public research university with a high percentage of first-generation college students. Student course evaluations and an independent assessment of the policy analysis exercise reflect high student interest, engagement, problem solving, satisfaction, perceived benefits, and application of policy analysis and communication skills, providing support for teaching health policy curriculum to undergraduate students using an active learning approach. The discussion includes strategies to address resistance by public health instructors and students to using active learning techniques.

Addressing the translational gap between research evidence and state health policy requires an understanding of the current use of research evidence in the state policymaking process. In this study, we explore the use of research evidence to inform the legislative debate about restaurant nutrition labeling policy in California. In 2008, California was the first state to enact a mandatory menu calorie labeling policy in the U.S. Using a qualitative approach, we examine data sources and types of evidence used in legislative documents (n = 87) related to six menu labeling bills introduced in California's state legislature between 2003 and 2008. Federal- and state-level government agency reports were the most frequently cited sources of technical knowledge. Advocacy coalition members who were active participants involved in the policy debate were also cited as experts. Five of the six bills included evidence in related legislative documents. While documents included considerable evidence on the magnitude and severity of the obesity problem to justify policy enactment, there were a limited number of statements referring to policy effectiveness and only one statement identified attesting to implementation context and acceptability. Reference to evidence on related policy suggests policy precedence may also play an important role in policy decision making. There is a need to improve the dissemination of obesity policy effectiveness and implementation studies in a politically time sensitive manner to influence state health policy debates. Strategies are discussed to effectively integrate the use of research evidence in the state health policymaking process.

Policy Points In 2012, Colorado and Washington were the first states to legalize recreational marijuana through voter-initiated ballots. In these states, counties could restrict or ban local marijuana facilities through a variety of regulatory methods such as ordinances and zoning. County-level recreational marijuana policies in Washington and Colorado vary substantially, with 69.2% of Washington counties and 23.4% of Colorado counties allowing all types of recreational marijuana facilities as of April 1, 2019. After Colorado and Washington legalized recreational marijuana, many counties modified their marijuana policies over time, with shifts in county policy often preceded by advocacy and information-seeking activities.

Context

In 2012, Colorado and Washington were the first states to legalize recreational marijuana. Both allowed local governments to further regulate the availability of marijuana facilities in their jurisdictions. As early adopters, these states are important quasi-natural experiments to examine local marijuana policy and policy change processes, including key stakeholders and arguments.

Methods

We conducted a policy scan of county-level recreational marijuana ordinances and regulations in Colorado and Washington. Data collected included policy documents from counties in both states and newspaper articles. We used a mixed-methods approach to describe the types of county-level recreational marijuana policies enacted by April 1, 2019; identify key policy stakeholders involved in local policy debates; and explore arguments used in support or opposition of county policies. We also selected four counties that represent three county policy environments (all marijuana facility types allowed, some marijuana facility types allowed, all marijuana facility types prohibited) and described the policy changes within these counties since recreational marijuana was legalized.

Findings

By April 1, 2019, Colorado counties were less likely than Washington counties to allow marijuana facilities-48.4% of Colorado counties prohibited recreational marijuana facilities in their jurisdiction compared to 23.1% of Washington counties. Since state legalization, several counties in both states have made substantial marijuana facility policy modifications, often preceded by information-seeking activities. Primary stakeholders involved in policy debates included elected officials, law enforcement, individual growers/farmers, marijuana business license applicants, parents, and residents. Proponents referenced local economic gain, reduced crime, and potential health benefits of marijuana as arguments in favor of permitting local facilities, whereas opponents pointed to economic loss, negative health and public health issues, public safety concerns, and existing federal law. Both sides referenced local public opinion data to support their position.

Conclusions

By early 2019, a patchwork of local marijuana policies was in place in Colorado and Washington. We identify key areas of policy and public health research needed to inform future local marijuana policy decisions, including the impact of legalization on public health outcomes (particularly for youth) and public safety.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic increased food insecurity among US households, however, little is known about how infants, who rely primarily on human milk and/or infant formula, were impacted. We conducted an online survey with US caregivers of infants under 2 years of age (N = 319) to assess how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted breastfeeding, formula-feeding and household ability to obtain infant-feeding supplies and lactation support (68% mothers; 66% White; 8% living in poverty). We found that 31% of families who used infant formula indicated that they experienced various challenges in obtaining infant formula, citing the following top three reasons: the formula was sold out (20%), they had to travel to multiple stores (21%) or formula was too expensive (8%). In response, 33% of families who used formula reported resorting to deleterious formula-feeding practices such as diluting formula with extra water (11%) or cereal (10%), preparing smaller bottles (8%) or saving leftover mixed bottles for later (11%). Of the families who fed infants human milk, 53% reported feeding changes directly as a result of the pandemic, for example, 46% increased their provisioning of human milk due to perceived benefits for the infant's immune system (37%), ability to work remotely/stay home (31%), concerns about money (9%) or formula shortages (8%). Fifteen percent of families who fed human milk reported that they did not receive the lactation support they needed and 4.8% stopped breastfeeding. To protect infant food and nutrition security, our results underscore the need for policies to support breastfeeding and ensure equitable and reliable access to infant formula.

Advocacy coalitions often play an important role in the state health policymaking process, yet little is known about their structure, composition, and behavior. In 2008, California became the first state to enact a menu labeling law. Using the advocacy coalition framework, we examine different facets of the coalitions involved in California's menu labeling policy debate. We use a qualitative research approach to identify coalition members and explore their expressed beliefs and policy arguments, resources, and strategies by analyzing legislative documents (n = 87) and newspaper articles (n = 78) produced between 1999 and 2009. Between 2003 and 2008, six menu labeling bills were introduced in the state's legislature. We found the issue received increasing media attention during this period. We identified two advocacy coalitions involved in the debate-a public health (PH) coalition and an industry coalition. State organizations acted as coalition leaders and participated for a longer duration than elected officials. The structure and composition of each coalition varied. PH coalition leadership and membership notably increased compared to the industry coalition. The PH coalition, led by nonprofit PH and health organizations, promoted a clear and consistent message around informed decision making. The industry coalition, led by a state restaurant association, responded with cost and implementation arguments. Each coalition used various resources and strategies to advance desired outcomes. PH coalition leaders were particularly effective at using resources and employing advocacy strategies, which included engaging state legislators as coalition members, using public opinion polls and information, and leveraging media resources to garner support. Policy precedence and a local policy push emerged as important policymaking strategies. Areas for future research on the state health policymaking process are discussed.

Objectives

We explored how perceived barriers and facilitators influence healthy eating and investigated the acceptability of changes to school lunch meals among adolescents after implementation of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010.

Methods

We conducted 8 focus groups with adolescents (N = 64) at 3 South Los Angeles high schools. Data collection instruments included a semi-structured guide and questionnaire. Two researchers independently coded transcripts.

Results

Most participants believed fruits and vegetables were available in their community and reported high relative cost, poor quality, and lack of motivation as barriers to consumption. Many said school meals were an important source of healthy food and were aware of recent changes to the school lunch program. A primary facilitator to eating school lunches was access to fresh food items (eg, a salad bar). Perceived barriers included long cafeteria lines, time constraints, lack of variety, and limited quantities of preferred items. Adolescents viewed off-campus food establishments near the school as competition to school meals.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest the need to measure perceived and actual barriers to healthy eating among adolescents and to examine the effect of these barriers on dietary behavior. We provide programmatic and policy recommendations.

Background

Community health centers (CHCs) pivoted to using telehealth to deliver chronic care during the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic. While care continuity can improve care quality and patients' experiences, it is unclear whether telehealth supported this relationship.

Objective

We examine the association of care continuity with diabetes and hypertension care quality in CHCs before and during COVID-19 and the mediating effect of telehealth.

Research design

This was a cohort study.

Participants

Electronic health record data from 166 CHCs with n=20,792 patients with diabetes and/or hypertension with ≥2 encounters/year during 2019 and 2020.

Methods

Multivariable logistic regression models estimated the association of care continuity (Modified Modified Continuity Index; MMCI) with telehealth use and care processes. Generalized linear regression models estimated the association of MMCI and intermediate outcomes. Formal mediation analyses assessed whether telehealth mediated the association of MMCI with A1c testing during 2020.

Results

MMCI [2019: odds ratio (OR)=1.98, marginal effect=0.69, z=165.50, P<0.001; 2020: OR=1.50, marginal effect=0.63, z=147.73, P<0.001] and telehealth use (2019: OR=1.50, marginal effect=0.85, z=122.87, P<0.001; 2020: OR=10.00, marginal effect=0.90, z=155.57, P<0.001) were associated with higher odds of A1c testing. MMCI was associated with lower systolic (β=-2.90, P<0.001) and diastolic blood pressure (β=-1.44, P<0.001) in 2020, and lower A1c values (2019: β=-0.57, P=0.007; 2020: β=-0.45, P=0.008) in both years. In 2020, telehealth use mediated 38.7% of the relationship between MMCI and A1c testing.

Conclusions

Higher care continuity is associated with telehealth use and A1c testing, and lower A1c and blood pressure. Telehealth use mediates the association of care continuity and A1c testing. Care continuity may facilitate telehealth use and resilient performance on process measures.

Background

Cross-sector coalitions can be a powerful vehicle to promote adoption and implementation of evidence-based programs and policies across diverse racial/ethnic communities with a high chronic disease burden. Few studies have examined coalition composition, function, or capacity to promote learning among members.

Methods

We used a mixed methods approach to examine the United for Health coalition's implementation of multiple food environment interventions across five low-income communities of color in Los Angeles, California (USA). At the coalition-level, key measures included the collaborative environment, membership characteristics, process and structure, communication, resources, strengths, challenges/barriers, and community impact. At the organizational- and individual-levels, we collected data on participation, leadership development, intraorganizational change, perceived benefits, and learning outcomes.

Findings

Overall, the United for Health coalition produced five community gardens, three pop-up produce markets, and one farmers' market; members also expanded Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) access at three existing farmers' markets. Findings indicate early coalition strengths included having a mutual purpose, which was maintained throughout the study period. Coalition participation and engagement was consistently high, while coalition and inter-organizational communication improved over time. Strengths were membership diversity and the availability of learning opportunities. Benefits included leadership development and strategic alignment across organizations. Members demonstrated an increased awareness of the importance of culturally adapted interventions and knowledge of community health planning topics. Key implementation challenges were a lack of resources and social context barriers.

Conclusions

Examining coalition function and maturation in a real-world context reveals important lessons for scholars and practitioners committed to addressing nutrition-related health disparities in marginalized and historically underserved communities. Future work should investigate the sustainability of externally funded cross-sector coalitions after funding ceases.

Background: Community health centers (CHCs) pivoted to remote chronic care services during the COVID-19 pandemic. While care continuity is associated with improved care quality and patients’ experiences, telehealth’s impact on these relationships is unclear. Objective: We aimed to examine the association among care continuity, telehealth use, and quality of diabetes or hypertension care in CHCs before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We collected electronic health record data from a cohort of 20,792 patients with diabetes or hypertension with ≥2 visits per year from March to December 2019 and 2020 among 166 California CHCs in the OCHIN Accelerating Data Value Across a National Community Health Center Network Collaborative. Logistic regression models estimated the association between care continuity (modified, modified continuity index [MMCI]) and telehealth adoption and blood pressure or hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing. Generalized linear regression models for 2019 and 2020 estimated the association between MMCI and blood pressure or HbA1c, exploring telehealth as a mediator. Results: Patients experienced reduced care continuity (2019: MMCI=0.71, SD 0.28; 2020: MMCI=0.63, SD 0.36; P<.001) and more blood pressure (99.99% vs 99.75%) and HbA1c (53.38% vs 48.99%) assessments in 2019 vs 2020. Telehealth accounted for 0.33% of 2019’s visits and 9.55% of 2020’s visits. MMCI scores were associated with higher odds of telehealth use in 2020 (odds ratio [OR] 1.96; P<.001). MMCI (2019: OR 1.72, P<.001; 2020: OR 1.66, P<.001) and telehealth use (2019: OR 2.44, P<.001; 2020: OR 6.82, P<.001) were associated with greater HbA1c testing. MMCI was associated with lower HbA1c values in 2020 (–0.40, P=.01) and lower systolic (2019: –1.64, P=.045; 2020: –2.40, P=.001) and diastolic (2019: –1.24, P=.007; 2020: –1.33, P=.001) blood pressure. MMCI and telehealth were not associated with HbA1c values in 2019. In 2020, telehealth mediated the relationship between MMCI and HbA1c testing (percent mediated 59%), but not between MMCI and other study outcomes. Conclusions: Care continuity facilitates telehealth use and enables resilient performance on process measures. Elucidating how care continuity influences telehealth adoption may provide insights about implementing patient-centered innovations.