Health Impact Assessment: A Missed Opportunity for MCH Professionals in Their Quest to Address the Social Determinants of Health.

Autor: Dills JE; Georgia Health Policy Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, 55 Park Place NE, 8th Floor, Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA. jdills@gsu.edu., Lawson TM; Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Grace Crum Rollins Building, 1518 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA., Branscomb J; Georgia Health Policy Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, 55 Park Place NE, 8th Floor, Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA., Mullenix A; Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill, 412 Rosenau Hall CB #7445, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA., Lich KH; Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill, 1105E McGavran-Greenberg Hall CB #7411, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Maternal and child health journal [Matern Child Health J] 2022 Aug; Vol. 26 (Suppl 1), pp. 88-113. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Jan 24.
DOI: 10.1007/s10995-021-03350-w
Abstrakt: Introduction: Public health professionals, especially ones concerned with maternal and child health (MCH), need to engage in cross-sector collaborations to address social determinants of health. Health Impact Assessment (HIA) systematically brings public health perspectives into non-health decision-making contexts that influence social determinants. Alignment of MCH and HIA practice has not previously been documented.
Methods: An exploratory review of HIAs conducted in the United States considered several dimensions of MCH-HIA alignment and produced data to test the hypothesis that HIAs involving MCH stakeholders are more likely to address MCH populations and relevant measures. The review examined three key variables for each HIA: inclusion of MCH-focused stakeholders, level of focus on MCH populations, and presence of MCH-relevant content.
Results: Of the 424 HIAs included in the database of US HIAs, 350 were included in this review. Twenty-four percent (84) included MCH-focused stakeholders, and 42% (148) focused on MCH populations. Ninety percent (317) included metrics or content relevant to at least one Title V National Performance Measure (NPM). HIAs that clearly included MCH stakeholders had seven times the odds of including both a focus on MCH populations and at least one NPM-relevant topic compared to HIAs that did not clearly include MCH stakeholders (OR 6.98; 95% CI 3.99, 12.20).
Discussion: Despite low engagement of MCH stakeholders in HIAs, many still consider MCH populations and measures. Intentional engagement of MCH workforce in HIAs could ensure greater alignment with existing MCH priorities (such as addressing the social determinants of health and equity) in a given jurisdiction.
(© 2022. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje