Schuller Kristin A, Cronin Cory E, Nicks Shannon E, Jing Xia, Kingori Caroline, Morrone Michele
Department of Social & Public Health, Ohio University, Grover Center W333, Athens, OH 45701, United States.
Department of Social & Public Health, Ohio University, Grover Center W359, Athens, OH 45701, United States.
Eval Program Plann. 2019 Jun;74:61-68. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.02.013. Epub 2019 Feb 26.
Rural areas are underserved in terms of the availability of and access to health care services. According to Healthy People 2020, access to health care continues to be the most frequently identified rural health priority in the United States.
The purpose was to develop an efficient approach for standardizing and prioritizing strategies to improve access to health care in rural areas across the United States. The rubric provides a quantitative metric of the effectiveness of each strategy in terms of impact and feasibility and allows community health departments and other access to care groups to compare strategies and facilitate discussion of various strategies' ability to meet the needs of diverse communities.
The Plan, Do, Check, Act (PDCA) cycle was used to create the rubric. The research team constructed a plan for creating a rubric to measure each strategy's impact and feasibility. We checked the rubric by applying it to selected access to care improvement strategies evaluated by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF). Members of a rural community Access to Care Workgroup applied the rubric to several RWJF What Works for Health strategies. The final step was to compare the results of the application phase through facilitated conversations with the goal of determining which strategy or strategies would best meet the needs of the rural community.
A rubric is a valuable tool to facilitate assessment and discussion and for assisting community members in determining access to care priorities. After applying the rubric in a community setting, we identified two important tactics: 1) the rubric is best applied to strategies when they are summarized consistently and cohesively; and 2) it is important to involve community stakeholders early in the process of identifying strategies for evaluation. The next step is to apply the rubric to similar strategies in other rural communities to further validate the rubric's effectiveness.
农村地区在医疗保健服务的可获得性和可及性方面存在服务不足的情况。根据《健康人民2020》,获得医疗保健仍然是美国农村地区最常被提及的健康优先事项。
目的是制定一种有效的方法,对改善美国农村地区医疗保健可及性的策略进行标准化和排序。该评分标准从影响和可行性方面提供了每个策略有效性的定量指标,并允许社区卫生部门和其他医疗服务获取团体比较策略,促进对各种策略满足不同社区需求能力的讨论。
采用计划、执行、检查、行动(PDCA)循环来创建评分标准。研究团队构建了一个创建评分标准的计划,以衡量每个策略的影响和可行性。我们通过将其应用于罗伯特·伍德·约翰逊基金会(RWJF)评估的选定医疗服务获取改善策略来检查该评分标准。一个农村社区医疗服务获取工作组的成员将该评分标准应用于RWJF的多项“健康有效策略”。最后一步是通过促进对话比较应用阶段的结果,目标是确定哪些策略最能满足农村社区的需求。
评分标准是促进评估和讨论以及帮助社区成员确定医疗服务获取优先事项的宝贵工具。在社区环境中应用评分标准后,我们确定了两个重要策略:1)当策略以一致且连贯的方式总结时,评分标准最适用于这些策略;2)在确定评估策略的过程中尽早让社区利益相关者参与很重要。下一步是将该评分标准应用于其他农村社区的类似策略,以进一步验证该评分标准的有效性。