Enabling services address a combination of social determinants of health and barriers to access to primary care and are intended to reduce health disparities. They include care coordination; health education; transportation; and assistance with obtaining food, shelter, and benefits. Empirical evidence of enabling services' potential contribution to health outcomes is limited, which impedes their widespread dissemination. We examined how the receipt of enabling services influenced patient health care outcomes based on a nationally representative survey of patients served in 2014 at health centers funded by the Health Resources and Services Administration. We compared enabling services users and nonusers and found that enabling services were associated with 1.92 more health center visits, an 11.78-percentagepoint higher probability of getting a routine checkup, a 16.34-percentagepoint higher likelihood of having had a flu shot, and a 7.63-percentagepoint higher probability of patient satisfaction. Our results confirm the value of systematic delivery of enabling services in reducing access barriers and improving patient satisfaction.

No abstract

Background Delivery of preventive care and chronic disease management are key components of a high functioning primary care practice. Health Centers (HCs) funded by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) have been delivering affordable and accessible primary health care to patients in underserved communities for over fifty years. This study examines the association between health center organization's health information technology (IT) optimization and clinical quality performance. Methods and findings Using 2016 Uniform Data System (UDS) data, we performed bivariate and multivariate analyses to study the association of Meaningful Use (MU) attestation as a proxy for health IT optimization, patient centered medical home (PCMH) recognition status, and practice size on performance of twelve electronically specified clinical quality measures (eCQMs). Bivariate analysis demonstrated performance of eleven out of the twelve preventive and chronic care eCQMs was higher among HCs attesting to MU Stage 2 or above. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that Stage 2 MU or above, PCMH status, and larger practice size were positively associated with performance on cancer screening, smoking cessation counseling and pediatric weight assessment and counseling eCQMs. Conclusions Organizational advancement in MU stages has led to improved quality of care that augments HCs patient care capacity for disease prevention, health promotion, and chronic care management. However, rapid technological advancement in health care acts as a potential source of disparity, as considerable resources needed to optimize the electronic health

Health centers (HCs) play a crucial and integral role in addressing social determinants of health (SDOH) among vulnerable and underserved populations, yet data on SDOH assessment and subsequent actions is limited. We conducted a systematic review to understand the existing evidence of integration of SDOH into HC primary-care practices. Database searches yielded 3,516 studies, of which 41 articles met the inclusion criteria. A majority of studies showed that HCs primarily captured patient-level rather than community-level SDOH data. Studies also showed that HCs utilized SDOH in electronic health records but capabilities varied widely. A few studies indicated that HCs measured health-related outcomes of integrating SDOH data. The review highlighted that many knowledge gaps exist in the collection, use, and assessment of impact of these data on outcomes, and future research is needed to address this knowledge gap.

Background: Evidence indicates the unmet need for primary care services including medical, mental health, and dental care is greater among uninsured and Medicaid beneficiaries than privately insured individuals, many of whom use Health Resources and Services Administration–funded health centers (HRSA HCs). Objective: We examined differences in rates of unmet need between low-income uninsured and Medicaid patients of HRSA HCs and safety-net clinics in general or private physicians. Research Design: We used logistic regression models to compare the predicted probabilities of unmet need for uninsured and Medicaid individuals whose usual source of care is HRSA HCs versus clinics in general or private physicians. Sample: We used a nationally representative survey of low income, adult patients who identified HRSA HCs as their usual source of care. We used the National Health Interview Survey to independently identify low-income individuals whose usual source of care was clinics (National Health Interview Survey clinics) or physicians (National Health Interview Survey physicians) in the general population. Measures: Dependent variables were unmet need and delay in medical care, and unmet need for prescription medications, mental health, and dental care. The primary independent variable of interest was the usual source of care. We controlled for potential confounders. Results: We found the probability of unmet need for medical and dental care to be lower among HRSA HC patients than individuals whose usual source of care were not HRSA HCs. Conclusions: HRSA HC patients have lower probabilities of unmet need for medical and dental care. This is likely because HRSA HCs provide accessible, affordable, and comprehensive primary care services. Expanding capacity of these organizations will help reduce unmet need and its consequences.