Background and Purpose: Stress among college students, and the related health and academic consequences, remains an important issue for college health professionals. Yet, less is known about the reported coping strategies among both undergraduate and graduate students. Purpose: This crosssectional study examined differences between undergraduate and graduate college students in stress levels and coping behaviors. Methods: An online health behavior survey was administered to a random sample of 1,139 college students enrolled in 2011. Chi-square test of independence examined demographic differences, stress levels and coping strategies. Classification and Regression Tree analysis further explored coping strategies which differentiated groups. Results: Participants were primarily white (87.2%), graduate students (58.5%), and female (59.8%). Almost 80% reported moderate, much or great deal of stress, with no significant differences between undergraduate and graduate students. Sleep (69.6%), exercise (66.1%), and food (56.8%) were the most common coping strategies, regardless of academic classification. Social support as a coping strategy was the most important variable explaining differences between undergraduate and graduate students. Conclusion: Undergraduate and graduate college students cope with stress in a similar manner. However, social support was more likely among graduate students and may be an important strategy for future college health programming.

Background Since October 2014, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has penalized 25% of U.S. hospitals with the highest rates of hospital-acquired conditions under the Hospital Acquired Conditions Reduction Program (HACRP). While early evaluations of the HACRP program reported cumulative reductions in hospital-acquired conditions, more recent studies have not found a clear association between receipt of the HACRP penalty and hospital quality of care. We posit that some of this disconnect may be driven by frequent scoring updates. The sensitivity of the HACRP penalties to updates in the program’s scoring methodology has not been independently evaluated. Methods We used hospital discharge records from 14 states to evaluate the association between changes in HACRP scoring methodology and corresponding shifts in penalty status. To isolate the impact of changes in scoring methods over time, we used FY2018 hospital performance data to calculate total HAC scores using FY2015 through FY2018 CMS scoring methodologies. Results Comparing hospital penalty status based on various HACRP scoring methodologies over time, we found a significant overlap between penalized hospitals when using FY 2015 and 2016 scoring methodologies (95%) and between FY 2017 and 2018 methodologies (46%), but substantial differences across early vs later years. Only 15% of hospitals were eligible for penalties across all four years. We also found significant changes in a hospital’s (relative) ranking across the various years, indicating that shifts in penalty status were not driven by small changes in HAC scores clustered around the penalty threshold. Conclusions HACRP penalties have been highly sensitive to program updates, which are generally announced after performance periods are concluded. This disconnect between performance and penalties calls into question the ability of the HACRP to improve patient safety as intended.

Introduction Research examining geographic variation in the structure of population health systems is continuing to emerge, and most of the evidence that currently exists divides systems by urban and rural designation. Very little is understood about how being rural and Appalachian impacts population health system structure and strength. Purpose This study examines geographic differences in key characteristics of population health systems in urban, rural non-Appalachian, and rural Appalachian regions of Kentucky. Methods Data from a 2018 statewide survey of community networks was used to examine population health system characteristics. Descriptive statistics were generated to examine variation across geographic regions in the availability of 20 population health activities, the range of organizations that contribute to those activities, and system strength. Data were collected in 2018 and analyzed in 2020. Results Variation in the provision of population health protections and the structure of public health systems across KY exists. Urban communities are more likely than rural to have a comprehensive set of population health protections delivered in collaboration with a diverse set of multisector partners. Rural Appalachian communities face additional limited capacity in the delivery of population health activities, compared to other rural communities in the state. Implications Understanding the delivery of population health provides further insight into additional system-level factors that may drive persistent health inequities in rural and Appalachian communities. The capacity to improve health happens beyond the clinic, and the strengthening of population health systems will be a critical step in efforts to improve population health.

Background Since October 2014, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has penalized 25% of U.S. hospitals with the highest rates of hospital-acquired conditions under the Hospital Acquired Conditions Reduction Program (HACRP). While early evaluations of the HACRP program reported cumulative reductions in hospital-acquired conditions, more recent studies have not found a clear association between receipt of the HACRP penalty and hospital quality of care. We posit that some of this disconnect may be driven by frequent scoring updates. The sensitivity of the HACRP penalties to updates in the program's scoring methodology has not been independently evaluated. Methods We used hospital discharge records from 14 states to evaluate the association between changes in HACRP scoring methodology and corresponding shifts in penalty status. To isolate the impact of changes in scoring methods over time, we used FY2018 hospital performance data to calculate total HAC scores using FY2015 through FY2018 CMS scoring methodologies. Results Comparing hospital penalty status based on various HACRP scoring methodologies over time, we found a significant overlap between penalized hospitals when using FY 2015 and 2016 scoring methodologies (95%) and between FY 2017 and 2018 methodologies (46%), but substantial differences across early vs later years. Only 15% of hospitals were eligible for penalties across all four years. We also found significant changes in a hospital's (relative) ranking across the various years, indicating that shifts in penalty status were not driven by small changes in HAC scores clustered around the penalty threshold. Conclusions HACRP penalties have been highly sensitive to program updates, which are generally announced after performance periods are concluded. This disconnect between performance and penalties calls into question the ability of the HACRP to improve patient safety as intended.