Public Health Services : Case Study Evaluation

Sorry to know you had to experience the illness of a loved with whom you have shared your life with for such a long time. Hopefully you will be strengthen by the joy and good times you shared.

Western Health System noticed that many of its local clinic managers were leaving to join the competition. Their human resources director, Stephanie Anderson realized that they were losing a lot of talented people who had become demotivated, and she worked on developing a program to increase their motivation in hope that they would remain committed to Western Health System. Her program, Exploration, had many great features, but to truly asses the program one first has to understand motivation, motivational theories, and the current issues at hand.

Nearly 145 million Americans are currently receiving the benefits of optimally fluoridated water. With the 1995 enactment of Assembly Bill 733 in California, ten states and territories in the United States now mandate fluoridation through legislation. Besides California, these include seven other states (Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Minnesota, Nebraska, Ohio and South Dakota), as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Three states (South Dakota, Rhode Island and Kentucky), as well as the District of Columbia, have achieved the ultimate success with 100 percent of their treatable community water systems providing the benefits of fluoridation to their citizens.

Although with all this information on the benefits of treating public water there is still information that is overlooked by governments. Fluoride is a pollutant, insecticide, poison, and a byproduct of fertilizer, nuclear power plants, and metal processing. Fluoride is also found in many processed goods, dental hygiene products, and pharmaceuticals meaning the average person’s intake is most likely far greater than the recommended levels. In the 1930s they were looking for an easy way to dispose of the toxic byproduct. During this time period one of the largest aluminum companies funded a test to determine how bad or good fluoride actually was to the people, this is when it was first deemed as a beneficial treatment. To me it seems kind of fishy that a company more worried about public relations and how to dispose of the toxic byproduct was trusted to carry out the testing themselves. This thinking came from the era where it was thought that smoking cigarettes would

Fluoridation of group drinking water is a main consideration in charge of the decrease in dental caries (tooth rot) . The historical backdrop of water fluoridation is a great case of clinical perception prompting epidemiologic examination and group based general wellbeing intercession. Albeit other fluoride-containing items are accessible, water fluoridation remains the most fair and practical strategy for conveying fluoride to all individuals from most groups, paying little respect to age, instructive achievement, or wage level.

In the first case study, the public health dental hygienist is responsible for evaluating the daily fluoridation test that is submitted by each state to make sure it is in the optimal range 0.7 to 1.2 milligrams per liter. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2011) She is also responsible for working with the state if the test results do not measure up the standards set forth by the CDC. In addition the dental hygienist reports all of these results to Centers for Disease control and Prevention (CDC) so the CDC can determine a national average. This case study shows the “assessment” part of the essential public health services.

(2015) and Dodd et al. (2014), Decker & Lipton (2015) have utilized data qualitatively, which verily served the purpose of gaining rich information on the perceptions of the respondents on dental care and health. This is also important to consider, especially since most of the studies are done quantitatively. Although both qualitative and quantitative studies are good on their own, both also have considerable weaknesses. It would be interesting as well to see more researches done in mixed method in order to fill in the weaknesses of these two. It will be also good to note if the study by Decker & Lipton (2015) can be replicated in different sample—such as other minority groups or a more heterogeneous sample. In this way, the scholar literature can be expanded by our knowledge about dental health that is growing to be a public health issue in United States and in other parts of the world. Given the qualitative data gathered by Decker & Lipton (2015), it will be helpful if better public policies are made to cater to these sensitive populations. This is also true in the suggestion of Dodd et al. (2014) on the widening of the Medicaid coverage among adults—and on the reconsideration not to deflouridate the water supply in New York in the study by Edelstein et al. (2015). As mentioned by Edelstein et al. (2015), removing the fluoride content in the New York water supply could only worsen the rates of early childhood carries. In the long run,

An article published in the Oregonian, “Portland and its aversion to fluoride reflects Oregon’s unusual politics”, presented views of Portlanders who have rejected adding fluoridation chemical to the city’s clean water supply.1 In September 2012 Portland city council approved adding fluorine to the city’s water supply.1 However, public outrage soon ensued leading to a special election to protect the water supply.1 In May 2013, Portlanders voted 61% to protect their clean water supply.1

In 1945, Brantford, Ontario, became the first Canadian city to add fluoride to its water.3 This was the first milestone that was involved in laying the groundwork for the achievement of adding fluoride to Canadian drinking water. Brantford was paired with neighbouring Sarnia in an 11-year case study of the effects of water fluoridation.3 This event was the first key process that contributed to the groundwork of this revolutionary idea. The rate of community water fluoridation in Canada has grown, with 45.1% of the total population now having access to fluoridated water.3 The implementation of this program has impacted a significant part of the Canadian population in a positive way. The benefit-cost ratio indicated that, at an expected average effectiveness of 30 % caries reduction, one dollar invested in the program saved $71.05–$82.83 per Quebec’s

Department of Health and Human Services address some of the public concerns about water fluoridation such as its effects on health and its ethical implication in the community. Some of the concerns express by the public were: safety of fluoride additives, fluoride’s impact on the brain, specifically citing lower IQ in children, effects of fluoride in the endocrine system, and cost effectiveness. In all cases, it was determine that in a concentration of 0.7 milligrams per liter, fluorided water was safe for consumption. Legal implications about community water fluoridation have been thoroughly reviewed by the U.S. court systems and the results have always being that water fluoridation is a proper means of promoting public health and welfare. Also, it is important to have in mind, that the state and local governments decide whether or not to implement water fluoridation after considering evidence regarding its benefits and

a) 8 A hospital ward wants to computerize its data about patients and medications / dosages prescribed for

Ms. Choi indicated that the marriage continued to deteriorate. The mother stated that she became unhappy with his behavior. The arguments between the parents became more intense and violent. Ms. Choi reported in 2009, the father continued to be physically abusive towards her.

My immediate response is to alert my nominated supervisor and once my nominated supervisor is informed I will record what has happened so that there is evidence of the injury that Lucy has faced. Documentation and preserving Lucy’s injury is a very important step. The location and the appearance has to be very well described as well as the date that it was noticed. I will also get a photo taken of the injury to have photographic proof.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is the government’s primary federal level administration, in the Executive Branch, that administrates the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) (U.S. Department of health and Human Services, 2016). The Tennessee Department of Health is the state level of government that manages the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) (Department of Health, ND). The Health Care Corporation is the Local delivery for Shelby County that guarantees suitable resources for distributing quality care and amenities (Tennessee, ND). The Employee Healthcare, Retirement and Disability Services, which is another local level of delivery, provide responsible and price effective assistance programs

Although the executive committee does not include behavioral health, psychiatrists, Mazhar Munir, MD, and Philip Creps provide critical behavioral health leadership. This team is charged with not only ensuring exceptional care for the underserved, but also keeping the organization afloat amidst the seas of fierce competition from rivals like Spectrum Health and Mercy Health.