scholarly journals Changes to Chiropractic Practice in Response to COVID-19: a survey of all 50 United States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawn M Neff ◽  
Christopher B Roecker ◽  
Casey S Okamoto ◽  
Samuel L Holguin ◽  
Jason G Napuli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
The United States ◽  
Individual State ◽  
The Public ◽  
Single Location ◽  
Chiropractic Practice ◽  
State And Local ◽  
At Home

Abstract Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented changes, as many individual state and local governments enacted stay-at-home orders and nonessential businesses were closed. State chiropractic licensing boards play an important role in protecting the public via regulation of licensure and provision of guidance regarding standards of practice, especially during times of change or uncertainty. Objective The purpose of this study was to summarize the guidance provided in each of the 50 United States, related to chiropractic practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A review of the public facing websites of Governors and state chiropractic licensing boards was conducted for each of the United States. Data was collected regarding the official guidance provided by each state’s chiropractic licensing board as well as the issuance of stay at home orders and designations of essential personnel by state Governors. Descriptive statistics were used to report the findings from this project. Results Each of the 50 state Governor’s websites and individual state chiropractic licensing board’s websites were surveyed. Stay-at-home or shelter-in-place orders were issued in 86% of all states. Chiropractors were classified as essential providers in 54% of states, non-essential in one state (2%), and no guidance was provided in the remaining 44% of all states. Fourteen states (28%) recommended restricting visits to only urgent cases and the remaining states (72%) provided no guidance. Twenty-seven states (54%) provided information regarding protecting against infectious disease and the remaining states (46%) provided no guidance. Twenty-two states (44%) provided recommendations regarding chiropractic telehealth and the remaining states (56%) provided no guidance. Seventeen states (34%) altered license renewal requirements and eight states (16%) issued warnings against advertising misleading or false information regarding spinal manipulation and protection from COVID-19. Conclusion Individual state guidance during the COVID-19 pandemic was heterogenous, widely variability in accessibility, and often no guidance was provided by state chiropractic licensing boards. Some state chiropractic licensing boards chose to assemble guidance for licensees into a single location, which we identified as a best practice for future situations where changes in chiropractic practice must be quickly communicated.

scholarly journals Guidance concerning chiropractic practice in response to COVID-19 in the U.S.: A summary of state regulators' web-based information

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawn M Neff ◽  
Christopher B Roecker ◽  
Casey S Okamoto ◽  
Samuel L Holguin ◽  
Jason G Napuli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Single Location ◽  
Chiropractic Practice ◽  
State And Local ◽  
License Renewal ◽  
At Home

Abstract Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented changes, as many state and local governments enacted stay-at-home orders and non-essential businesses were closed. State chiropractic licensing boards play an important role in protecting the public via regulation of licensure and provision of guidance regarding standards of practice, especially during times of change or uncertainty. Objective: The purpose of this study was to summarize the guidance provided in each of the 50 United States, related to chiropractic practice during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: A review of the public facing websites of governors and state chiropractic licensing boards was conducted in the United States. Data were collected regarding the official guidance provided by each state’s chiropractic licensing board as well as the issuance of stay-at-home orders and designations of essential personnel by state governors. Descriptive statistics were used to report the findings from this project. Results: Each of the 50 state governor’s websites and individual state chiropractic licensing board’s websites were surveyed. Stay-at-home or shelter-in-place orders were issued in 86% of all states. Chiropractors were classified as essential providers in 54% of states, non-essential in one state (2%), and no guidance was provided in the remaining 44% of all states. Fourteen states (28%) recommended restricting visits to only urgent cases and the remaining states (72%) provided no guidance. Twenty-seven states (54%) provided information regarding protecting against infectious disease and the remaining states (46%) provided no guidance. Twenty-two states (44%) provided recommendations regarding chiropractic telehealth and the remaining states (56%) provided no guidance. Seventeen states (34%) altered license renewal requirements and eight states (16%) issued warnings against advertising misleading or false information regarding spinal manipulation and protection from COVID-19.Conclusion: State guidance during the COVID-19 pandemic was heterogenous, widely variability in accessibility, and often no guidance was provided by state chiropractic licensing boards. Some state chiropractic licensing boards chose to assemble guidance for licensees into a single location, which we identified as a best practice for future situations where changes in chiropractic practice must be quickly communicated.

scholarly journals Early Responses to Climate Change: An Analysis of Seven U.S. State and Local Climate Adaptation Planning Initiatives

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 237-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle Andrew Poyar ◽  
Nancy Beller-Simms
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Climate Adaptation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Climate Impact ◽  
Climate Impacts ◽  
Adaptation Planning ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Climate Adaptation Planning

Abstract State and local governments in the United States manage a wide array of natural and human resources that are particularly sensitive to climate variability and change. Recent revelations of the extent of the current and potential climate impact in this realm such as with the quality of water, the structure of the coasts, and the potential and witnessed impact on the built infrastructure give these political authorities impetus to minimize their vulnerability and plan for the future. In fact, a growing number of subnational government bodies in the United States have initiated climate adaptation planning efforts; these initiatives emphasize an array of climate impacts, but at different scales, scopes, and levels of sophistication. Meanwhile, the current body of climate adaptation literature has not taken a comprehensive look at these plans nor have they questioned what prompts local adaptation planning, at what scope and scale action is being taken, or what prioritizes certain policy responses over others. This paper presents a case-based analysis of seven urban climate adaptation planning initiatives, drawing from a review of publicly available planning documents and interviews with stakeholders directly involved in the planning process to provide a preliminary understanding of these issues. The paper also offers insight into the state of implementation of adaptation strategies, highlighting the role of low upfront costs and cobenefits with issues already on the local agenda in prompting anticipatory adaptation.

scholarly journals The Effect of Governmental Health Measures on Public Behaviour During the COVID-19 Pandemic Outbreak

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guoyan Wang ◽  
Li Li ◽  
Lingfei Wang ◽  
Zhi Xu
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
New York State ◽  
The United States ◽  
Average Score ◽  
Phase Rule ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Measures ◽  
Epidemic Area

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in radical changes in many aspects of life. To deal with this, each country has implemented continuous health measures from the beginning of the outbreak. Discovering how governmental actions impacted public behaviour during the outbreak stage is the purpose of this study. Methods: This study uses a hybrid large-scale data visualisation method to analyse public behaviour (epidemic concerns, self-protection, and mobility trends), using the data provided by multiple authorities. Meanwhile, a content analysis method is used to qualitatively code the health measures of three countries with severe early epidemic outbreaks from different continents, namely China, Italy, and the United States. Eight dimensions are coded to rate the mobility restrictions implemented in the above countries. Results: (1) Governmental measures did not immediately persuade the public to change their behaviours during the COVID-19 epidemic. Instead, the public behaviour proceeded in a three-phase rule, which is typically witnessed in an epidemic outbreak, namely the wait-and-see phase, the surge phase and the slow-release phase. (2) The strictness of the mobility restrictions of the three countries can be ranked as follows: Hubei Province in China (with an average score of 8.5 out of 10), Lombardy in Italy (7.125), and New York State in the United States (5.375). Strict mobility restrictions are more likely to cause a surge of population outflow from the epidemic area in the short term, whereas the effect of mobility restrictions is positively related to the stringency of policies in the long term. Conclusion: The public showed generally lawful behaviour during regional epidemic outbreaks and blockades. Meanwhile public behaviour was deeply affected by the actions of local governments, rather than the global pandemic situation. The contextual differences between the various countries are important factors that influence the effects of the different governments’ health measures.

Committee on School Health Health Education

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-117
Author(s):  
Donald E. Cook ◽  
Conrad L. Andringa ◽  
Karl W. Hess ◽  
Leonard L. Kishner ◽  
Samuel R. Leavitt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Education ◽  
School Health ◽  
The United States ◽  
Education Programs ◽  
The Public ◽  
School Health Education ◽  
Comprehensive Health ◽  
The Media ◽  
State And Local

The American Academy of Pediatrics believes that it is necessary to reaffirm its support for the concept of school health education, from kindergarten through grade 12, for all schoolchildren in the United States. A basic concept of pediatrics is prevention, and health education is a basic element in the delivery of comprehensive health care. The public is continually bombarded by the media about the high cost of medical care and the overutilization and incorrect use of medical facilities. The media also writes about the problems of increasing promiscuity and illegitimacy; the money wasted on quackery; practices that are detrimental to the health of people in the United States; and the lag in the dissemination of new health information and facts to the public. The Committee on School Health believes that community health education programs, of which school health education programs from kindergarten through grade 12 are an integral part, are one of the most viable methods to help alleviate these and similar problems. Therefore, the Committee on School Health makes the following recommendations and urges action for them at state and local levels. 1. Health education is a basic education subject, and it should be taught as such. Health education is compatible with other traditional subjects and can enhance the contribution that other basic subjects make to general life experience, understanding, and skills. 2. Planned, integrated programs of comprehensive health education should be required for students from kindergarten through grade 12. Instruction should be given by teachers qualified to teach health education.

The Contours of Repression

2019 ◽  
pp. 184-208
Author(s):  
David M. Struthers
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Industrial Workers ◽  
World War One ◽  
International Borders ◽  
The World ◽  
Sedition Act ◽  
State And Local

This chapter examines the World War One period in which the federal, state, and local governments in the United States, in addition to non-state actors, created one of the most severe eras of political repression in United States history. The Espionage Act, the Sedition Act, changes to immigration law at the federal level, and state criminal syndicalism laws served as the legal basis for repression. The Partido Liberal Mexicano (PLM), Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), and other anarchists took different paths in this era. Some faced lengthy prison sentences, some went underground, while others crossed international borders to flee repression and continue organizing. This chapter examines the repression of radical movements and organizing continuities that sustained the movement into the 1920s.

Government and Fiscal Policy in American Economic History

2018 ◽  
pp. 194-224
Author(s):  
John Joseph Wallis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Property Tax ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Payroll Taxes ◽  
The Third ◽  
State And Local

Over the last 225 years, government finances in the United States have gone through three distinct stages. In the first stage, 1790–1850, state governments actively pursued policies to promote economic development and financed them from revenues from state investments. In the second, 1850–1930, local governments became the most important level of government, as measured by revenues and expenditures, and revenues shifted toward the property tax. In the third period, 1930 to the present, the national government became the most active and largest level of government, financed through income and payroll taxes, and developed an extensive network of grants to state and local governments. The chapter tracks the changes in sources of revenues and purpose of expenditures, with specific attention paid to military spending over the entire period.

Infant formula and toddler milk marketing: opportunities to address harmful practices and improve young children’s diets

2020 ◽  
Vol 78 (10) ◽  
pp. 866-883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer L Harris ◽  
Jennifer L Pomeranz
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Infant Formula ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Child Nutrition ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Health ◽  
Health Providers ◽  
Formula Milk ◽  
State And Local

Abstract Children’s diets in their first 1000 days influence dietary preferences, eating habits, and long-term health. Yet the diets of most infants and toddlers in the United States do not conform to recommendations for optimal child nutrition. This narrative review examines whether marketing for infant formula and other commercial baby/toddler foods plays a role. The World Health Organization’s International Code of Marketing Breast-milk Substitutes strongly encourages countries and manufacturers to prohibit marketing practices that discourage initiation of, and continued, breastfeeding. However, in the United States, widespread infant formula marketing negatively impacts breastfeeding. Research has also identified questionable marketing of toddler milks (formula/milk-based drinks for children aged 12–36 mo). The United States has relied exclusively on industry self-regulation, but US federal agencies and state and local governments could regulate problematic marketing of infant formula and toddler milks. Health providers and public health organizations should also provide guidance. However, further research is needed to better understand how marketing influences what and how caregivers feed their young children and inform potential interventions and regulatory solutions.

U.S. Floods

2017 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beverly A. Cigler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Disaster Response ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Response And Recovery ◽  
Property Losses ◽  
State And Local

Floods are the costliest natural hazard events in the United States in terms of lives and property losses. The financial costs of flood disasters are unsustainable, especially for the national government, which assumes the most costs while state and local governments have the greatest ability to avoid great losses due to their influence over land use, economic policy, and other areas that can help mitigate floods and reduce the high costs of relief and recovery. This article summarizes the types, causes, and occurrence of floods in the United States and their unsustainable economic and social costs. It explains that the growing burden to taxpayers from disaster response and recovery has resulted in increased interest by national decision makers in shifting more disaster responsibilities and costs to state and local governments. The article reviews the broad tool kit of mitigation strategies available to local governments and their residents in taking greater responsibility for the impacts of flood events.

scholarly journals LGBT Discrimination, Subnational Public Policy, and Law in the United States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christy Mallory ◽  
Brad Sears
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Sexual Orientation ◽  
Gender Identity ◽  
State Government ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Lgbt People ◽  
And Gender

LGBT people in the United States continue to experience discrimination because of their sexual orientation and gender identity, despite increasing acceptance of LGBT people and legal recognition of marriage for same-sex couples nationwide. This ongoing discrimination can lead to under- and unemployment, resulting in socioeconomic disparities for LGBT people. In addition, empirical research has linked LGBT health disparities, including disparities in health-related risk factors, to experiences of stigma and discrimination. Currently, federal statutes in the United States do not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in employment, housing, or public accommodations, leaving regulation in this area primarily to state and local governments. This creates a limited and uneven patchwork of protections from discrimination against LGBT people across the country. Despite public support for LGBT-inclusive non-discrimination laws across the country, in 28 states there are no statewide statutory protections for LGBT people in employment, housing, or public accommodations. To date, only 20 states and the District of Columbia have enacted comprehensive non-discrimination statutes that expressly prohibit discrimination based on both sexual orientation and gender identity in all three of these areas. One additional state has statutes that prohibit sexual orientation discrimination, but not gender identity discrimination, in these areas. One other state prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment and housing, but not in public accommodations. In states without statutes that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity, there are other policies that afford LGBT people at least some limited protections from discrimination. In some of these states, state executive branch officials have expanded non-discrimination protections for LGBT people under their executive or agency powers. For example, in three states, state government agencies have expanded broad protections from sexual orientation or gender identity discrimination through administrative regulations. And, in 12 states without statutes prohibiting discrimination against LGBT people, governors have issued executive orders that protect state government employees (and sometimes employees of state government contractors) from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In addition, local government ordinances provide another source of protection from discrimination; however, these laws are generally unenforceable in court and provide much more limited remedies than statewide non-discrimination statutes. In recent years, lawmakers have increasingly attempted to limit the reach of state and local non-discrimination laws, which can leave LGBT people vulnerable to discrimination. For example, some states have passed laws allowing religiously motivated discrimination and others have passed laws prohibiting local governments from enacting their own non-discrimination ordinances that are broader than state non-discrimination laws. While most of these bills have not passed, the recent increase in the introduction of these measures suggests that state legislatures will continue to consider rolling back non-discrimination protections for LGBT people in the coming years. Continued efforts are required at both the state and federal levels to ensure that LGBT people are fully protected from discrimination based on their sexual orientation and gender identity throughout the United States, including federal legislation and statewide bills in over half the states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document