The June 24, 2022 US Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women\'s Health Organization resulted in an expansive restriction on abortion access that had been constitutionally guaranteed for nearly half a century. Currently, 14 states have implemented complete bans on abortion with very limited exceptions, and an additional 7 states have implemented abortion bans at 6 to 18 weeks\' gestation. It has been well demonstrated that restrictive policies disproportionately limit abortion access for minoritized people and people of low socioeconomic status; the financial and geographic barriers of these post-Dobbs restrictions will only exacerbate this disparity. Proponents of abortion restrictions, who identify as pro-life, assert that these policies are essential to protect children, women, and families. We examine whether the protection of these groups extends past conception by evaluating the association between state abortion legislation and state-based policies and programs designed to provide medical and social support for children, women, and families. We found that states with the most restrictive post-Dobbs abortion policies in fact have the least comprehensive and inclusive public infrastructure to support these groups. We suggest further opportunities for advocacy. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(10):1043-1050. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307792).

Insurance coverage for prenatal care, labor and delivery care, and postpartum care for undocumented immigrants consists of a patchwork of state and federal policies, which varies widely by state. According to federal law, states must provide coverage for labor and delivery through Emergency Medicaid. Various states have additional prenatal and postpartum coverage for undocumented immigrants through policy mechanisms such as the Children\'s Health Insurance Program\'s \"unborn child\" option, expansion of Medicaid, and independent state-level mechanisms. Using a search of state Medicaid and federal government websites, we found that 27 states and the District of Columbia provide additional coverage for prenatal care, postpartum care, or both, while 23 states do not. Twelve states include any postpartum coverage; 7 provide coverage for 12 months postpartum. Although information regarding coverage is available publicly online, there exist many barriers to access, such as lack of transparency, lack of availability of information in multiple languages, and incorrect information. More inclusive and easily accessible policies are needed as the first step toward improving maternal health among undocumented immigrants, a population trapped in a complicated web of immigration policy and a maternal health crisis. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(10):1051-1060. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307750).

UNASSIGNED: Despite high social and public health costs of firearm violence in the United States, the effects of many policies designed to reduce firearm mortality remain uncertain.
UNASSIGNED: To estimate the individual and joint effect sizes of state firearm policies on firearm-related mortality.
UNASSIGNED: In this comparative effectiveness study, bayesian methods were used to model panel data of annual, state-level mortality rates (1979-2019) for all US firearm decedents, with analyses conducted in October 2023.
UNASSIGNED: Six classes of firearms policies: background checks, minimum age, waiting periods, child access, concealed carry, and stand-your-ground laws.
UNASSIGNED: Primary outcomes (total firearm deaths, firearm homicide deaths, and firearm suicide deaths) were assessed using the National Vital Statistics System. Bayesian estimation was used to estimate the partial association of changes in firearms policies with subsequent changes in firearm mortality.
UNASSIGNED: The estimated effect sizes of individual policies 5 or more years after implementation were generally small in magnitude and had considerable uncertainty. The policy class with the highest probability of reducing firearm deaths was child-access prevention laws, estimated to reduce overall firearm mortality by 6% (80% credible interval [CrI], -2% to -9%). The policy class with the highest probability of increasing firearm deaths was stand-your-ground laws, estimated to increase firearm homicides by 6% (80% CrI, 0% to 13% increase). Estimates of association of implementing multiple firearm restrictions with subsequent changes in firearm mortality yielded larger effect sizes. Moving from the most permissive to most restrictive set of firearm policies was associated with an estimated 20% reduction in firearm deaths (80% CrI, 10% to 28% reduction), with a 0.99 probability of any reductions in firearm death rates.
UNASSIGNED: In this comparative effectiveness study of state firearm policies, the joint effect estimates of combinations of firearm laws were calculated, showing that restrictive firearm policies were associated with substantial reductions in firearm mortality. Although policymakers would benefit from knowing the effects of individual policies, the estimated changes in firearm mortality following implementation of individual policies were often small and uncertain.

We conducted a comprehensive review of state workers\' compensation laws in the United States to evaluate the extent to which they support first responders with mental injury. Most state workers\' compensation systems divide mental injuries into categories based on their presumed etiology: physical-mental, mental-physical, and mental-mental. Major differences exist among states as to which workers are eligible. Proving workplace causation can be difficult where no traumatic physical injuries exist. Latency periods, time limits, preexisting health conditions, restrictions as to types of condition covered, and complex chains of causation may make this burden, which falls on the claimant, even more challenging. Only nine (9) states enacted presumption of causation laws for mental health conditions to ease claimants\' burden of proof. This contrasts starkly with presumption laws for chronic and infectious diseases. State decision-makers should create presumptions that mental health conditions in first responders are caused or significantly exacerbated by their stressful workplaces.

Cross jurisdictional collaboration efforts and emergency vaccine plans that are consistent with Tribal sovereignty are essential to public health emergency preparedness. The widespread adoption of clearly written federal, state, and local vaccine plans that address fundamental assumptions in vaccine distribution to Tribal nations is imperative for future pandemic response.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has the potential to prevent new HIV infections, but it is unclear how state policies governing sexual and reproductive health services (SRH) impact access for cisgender women. The objective of this review is to identify barriers to PrEP access for cisgender women in the United States. Using the CDC Atlas Program, 20 states with the highest HIV incidence among cisgender women were included in this analysis. Through a search conducted in May-July 2022 of CDC, PrEPWatch.org, and other State Department and Insurance websites, Medicaid expansion status, pharmacist PrEP prescribing laws, financial support programs, and Traditional Medicaid coverage of PrEP, HIV testing, and emergency contraception were reviewed. Of the included states, nearly half did not expand Medicaid at the state level. Emergency contraception and HIV testing was covered under Traditional Medicaid for almost all included states, but insurance stipulations and eligibility requirements remain. Although PrEP is covered under all Traditional Medicaid plans, six states require pre-authorization. Three states have HIV testing mandates, four allow pharmacists to prescribe PrEP and six have financial support programs to cover the cost of PrEP. Medicaid expansion, pre-authorization requirements for PrEP prescriptions and emergency contraception, and limitations on pharmacist prescribing abilities were identified as barriers to SRH access for cisgender women. Medicaid expansion should be prioritized as an approach to expanding access to HIV prevention services at the state level.

In September 2023, we examined requirements for budtenders working in nonmedical dispensaries in the 20 states with active non-medical cannabis markets. Two coders extracted data from each state\'s licensing board and/or governmental websites. The age requirement for budtenders was ≥21 years old ( n = 17) or ≥18 ( n = 3). Most states ( n = 16) required background checks; 10 specified felony convictions preventing employment, 5 allowed the Department to determine eligibility, and 2 allowed petitions upon denial. Twelve states required fingerprinting. There were application fees ($25-$300) in 13 states. Structured training was required in 7 states, while 5 states required employee training. Given the diverse budtender requirements, the evaluation of budtender standards is essential to assess the impacts of training on regulatory compliance and consumer education, and of application costs and conviction-based employment restrictions on social equity. This must inform the development of effective regulations and enforcement protocols, as well as and how to promote equity in cannabis regulations.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of Medicaid expansion on state expenditures through the end of 2022.
METHODS: We used data from the National Association of State Budget Officers (NASBO)\'s State Expenditure Report, Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF)\'s Medicaid expansion tracker, US Bureau of Labor Statistics data (BLS), US Bureau of Economic Analysis data (BEA), and Pandemic Response Accountability Committee Oversight (PRAC).
METHODS: We investigated spending per capita (by state population) across seven budget categories, including Medicaid spending, and four spending sources. We performed a difference-in-differences (DiD) analysis that compared within-state changes in spending over time in expansion and nonexpansion states to estimate the effect of Medicaid expansion on state budgets. We adjusted for annual state unemployment rate, annual state per capita personal income, and state spending of Coronavirus Relief Funds (CRF) from 2020 to 2022 and included state and year fixed effects.
METHODS: We linked annual state-level data on state-reported fiscal year expenditures from NASBO with state-level characteristics from BLS and BEA data and with CRF state spending from PRAC.
RESULTS: Medicaid expansion was associated with an average increase of 21% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 16%-25%) in per capita Medicaid spending after Medicaid expansion among states that expanded prior to 2020. After inclusion of an interaction term to separate between the coronavirus disease (COVID) era (2020-2022) and the prior period following expansion (2015-2019), we found that although Medicaid expansion led to an average increase of 33% (95% CI: 21%-45%) in federal funding of state expenditures in the post-COVID years, it was not significantly associated with increased state spending.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of crowding out of other state expenditure categories or a substantial impact on total state spending, even in the COVID-19 era. Increased federal expenditures may have shielded states from substantial budgetary impacts.

This survey study evaluates public health priorities and trust in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and state health departments among US adults after the COVID-19 pandemic.

UNASSIGNED: The majority of states have legalized medical cannabis. Nurse leaders must be prepared for an increase in patients\' use of the drug across all care settings.
UNASSIGNED: To explore nurse leaders\' attitudes towards, knowledge of, and experiences with medical cannabis.
UNASSIGNED: : Descriptive qualitative study design.
UNASSIGNED: 28 nurse leaders-19 in four focus groups of 3-7 participants and another 9 in interviews.
UNASSIGNED: Semi-structured, one-on-one interviews and focus groups of nurse leaders about their attitudes towards and experiences with patients\' use of medical cannabis. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes and subthemes.
UNASSIGNED: Four major themes were identified: overwhelming support for legalized medical cannabis; importance of overcoming the stereotype of a gateway drug; problematic mismatch between federal and state cannabis policies; and nursing needs to be move involved.
UNASSIGNED: There was strong support for legalized medical cannabis to meet patients\' needs; yet, respondents reported little discussion about or education regarding medical cannabis among nurses. Inconsistent federal and state cannabis policies were viewed as especially problematic and in need of alignment.