Primary Navigation for the CDC Website
CDC en Espaņol
2002 PRAMS Surveillance Report: Multistate Exhibits
Infant Follow-Up and Well-Baby Care

Data Highlights | References | Tables

Background

Traditionally, clinicians were able to assess and monitor closely the medical and psychological needs of newborns and their mothers during the important first few days following birth in the hospital setting. Beginning in the 1970s, public pressure to demedicalize childbirth resulted in declining hospital lengths of stay after normal childbirth. This trend accelerated in the early 1990s as pressure to contain health care costs increased.1,2 The average length of a hospital stay for a well newborn declined from 3.2 days in 1980 to 1.7 days in 1995.3

Concerns that reduced access to care in the hospital setting following birth would lead to adverse health outcomes for infants and their mothers prompted professional organizations to publish guidelines for length of birth- and delivery-related stays. In 1992, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) jointly published the Guidelines for Perinatal Care in which they recommended postpartum hospital stays of at least 48 hours for uncomplicated vaginal deliveries and at least 96 hours for uncomplicated cesarean deliveries.4 In 1995, the AAP further recommended that newborns receive follow-up care in the office or home within 48 hours of an early discharge, defined as a stay under 48 hours for uncomplicated vaginal delivery and a stay under 96 hours for an uncomplicated cesarean delivery.5 The guidelines regarding lengths of postpartum hospital stay and follow-up care for infants discharged early are retained in the most current (2002) Guidelines for Perinatal Care.6

In the mid-1990s, 43 states and the federal government backed up these recommendations by enacting legislation mandating insurance coverage of birth- and delivery-related hospital stays of the standard duration recommended by the AAP and ACOG.2 Many states also required coverage of postdischarge home or office follow-up for vaginally delivered newborns with stays under 48 hours and cesarean-delivered newborns with stays less than 96 hours. The federal legislation does not include requirements for infant follow-up care.

Following the legislation, the incidence of early discharge declined and the average lengths of stay for newborns and their mothers increased. By 2001, the average length of stay for a well newborn had increased to 2.1 days.3 However, many newborns continue to be discharged early and many of these infants fail to receive early follow-up care.1,7,8 A study of births in California in 1999 found that the odds of untimely follow-up were greater among mothers with lower incomes, Medicaid coverage, Latino ethnicity, and non-English language.7

The clinical rationale for the follow-up care recommendation was that jaundice peaks and breast milk comes in at 72 to 96 hours after delivery. However, evidence in the literature concerning the impact of early discharge on newborn morbidity is inconclusive: some studies show early discharge increasing newborn morbidity,1,915 while others do not.1619 Little evidence exists on the impact of early follow-up care on newborn morbidity. A recent study of Ohio Medicaid claims linked to birth certificates for 1991 to 1998 suggests that for newborns with early discharge, early follow-up visits may reduce rehospitalizations within the first 10 days of life.1

Beyond early postdischarge follow-up care, the AAP recommends routine well-baby visits for infants at 1 week and at 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, and 12 months.20 These visits are used to track growth and development; administer immunizations, screening tests, and health assessments; and provide health education and guidance to parents.21 They are particularly important for infants at risk for health problems and for families adjusting to new parenthood. Well-baby visits also provide an opportunity for health care workers to screen the mother for domestic violence and postpartum depression.22

Studies have found that well-baby visits are underutilized in the United States. Data from the 1988 National Maternal and Infant Health Survey (NMIHS) suggested that fewer than one-half of infants under 6 months of age were compliant with the AAP guidelines.23 Furthermore, black and Hispanic infants were much less likely to have received all recommended well-baby visits. Ronsaville and Hakim23 found that 58% of white infants had received all recommended visits, but only 35% of black infants and 37% of Hispanic infants were compliant with the AAP guidelines. No more recent national data exist to determine current rates of compliance among infants under 6 months of age. However, benchmark data from the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS) suggest that higher compliance with recommended well-child schedules continues to elude commercial and Medicaid managed care plans; in 2002, only 58% of children aged 3 through 6 years in managed care plans received the recommended number of visits.24

PRAMS collects data on whether infants were discharged early, whether they were seen by a primary health care practitioner in the first week postdischarge, and the proportion of infants who receive sufficient well-baby care up to the time of the interview. Sufficient well-baby care is defined as an infant receiving 2 or more checkups by 2–3 months (60–122 days) of age; 3 or more checkups by 4–5 months (123–183 days) of age; or 4 or more checkups by 6–9 months (184–274 days) of age. With these data, states can track compliance with length-of-stay, early follow-up, and well-baby visit guidelines.

Data Highlights

  • In 2002, the proportion of infants discharged from the hospital within 48 hours of their birth ranged from 49.8% (New Jersey) to 70.4% (Utah and Washington). Among these infants, the proportion who received a checkup within 1 week of their early discharge ranged from 58.3% (North Dakota) to 90.6% (Washington).

  • During 2000–2002, the proportion of infants discharged from the hospital within 48 hours of their birth decreased in 6 states (Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, North Carolina, Utah, and Washington). During this same period, the proportion of infants who received a checkup within 1 week of their early hospital discharge (within 48 hours after birth) increased in 5 states (Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, North Carolina, and Utah).

  • In 2002, the proportion of infants who received sufficient well-baby care ranged from 76.1% (Alaska) to 94.8% (Rhode Island).

  • During 2000–2002, the proportion of infants who received sufficient well-baby care increased in 1 state (Louisiana) and decreased in another (Alaska).

References

  1. Meara E, Kotagal UR, Atherton HD, Lieu TA. Impact of early newborn discharge legislation and early follow-up visits on infant outcomes in a state Medicaid population. Pediatrics 2004;113(6):1619–1627.

  2. Eaton AP. Early postpartum discharge: recommendations from a preliminary report to Congress. Pediatrics 2001;107(2):400–403.

  3. Kozak LJ, Owings MF, Hall MJ. National Hospital Discharge Survey: 2001 annual summary with detailed diagnosis and procedure data. Vital and Health Statistics 2004;13(156): i–v, 1–198.

  4. American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Guidelines for Perinatal Care. Elk Grove Village, IL and Washington, DC: AAP and ACOG; 1992.

  5. American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Fetus and Newborn. Hospital stay for healthy term newborns. Pediatrics 1995;96(4 Part 1):788–790.

  6. American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Committee on the Fetus and Newborn and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Committee on Obstetric Practice. Guidelines for Perinatal Care. Elk Grove Village, IL and Washington, DC: AAP and ACOG; 2002.

  7. Galbraith AA, Egerter SA, Marchi KS, Chavez G, Braveman PA. Newborn early discharge revisited: are California newborns receiving recommended postnatal services? Pediatrics 2003;111(2):364–371.

  8. Madlon-Kay DJ, DeFor TA, Egerter S. Newborn length of stay, health care utilization, and the effect of Minnesota legislation. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 2003;157(6):579–583.

  9. Lee KS, Perlman M, Ballantyne M, Elliott I, To T. Association between duration of neonatal hospital stay and readmission rate. The Journal of Pediatrics 1995;127(5):758–766.

  10. Liu LL, Clemens CJ, Shay DK, Davis RL, Novack AH. The safety of newborn early discharge. The Washington State experience. JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) 1997;278(4):293–298.

  11. Gazmararian JA, Koplan JP, Cogswell ME, Bailey CM, Davis NA, Cutler CM. Maternity experiences in a managed care organization. Health Affairs 1997;16(3):198–208.

  12. Maisels MJ, Kring E. Length of stay, jaundice, and hospital readmission. Pediatrics 1998;101(6):995–998.

  13. Grupp-Phelan J, Taylor JA, Liu LL, Davis RL. Early newborn hospital discharge and readmission for mild and severe jaundice. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 1999;153(12):1283–1288.

  14. Lane DA, Kauls LS, Ickovics JR, Naftolin F, Feinstein AR. Early postpartum discharges. Impact on distress and outpatient problems. Archives of Family Medicine 1999;8(3):237–242.

  15. Malkin JD, Broder MS, Keeler E. Do longer postpartum stays reduce newborn readmissions? Analysis using instrumental variables. Health Services Research 2000;35(5 Part 2):1071–1091.

  16. Gazmararian JA, Koplan JP. Length-of-stay after delivery: managed care versus fee-for-service. Health Affairs 1996;15(4):74–80.

  17. Meikle SF, Lyons E, Hulac P, Orleans M. Rehospitalizations and outpatient contacts of mothers and neonates after hospital discharge after vaginal delivery. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1998;179(1):166–171.

  18. Kotagal UR, Atherton HD, Eshett R, Schoettker PJ, Perlstein PH. Safety of early discharge for Medicaid newborns. JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) 1999;282(12):1150–156.

  19. Madden JM, Soumerai SB, Lieu TA, Mandl KD, Zhang F, Ross-Degnan D. Length-of-stay policies and ascertainment of postdischarge problems in newborns. Pediatrics 2004;113(1 Part 1):42–49.

  20. American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Practice and Ambulatory Medicine. Recommendations for preventative pediatric health care. Pediatrics 2000;105(3):645–646.

  21. Shelov SP, Hannemann RE, editors. Caring for Your Baby and Young Child: Birth to Age 5. Elk Grove Village, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics; 2004.

  22. Logsdon MC, Birkimer JC, Usui WM. The link of social support and postpartum depressive symptoms in African-American women with low incomes. The American Journal of Maternal Child Nursing 2000;25(5):262–266.

  23. Ronsaville DS, Hakim RB. Well child care in the United States: racial differences in compliance with guidelines. American Journal of Public Health 2000;90(9):1436–1443.

  24. National Association of State Medicaid Directors (NASMD). Medicaid HEDIS 2002 Database Report. Washington, DC: NASMD; 2003.

 

Prevalence of Infant Discharge from Hospital Within 48 Hours, 2002

State Respondents Percent Standard Error 95% CI
Alabama 1,528 54.1 1.6 51.0–57.2
Alaska 1,579 69.2 1.3 66.6–71.7
Arkansas 1,937 67.8 1.4 64.9–70.5
Colorado 2,225 69.2 1.2 66.7–71.5
Florida 1,982 56.1 1.7 52.8–59.3
Hawaii 1,793 65.4 1.4 62.7–68.0
Illinois 1,922 63.7 1.2 61.4–65.9
Louisiana 1,660 54.9 1.4 52.2–57.6
Maine 1,125 60.7 1.6 57.5–63.9
Maryland 1,443 57.6 1.9 53.8–61.4
Michigan 1,527 66.8 1.3 64.1–69.4
Minnesotaa 1,140 64.0 1.8 60.4–67.5
Montana 1,019 67.2 1.5 64.2–70.1
Nebraska 1,874 62.0 1.4 59.3–64.6
New Jerseyb 935 49.8 1.9 46.1–53.6
New Mexico 1,533 69.5 1.2 67.0–71.9
New Yorkc 1,209 60.4 1.8 56.9–63.8
North Carolina 1,529 62.3 1.5 59.3–65.2
North Dakota 904 64.6 1.6 61.5–67.7
Ohio 1,356 66.0 1.6 62.8–69.1
Oklahoma 1,831 62.8 1.7 59.3–66.1
Rhode Island 1,401 58.1 1.5 55.1–61.1
South Carolina 1,359 58.0 2.1 53.9–62.1
Utah 1,542 70.4 1.5 67.5–73.2
Vermont 1,077 65.8 1.4 63.0–68.5
Washington 1,496 70.4 1.7 66.9–73.6
West Virginia 1,659 65.2 1.6 62.0–68.3
All PRAMS states§ 40,585 62.2 0.4 61.4–63.0
2002 state range is 49.8–70.4%.
Confidence interval.
§ Aggregate of the 27 PRAMS states.
a Data represent Minnesota births from May–December 2002.
b Data represent New Jersey births from July–December 2002.
c Data exclude New York City.

 

Prevalence of Infant Discharge from Hospital Within 48 Hours, 2002

This bar graph depicts the data reported in the table, Prevalence of Infant Discharge from Hospital Within 48 Hours, 2002

 

Prevalence of Infant Discharge from Hospital Within 48 Hours, 2000–2002

State 2000
(%)
2001
(%)
2002
(%)
P value
for trend#
Alabama 58.6 57.0 54.1 0.045*
Alaska 70.1 69.7 69.2 0.610
Arkansas 69.2 69.6 67.8 0.508
Colorado 72.3 74.0 69.2 0.070
Florida 61.1 56.5 56.1 0.030*
Hawaii 67.3 66.1 65.4 0.262
Illinois 66.1 66.5 63.7 0.128
Louisiana 57.8 53.6 54.9 0.113
Maine 64.0 63.4 60.7 0.155
Maryland 59.6d 57.6 # #
Michigan 68.5e 66.8 # #
Minnesota 64.0a # #
Montana 67.2 # #
Nebraska 66.6 60.3 62.0 0.012*
New Jersey 49.8b # #
New Mexico 72.6 72.7 69.5 0.067
New Yorkc 62.5 58.5 60.4 0.383
North Carolina 69.7 64.2 62.3 0.000**
North Dakota 64.6 # #
Ohio 66.0 66.3 66.0 0.988
Oklahoma 66.0 66.1 62.8 0.191
Rhode Island 58.1 # #
South Carolina 61.6 57.4 58.0 0.210
Utah 75.3 72.3 70.4 0.015*
Vermont f 72.0f 65.8 # #
Washington 75.4 72.6 70.4 0.027*
West Virginia 66.9 67.7 65.2 0.462
# Based on a test for linear trend using logistic regression.
* p value is less than 0.05.
** p value is less than 0.001.
# # < 3 years of data available; test for linear trend not applicable.
a Data represent Minnesota births from May–December 2002.
b Data represent New Jersey births from July–December 2002.
c Data exclude New York City.
d Data represent Maryland births from February–December 2001.
e Data represent Michigan births from July–December 2001.
f Data represent Vermont births from October 2000–December 2001.

 

Prevalence of Infant Checkup Within 1 Week of Hospital Discharge for Infants Discharged Within 48 Hours, 2002

State Respondents Percent Standard Error 95% CI
Alabama 568 63.8 2.2 59.3–68.0
Alaska 877 77.5 1.4 74.6–80.1
Arkansas 1,009 74.6 1.7 71.1–77.7
Colorado 1,280 88.2 1.1 85.8–90.2
Florida 731 83.4 1.8 79.7–86.6
Hawaii 1,130 82.3 1.4 79.4–85.0
Illinois 1,071 82.0 1.2 79.5–84.3
Louisiana 698 71.8 1.7 68.3–75.1
Maine 529 76.8 1.9 72.9–80.3
Maryland 594 83.8 2.0 79.6–87.4
Michigan 862 82.3 1.4 79.4–84.9
Minnesotaa 668 74.4 2.1 70.1–78.3
Montana 650 83.9 1.5 80.8–86.7
Nebraska 1,094 78.1 1.5 75.0–80.8
New Jerseyb 442 72.8 2.5 67.6–77.3
New Mexico 1,036 86.4 1.1 84.2–88.4
New Yorkc 522 75.2 2.2 70.8–79.2
North Carolina 692 87.1 1.4 84.1–89.6
North Dakota 571 58.3 2.0 54.2–62.3
Ohio 640 77.4 1.9 73.4–81.0
Oklahoma 719 65.5 2.3 60.8–69.9
Rhode Island 629 87.5 1.4 84.4–90.0
South Carolina 395 76.6 2.5 71.3–81.1
Utah 887 63.4 1.9 59.5–67.1
Vermont 640 84.4 1.4 81.4–86.9
Washington 994 90.6 1.3 87.8–92.9
West Virginia 794 74.9 1.9 70.9–78.5
All PRAMS states§ 20,722 79.5 0.4 78.7–80.3
2002 state range is 58.3–90.6%.
Confidence interval.
§ Aggregate of the 27 PRAMS states.
a Data represent Minnesota births from May–December 2002.
b Data represent New Jersey births from July–December 2002.
c Data exclude New York City.

 

Prevalence of Infant Checkup Within 1 Week of Hospital Discharge for Infants Discharged Within 48 Hours, 2002

This bar graph depicts the data reported in the table, Prevalence of Infant Checkup Within 1 Week of Hospital Discharge for Infants Discharged Within 48 Hours, 2002

 

Prevalence of Infant Checkup Within 1 Week of Hospital Discharge for Infants Discharged Within 48 Hours, 2000–2002

State 2000
(%)
2001
(%)
2002
(%)
P value
for trend#
Alabama 65.7 64.6 63.8 0.515
Alaska 73.9 76.0 77.5 0.089
Arkansas 65.4 72.0 74.6 0.001**
Colorado 88.6 88.0 88.2 0.818
Florida 77.9 78.3 83.4 0.035*
Hawaii 79.6 82.1 82.3 0.140
Illinois 76.9 79.2 82.0 0.004*
Louisiana 69.4 70.0 71.8 0.296
Maine 78.6 79.8 76.8 0.491
Maryland 83.9d 83.8 # #
Michigan 76.2e 82.3 # #
Minnesota 74.4a # #
Montana 83.9 # #
Nebraska 75.7 78.7 78.1 0.241
New Jersey 72.8b # #
New Mexico 84.9 87.3 86.4 0.322
New Yorkc 78.5 79.1 75.2 0.275
North Carolina 79.8 84.8 87.1 0.001**
North Dakota 58.3 # #
Ohio 78.2 77.9 77.4 0.778
Oklahoma 67.0 70.1 65.5 0.641
Rhode Island 87.5 # #
South Carolina 75.1 75.1 76.6 0.670
Utah 51.5 55.4 63.4 0.000**
Vermont f 83.8f 84.4 # #
Washington 87.3 88.2 90.6 0.081
West Virginia 73.8 72.3 74.9 0.695
# Based on a test for linear trend using logistic regression.
* p value is less than 0.05.
** p value is less than 0.001.
# # < 3 years of data available; test for linear trend not applicable.
a Data represent Minnesota births from May–December 2002.
b Data represent New Jersey births from July–December 2002.
c Data exclude New York City.
d Data represent Maryland births from February–December 2001.
e Data represent Michigan births from July–December 2001.
f Data represent Vermont births from October 2000–December 2001.

 

Prevalence of Sufficient Well-Baby Care, 2002

State Respondents Percent Standard Error 95% CI
Alabama 1,318 83.7†† 1.2 81.1–86.0
Alaska 1,415 76.1 1.2 73.6–78.4
Arkansas 1,831 78.3 1.3 75.6–80.7
Colorado 2,071 85.8 1.0 83.7–87.6
Florida 1,747 80.4 1.4 77.6–83.0
Hawaii 1,654 84.2 1.1 82.0–86.2
Illinois 1,783 89.2 0.8 87.5–90.6
Louisiana 1,387 81.6†† 1.1 79.3–83.7
Maine 1,035 87.6 1.1 85.2–89.7
Maryland 1,293 89.4 1.3 86.6–91.7
Michigan 1,357 80.8 1.2 78.3–83.1
Minnesotaa 1,030 84.4 1.4 81.5–87.0
Montana 1,003 81.0 1.3 78.3–83.4
Nebraska 1,690 83.6 1.0 81.4–85.5
New Jerseyb 864 89.4 1.1 87.0–91.4
New Mexico 1,410 78.0 1.2 75.7–80.2
New Yorkc 1,087 90.9 1.1 88.4–92.9
North Carolina 1,382 85.7 1.2 83.2–87.8
North Dakota 848 79.0 1.4 76.1–81.6
Ohio 1,193 87.0 1.2 84.5–89.2
Oklahoma 1,601 76.9 1.6 73.6–79.9
Rhode Island 1,268 94.8 0.7 93.2–96.0
South Carolina 1,098 80.3†† 1.8 76.5–83.7
Utah 1,396 82.8 1.3 80.1–85.2
Vermont 1,037 84.7 1.1 82.4–86.7
Washington 1,419 83.3 1.4 80.3–85.9
West Virginia 1,485 85.6 1.3 82.9–87.9
All PRAMS states§ 36,702 84.6 0.3 84.0–85.2
Note: Sufficient well-baby care is defined as an infant receiving
     2 or more checkups by 2–3 months (60–122 days) of age;
     3 or more checkups by 4–5 months (123–183 days) of age; or
     4 or more checkups by 6–9 months (184–274 days) of age.
2002 state range is 76.1–94.8%.
Confidence interval.
§ Aggregate of the 27 PRAMS states.
†† Missing ≥ 10% data.
a Data represent Minnesota births from May–December 2002.
b Data represent New Jersey births from July–December 2002.
c Data exclude New York City.

 

Prevalence of Sufficient Well-Baby Care, 2002

This bar graph depicts the data reported in the table, Prevalence of Sufficient Well-Baby Care, 2002

 

Prevalence of Sufficient Well-Baby Care, 2000–2002

State 2000
(%)
2001
(%)
2002
(%)
P value
for trend#
Alabama 86.1 86.8 83.7†† 0.181
Alaska 80.5 78.3 76.1 0.010*
Arkansas 75.7 78.2 78.3 0.223
Colorado 83.8 82.3 85.8 0.164
Florida 81.0 79.6 80.4 0.775
Hawaii 85.4†† 83.0†† 84.2 0.397
Illinois 87.8 89.3 89.2 0.233
Louisiana 75.2†† 80.5†† 81.6†† 0.000**
Maine 87.7 87.4 87.6 0.965
Maryland 90.6††d 89.4 # #
Michigan 80.4††e 80.8 # #
Minnesota 84.4a # #
Montana 81.0 # #
Nebraska 85.6 81.8 83.6 0.158
New Jersey 89.4b # #
New Mexico 80.6 78.9 78.0 0.100
New Yorkc 89.3 88.9 90.9 0.339
North Carolina 83.9 85.1 85.7 0.280
North Dakota 79.0 # #
Ohio 84.8 81.8 87.0 0.203
Oklahoma 75.6 76.0 76.9 0.555
Rhode Island 94.8 # #
South Carolina 79.8†† 73.1†† 80.3†† 0.762
Utah 80.8 82.0 82.8 0.271
Vermont f 85.6f 84.7 # #
Washington 83.0 81.2 83.3 0.907
West Virginia 86.5 87.8 85.6 0.607
Note: Sufficient well-baby care is defined as an infant receiving
     2 or more checkups by 2–3 months (60–122 days) of age;
     3 or more checkups by 4–5 months (123–183 days) of age; or
     4 or more checkups by 6–9 months (184–274 days) of age.
# Based on a test for linear trend using logistic regression.
* p value is less than 0.05.
** p value is less than 0.001.
# # < 3 years of data available; test for linear trend not applicable.
†† Missing ≥ 10% data.
a Data represent Minnesota births from May–December 2002.
b Data represent New Jersey births from July–December 2002.
c Data exclude New York City.
d Data represent Maryland births from February–December 2001.
e Data represent Michigan births from July–December 2001.
f Data represent Vermont births from October 2000–December 2001.

Back | Next

Page last reviewed: 5/13/09
Page last modified: 8/23/06
Content source: Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion

rectangle border
2002 PRAMS Surveillance Report label
bullet Home
bullet Preface
bullet Acknowledgments
bullet Introduction
bullet Overview
bullet Multistate Exhibits
bullet State Exhibits
bullet Detailed Summaries
bullet Appendixes
bullet
rectangle border
Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System
 
PRAMS Home

Reproductive Health related resources
bullet Reproductive Health Home
bullet Data and Statistics
bullet Publications and Products
bullet

Glossary

bullet Related Links

bullet Adolescent Reproductive Health
bullet Assisted Reproductive Technology
bullet Global Reproductive Health
bullet Maternal and Infant Health Research
bullet Refugee Reproductive Health
bullet Sudden Infant Death Syndrome
bullet Unintended Pregnancy
bullet Women's Reproductive Health

bullet Division of Reproductive Health

 
Contact Info
CDC/DRH
4770 Buford Hwy, NE
MS K-20
Atlanta, GA 30341-3717

Call: 1 (800) CDC-INFO
TTY: 1 (888) 232-6348
FAX: (770) 488-4760

bullet Contact Us

divider
  Home | Policies and Regulations | Disclaimer | e-Government | FOIA | Contact Us
Safer, Healthier People

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA 30333, U.S.A
Tel: (404) 639-3311 / Public Inquiries: (404) 639-3534 / (800) 311-3435
USAGov LogoDHHS Department of Health
and Human Services