Search

Purpose: Unmet social needs pose barriers to cancer care, contributing to adverse outcomes and health inequities. A better understanding of how social needs change after cancer diagnosis can inform more effective, equity-focused interventions., Methods: In this study, we examined self-reported social needs at 0, 3, and 6 months after a breast cancer diagnosis in a racially diverse, multilingual sample (n = 222) enrolled in patient navigation intervention at an urban safety-net hospital. At each timepoint, respondents completed surveys about social needs related to employment, disability benefits, housing and utilities, and personal and family stability., Results: Over three-quarters (78%, n = 175) reported ≥ 1 social need, and 46% (n = 102) reported ≥ 3 social needs. The most frequently reported need was housing and utilities (64%, n = 142), followed by employment (40%, n = 90). Individuals from minoritized groups more frequently reported an increased number of social needs over time, compared with their White counterparts (p = 0.02)., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that despite navigation, many cancer patients from historically underrepresented populations continue to experience social concerns over the first 6 months of treatment. Further research, conducted with historically underrepresented populations in research, is needed to better understand the social needs of breast cancer patients to inform effective and equitable interventions., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Objectives: Little research exists on how risk scores are used in counselling. We examined (a) how Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT) scores are presented during counselling; (b) how women react and (c) discuss them afterwards., Design: Consultations were video-recorded and participants were interviewed after the consultation as part of the NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Decision-Making Project 1 (NSABP DMP-1)., Setting: Two NSABP DMP-1 breast cancer care centres in the USA: one large comprehensive cancer centre serving a high-risk population and an academic safety-net medical centre in an urban setting., Participants: Thirty women evaluated for breast cancer risk and their counselling providers were included., Methods: Participants who were identified as at increased risk of breast cancer were recruited to participate in qualitative study with a video-recorded consultation and subsequent semi-structured interview that included giving feedback and input after viewing their own consultation. Consultation videos were summarised jointly and inductively as a team.tThe interview material was searched deductively for text segments that contained the inductively derived themes related to risk assessment. Subgroup analysis according to demographic variables such as age and Gail score were conducted, investigating reactions to risk scores and contrasting and comparing them with the pertinent video analysis data. From this, four descriptive categories of reactions to risk scores emerged. The descriptive categories were clearly defined after 19 interviews; all 30 interviews fit principally into one of the four descriptive categories., Results: Risk scores were individualised and given meaning by providers through: (a) presenting thresholds, (b) making comparisons and (c) emphasising or minimising the calculated risk. The risk score information elicited little reaction from participants during consultations, though some added to, agreed with or qualified the provider's information. During interviews, participants reacted to the numbers in four primary ways: (a) engaging easily with numbers; (b) expressing greater anxiety after discussing the risk score; (c) accepting the risk score and (d) not talking about the risk score., Conclusions: Our study highlights the necessity that patients' experiences must be understood and put into relation to risk assessment information to become a meaningful treatment decision-making tool, for instance by categorising patients' information engagement into types., Trial Registration Number: NCT01399359., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: Breast density notifications advise women to discuss breast density with their clinicians, yet little is known about such discussions., Objectives: To examine the content of women's reports of breast density discussions with clinicians and identify variations by women's sociodemographic characteristics (age, income, state legislation status, race and ethnicity, and literacy level)., Design, Setting, and Participants: This US nationwide, population-based, random-digit dial telephone survey study was conducted from July 1, 2019, to April 30, 2020, among 2306 women aged 40 to 76 years with no history of breast cancer who underwent mammography in the prior 2 years and had heard the term dense breasts or breast density. Results were analyzed from a subsample of 770 women reporting a conversation about breast density with their clinician after their last mammographic screening. Statistical analysis was conducted in April and July 2023., Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey questions inquired whether women's clinicians had asked about breast cancer risk or their worries or concerns about breast density, had discussed mammography results or other options for breast cancer screening or their future risk of breast cancer, as well as the extent to which the clinician answered questions about breast density., Results: Of the 770 women (358 [47%] aged 50-64 years; 47 Asian [6%], 125 Hispanic [16%], 204 non-Hispanic Black [27%], 317 non-Hispanic White [41%], and 77 other race and ethnicity [10%]) whose results were analyzed, most reported that their clinicians asked questions about breast cancer risk (88% [670 of 766]), discussed mammography results (94% [724 of 768]), and answered patient questions about breast density (81% [614 of 761]); fewer women reported that clinicians had asked about worries or concerns about breast density (69% [524 of 764]), future risk of breast cancer (64% [489 of 764]), or other options for breast cancer screening (61% [459 of 756]). Women's reports of conversations varied significantly by race and ethnicity; non-Hispanic Black women reported being asked questions about breast cancer risk more often than non-Hispanic White women (odds ratio [OR], 2.08 [95% CI, 1.05-4.10]; P = .04). Asian women less often reported being asked about their worries or concerns (OR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.20-0.86]; P = .02), and Hispanic and Asian women less often reported having their questions about breast density answered completely or mostly (Asian: OR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.13-0.62]; P = .002; Hispanic: OR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.27-0.87]; P = .02). Women with low literacy were less likely than women with high literacy to report being asked about worries or concerns about breast density (OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.43-0.96]; P = .03), that mammography results were discussed with them (OR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.16-0.63]; P = .001), or that their questions about breast density were answered completely or mostly (OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.32-0.81]; P = .004)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, although most women reported that their clinicians counselled them about breast density, the unaddressed worries or concerns and unanswered questions, especially among Hispanic and Asian women and those with low literacy, highlighted areas where discussions could be improved.

The early COVID-19 pandemic was associated with cessation of screening services, but the prevalence of ongoing delays in cancer screening into the third year of the pandemic are not well-characterized. In February/March 2022, a population-based survey assessed cancer needs in New Hampshire and Vermont. The associations between cancer screening delays (breast, cervical, colorectal or lung cancer) and social determinants of health, health care access, and cancer attitudes and beliefs were tested. Distributions and Rao-Scott chi-square tests were used for hypothesis testing and weighted to represent state populations. Of 1717 participants, 55% resided in rural areas, 96% identified as White race, 50% were women, 36% had high school or less education. Screening delays were reported for breast cancer (28%), cervical cancer (30%), colorectal cancer (24%), and lung cancer (30%). Delays were associated with having higher educational attainment (lung), urban living (colorectal), and having Medicaid insurance (breast, cervical). Low confidence in ability to obtain information about cancer was associated with screening delays across screening types. The most common reason for delay was the perception that the screening test was not urgent (31% breast, 30% cervical, 28% colorectal). Cost was the most common reason for delayed lung cancer screening (36%). COVID-19 was indicated as a delay reason in 15-29% of respondents; 12-20% reported health system capacity during the pandemic as a reason for delay, depending on screening type. Interventions that address sub-populations and reasons for screening delays are needed to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer burden and mortality., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest No authors have conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Breast density information aims to increase awareness of breast density and its risks and to foster more informed future breast screening decisions among women with dense breasts. We explored associations between such information and outcomes including anxiety, confusion, or feeling informed, and whether they varied by race/ethnicity or literacy, or differentially affected future mammography plans., Methods: A national telephone survey of a diverse sample of women previously informed of personal breast density (N = 1,322) assessed reactions to receipt of breast density information and future mammography plans., Results: Most women (86%) felt informed after receiving personal breast density information; however, some felt anxious (15%) or confused (11%). Reactions varied significantly by sociodemographics; non-Hispanic Black, Asian, and Hispanic women and women with low literacy were nearly two to three times more likely to report anxiety than non-Hispanic White women (all ps < .05). Asian women and those with low literacy less often felt informed and more often felt confused. Non-Hispanic Black and Asian women were nearly twice as likely to report that knowing their breast density made them more likely to have future mammograms. Women with low literacy were more likely to change mammography plans, with some being more likely and others less likely to plan to have future mammograms. Greater anxiety and confusion were associated with higher likelihood of planning future mammograms; those feeling informed were less likely to plan future mammography., Conclusions: Differential reactions to breast density information are concerning if associated with disparate future screening plans. Future breast density education efforts should ensure that such information is readily accessible and understandable to all women in order to lead to desired effects., (Copyright © 2023 Jacobs Institute of Women's Health, George Washington University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Breast density is an independent risk factor for breast cancer. Despite the proliferation of mandated written notifications about breast density following mammography, there is little understanding of how women perceive the relative breast cancer risk associated with breast density., Objective: To assess women's perception of breast density compared with other breast cancer risks and explore their understanding of risk reduction., Design, Setting, and Participants: This mixed-methods qualitative study used telephone surveys and semistructured interviews to investigate perceptions about breast cancer risk among a nationally representative, population-based sample of women. Eligible study participants were aged 40 to 76 years, reported having recently undergone mammography, had no history of prior breast cancer, and had heard of breast density. Survey participants who had been informed of their personal breast density were invited for a qualitative interview. Survey administration spanned July 1, 2019, to April 30, 2020, with 2306 women completing the survey. Qualitative interviews were conducted from February 1 to May 30, 2020., Main Outcomes and Measures: Respondents compared the breast cancer risk associated with breast density with 5 other risk factors. Participants qualitatively described what they thought contributed to breast cancer risk and ways to reduce risk., Results: Of the 2306 women who completed the survey, 1858 (166 [9%] Asian, 503 [27%] Black, 268 [14%] Hispanic, 792 [43%] White, and 128 [7%] other race or ethnicity; 358 [19%] aged 40-49 years, 906 [49%] aged 50-64 years, and 594 [32%] aged ≥65 years) completed the revised risk perception questions and were included in the analysis. Half of respondents thought breast density to be a greater risk than not having children (957 [52%]), having more than 1 alcoholic drink per day (975 [53%]), or having a prior breast biopsy (867 [48%]). Most respondents felt breast density was a lesser risk than having a first-degree relative with breast cancer (1706 [93%]) or being overweight or obese (1188 [65%]). Of the 61 women who were interviewed, 6 (10%) described breast density as contributing to breast cancer risk, and 43 (70%) emphasized family history as a breast cancer risk factor. Of the interviewed women, 17 (28%) stated they did not know whether it was possible to reduce their breast cancer risk., Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study of women of breast cancer screening age, family history was perceived as the primary breast cancer risk factor. Most interviewees did not identify breast density as a risk factor and did not feel confident about actions to mitigate breast cancer risk. Comprehensive education about breast cancer risks and prevention strategies is needed.

Background: Sociolegal barriers to cancer care are defined as health-related social needs like affordable healthy housing, stable utility service, and food security that may be remedied by public policy, law, regulation, or programming. Legal support has not been studied in cancer care., Methods: The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial of patients who had newly diagnosed cancer at a safety-net medical center in Boston from 2014 through 2017, comparing standard patient navigation versus enhanced navigation partnered with legal advocates to identify and address sociolegal barriers. English-speaking, Spanish-speaking, or Haitian Creole-speaking patients with breast and lung cancer were eligible within 30 days of diagnosis. The primary outcome was timely treatment within 90 days of diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes (distress, cancer-related needs, and satisfaction with navigation) at baseline and at 6 months., Results: In total, 201 patients with breast cancer and 19 with lung cancer enrolled (response rate, 78%). The mean patient age was 55 years, 51% of patients were Black and 22% were Hispanic, 20% spoke Spanish and 8% spoke Haitian Creole, 73% had public health insurance, 77% reported 1 or more perceived sociolegal barrier, and the most common were barriers to housing and employment. Ninety-six percent of participants with breast cancer and 73% of those with lung cancer initiated treatment within 90 days. No significant effect of enhanced navigation was observed on the receipt of timely treatment among participants with breast cancer (odds ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.17-4.52) or among those with lung cancer (odds ratio, 4.00; 95% CI, 0.35-45.4). No differences in patient-reported outcomes were observed between treatment groups., Conclusions: Navigation enhanced by access to legal consultation and support had no impact on timely treatment, patient distress, or patient needs. Although most patients reported sociolegal barriers, few required intensive legal services that could not be addressed by navigators., Lay Summary: In patients with cancer, the experience of sociolegal barriers to care, such as unstable housing, utility services, or food insecurity, is discussed. Addressing these barriers through legal information and assistance may improve care. This study compares standard patient navigation versus enhanced navigation partnered with legal advocates for patients with breast and lung cancers. Almost all patients in both navigation groups received timely care and also reported the same levels of distress, needs, and satisfaction with navigation. Although 75% of patients in the study had at least 1 sociolegal barrier identified, few required legal advocacy beyond what a navigator who received legal information and coaching could provide., (© 2022 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Most U.S. states require written notification of breast density after mammograms, yet effects of notifications on knowledge are mixed. Little is known about potential misunderstandings. Methods: We used a sequential mixed-methods study design to assess women's knowledge about breast density, after receiving a notification. We conducted a telephone survey among a racially/ethnically and health-literacy level diverse sample ( N  = 754) and qualitative interviews with 61 survey respondents. Results: In survey results, 58% of women correctly indicated that breast density is not related to touch, with higher accuracy among non-Hispanic White women and those with greater health literacy. Next, 87% of women recognized that breast density is identified visually via mammogram, with no significant differences in responses by race/ethnicity or health literacy. Most (81%) women recognized that a relationship exists between breast tissue types and density; Non-Hispanic White women were less likely to respond correctly. Only 47% of women correctly indicated that having dense breasts increases one's risk of breast cancer; women with low health literacy were more often correct. Qualitative results revealed additional dimensions of understanding: Some women incorrectly reported that density could be felt, or dense breasts were lumpier, thicker, or more compacted; others identified "dense" tissue as fatty. Interpretations of risk included that breast density was an early form of breast cancer. Conclusion: We found areas of consistent knowledge and identified misperceptions surrounding breast density across race/ethnicity and health literacy levels. Further education to address disparities and correct misunderstandings is essential to promote better knowledge, to foster informed decisions.

Background: Socioeconomic and health-related factors, including comorbid illness, may affect mammography screening rates and subsequently contribute to breast cancer outcomes. We explored the association between diabetes and mammography screening, and whether this association varied between racial, ethnic, and geographic groups. Methods: Cross-sectional data from the 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were used to fit logistic regression models assessing the association between diabetes and up-to-date mammography screening in 497,600 women, aged 50-74 years. Participants were considered exposed if they responded "yes" to "(Ever told) you have diabetes?" and up to date on screening if they responded "yes" to having a mammogram within the past 2 years. Models were adjusted for age, health status, socioeconomic, and access variables. Results: The majority of participants were White (79.6%), non-Hispanic (88.9%), and up to date on screening (78.8%). Overall, 16.8% reported having diabetes. In fully adjusted models, White women with diabetes were 12% more likely to be up to date on screening (odds ratio [OR]: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-1.19) than those without diabetes. Black/African American women and those of Hispanic ethnicity with diabetes were more likely to report being up to date with mammography (OR Black : 1.28, 95% CI: 1.12-1.45; OR Hispanic : 1.19, 95% CI: 1.13-1.24) than those without. Patterns were similar across geographic regions. Conclusions: Women of ages 50-74 years with diabetes were more likely to be up to date on screening than women without diabetes. Chronic disease management may represent an opportunity to address cancer screening.

Objective: Understanding whether states' breast density notifications are associated with desired effects, or disparities, can inform federal policy. We examined self-reported receipt of personal breast density information, breast density discussions with providers, knowledge about density's masking effect, and association with increased breast cancer risk by state legislation status and women's sociodemographic characteristics., Methods: Cross-sectional observational population-based telephone survey of women aged >40 years who underwent mammography within prior 2 years, had no history of breast cancer, and had heard the term "breast density.", Results: Among 2,306 women, 57% received personal breast density information. Multivariate regression models adjusted for covariates indicated that women in notification states were 1.5 times more likely to receive density information, and older Black and Asian women of lower income and lower health literacy were less likely. Overall, only 39% of women discussed density with providers; women in notification states were 1.75 times as likely. Older and Asian women were less likely to have spoken with providers; women with high literacy or prior biopsy were more likely. State legislation status was not associated with differences in density knowledge, but Hispanic women and women of lower income or low health literacy had less knowledge regarding density's masking effects; older women were more knowledgeable. Hispanic women and women of lower income or low health literacy were more likely, and middle-aged women less likely, to recognize increased breast cancer risk., Discussion: Some positive effects were observed, but sociodemographic disparities suggest tailoring of future breast density communications for specific populations of women to ensure equitable understanding., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Low health literacy (HL) and language negatively affect cancer screening and prevention behaviors; less is known about how they affect the patient's experience during cancer treatment. This study explores associations among HL, spoken language, and dimensions of cancer-related needs within 6 months of receiving a breast cancer diagnosis., Methods: Women speaking English, Spanish, or Haitian Creole, enrolled in a patient navigation study at diagnosis, completed a survey in their primary spoken language at baseline and 6 months to characterize their cancer-related needs. HL was measured using the Brief Health Literacy Screening Tool. Outcomes included the Cancer Needs Distress Inventory (CaNDI; n = 38 items) and the Communication and Attitudinal Self-Efficacy scale (CASE-Cancer) for cancer (n = 12 items). Linear regressions measured the impact of HL and language on total CaNDI and CASE-Cancer scale for cancer scores and subscales, adjusted for demographics., Results: At baseline, 262 women participated and 228 (87%) followed up at 6 months. Of these, 38% had adequate HL, 33% had marginal HL, and 29% had inadequate HL. Women with inadequate or marginal HL had higher median baseline CaNDI scores ( P = .02) and lower self-efficacy scores ( P = .008), relative to those with adequate HL. Haitian-Creole speakers had significantly lower CANDI scores at baseline ( P = .03). Adjusting for demographics, differences in CaNDI scores at baseline remained significant for those with lower HL and Haitian-Creole speakers. At 6 months, differences in self-efficacy persisted for Haitian-Creole speakers., Conclusion: Findings suggest that interventions oriented to mitigating HL and language barriers might reduce distress at the time of diagnosis and improve self-efficacy over the course of treatment.

Background: Literature on decision making about breast cancer prevention focuses on individual perceptions and attitudes that predict chemoprevention use, rather than the process by which women decide whether to take risk-reducing medications. This secondary analysis aimed to understand how women's perceptions of breast cancer risk and locus of control influence their decision making., Methods: Women were accrued as part of the NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Decision-Making Project 1, a study aimed at understanding contributors to chemoprevention uptake. Thirty women participated in qualitative in-depth interviews after being counseled about chemoprevention. Deductive codes grouped women based on dimensions of risk perception and locus of control. We used a constant comparative method to make connections among inductive themes focused on decision making, deductive codes for perceived risk and perceived locus of control, and the influence of explanatory models within and across participants., Results: Participants were predominantly non-Hispanic white (63%), with an average age of 50.9 years. Decision making varied across groups: the high-perceived risk/high-perceived control group used "social evidence" to model the behaviors of others. High-perceived risk/low-perceived control women made decisions based on beliefs about treatment, rooted in the experiences of social contacts. The low-perceived risk/low-perceived control group interpreted signs of risk as part of the normal continuum of bodily changes in comparison to others. Low-perceived risk/high-perceived control women focused on maintaining a current healthy trajectory., Conclusion: "Social evidence" plays an important role in the decision-making process that is distinct from emotional aspects. Attending to patients' perceptions of risk and control in conjunction with social context is key to caring for patients at high risk in a way that is evidence based and sensitive to patient preferences.

Background: Explanatory models represent patient understanding of etiology, pathophysiology, illness, symptoms, and treatments, but little attention has been paid to how they are used by patients "at risk" for future disease., Objective: The aims of this study were to elucidate what constitutes an explanatory model of risk and to describe explanatory models of risk related to developing breast cancer., Methods: Thirty qualitative interviews with women identified as at an increased risk for breast cancer were conducted. Interviews were coded to identify domains of explanatory models of risk using a priori codes derived from the explanatory model of illness framework. Within each domain, a grounded thematic analysis described participants' explanatory models related to breast cancer risk., Results: The domains of treatment and etiology remained similar in a risk context compared with illness, whereas course of illness, symptoms, and pathophysiology differed. We identified a new, integrative concept relative to other domains within explanatory models of risk: social comparisons, which was dominant in risk perhaps due to the lack of physical experiences associated with being "at risk.", Conclusions: Developing inclusive understandings of risk and its treatment is key to developing a framework for the care of high-risk patients that is both evidence based and sensitive to patient preferences., Implications for Practice: The concept of "social comparisons" can assist healthcare providers in understanding women's decision making under conditions of risk. Ensuring that healthcare providers understand patient perceptions of risk is important because it relates to patient decision making, particularly due to an increasing focus on risk assessment in cancer.

Objective: Currently, 30 US states mandate that radiologists notify women when dense breast tissue is found on mammography. Little is understood about how notifications are perceived by recipients. This qualitative study sought to understand how dense breast notifications (DBNs) impact women's perceptions and their participation in follow-up care., Methods: We assessed rates of DBN recall and conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 30 English-speaking women ages 40 to 74 after receiving a DBN from a Massachusetts hospital. Content coding characterized women's recall of the notification content, perceptions of breast density, and planned or actual participation in follow-up care., Results: Most women (81%) recalled receiving a DBN, but few could recall specific content. Women described struggling to understand the meaning of breast density and created their own explanatory models of dense breasts that differed from medical explanations. Many women planned to or did talk with their doctors about breast density as a result of receiving the notification., Conclusions: Women receiving DBNs have limited knowledge and many misperceptions about the implications of having dense breasts., Practice Implications: Educational support is needed to promote informed decision- making about breast cancer screening that incorporates personal risk in the setting of dense breast legislation., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Dense breasts on mammography independently increases breast cancer risk and decreases mammography sensitivity. Thirty-two states have adopted notification laws to raise awareness among women with dense breasts about supplemental screening. Little is known about these policies' impact on clinical practice among primary care providers (PCPs)., Materials and Methods: This study explores PCP attitudes, knowledge, and the impact of the Massachusetts dense breast notification legislation on clinical practice after its enactment in 2015. An anonymous, online survey at two urban safety-net hospitals was administered in 2015-2016. Practicing MDs and nurse practitioners in primary care were invited to participate., Results: All 145 PCPs in general internal medicine at the two sites were e-mailed a survey link and 80 (55%) were completed. While 64 of 80 PCPs surveyed (80%) had some familiarity with the legislation, none identified the 8 required components of notifications contained in the Massachusetts legislation. Forty-nine percent (39/80) did not feel prepared to respond to patient questions about dense breasts. Forty-one percent (33/80) correctly identified that no current guidelines recommend the use of supplemental screening tests solely based on breast density and 85% (68/80) indicated interest in further training. Female and less experienced providers were more likely to be in favor of the legislation (49% vs. 11% by gender; 76% <5 years vs. 9%> 20 years). Women practitioners (55%) who were more likely than men (17%, p = 0.01) to agree with the policy changed their discussions of mammography results with patients., Conclusions: PCPs feel underprepared to counsel women about breast density identified on mammography and its implications.

Objectives: A false-positive mammogram can result in anxiety, distress, and increased perceptions of breast cancer risk, potentially changing how women utilize healthcare. This study examined whether having an abnormal mammogram, considered a proxy for elevated risk perception, was associated with greater future health service use (outpatient visits and referrals)., Study Design: A retrospective cohort study using electronic health record data, spanning 2008 to 2012, from Boston Medical Center, a safety-net hospital., Methods: We grouped 3920 women aged 40 to 75 years receiving primary care and who had a mammogram between 2010 and 2011 into 3 categories: false-positive mammogram at index date; previous false positive, but normal index mammogram; and no history of false-positive mammograms. We contrasted the longitudinal changes in outpatient visits and provider referrals, before versus after the index mammogram, between women with false-positive mammogram and those without using Poisson regression models with a difference-in-differences specification. Clinical, visit, and demographic data were obtained from the institutional clinical data warehouse., Results: Adjusting for baseline differences in sociodemographic characteristics across risk groups and for secular changes between pre- and postindex periods, a current false-positive mammogram was associated with an 18% increase in overall outpatient visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.18; 95% CI, 1.07-1.51), but no corresponding increase in provider referrals (IRR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.99‑1.34), relative to never having a false positive. A previous false-positive mammogram had no associated change in outpatient utilization (IRR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91-1.07)., Conclusions: Providers should discuss the implications of mammography findings at the time of screening to help mitigate potential detrimental effects and promote appropriate engagement in health services.

Objectives: The presentation of risks and benefits in clinical practice is common particularly in situations in which treatment recommendations involve trade-offs. The treatment of breast cancer risk with selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) is such a decision. We investigated the influence of health care provider (HCP) counseling on women's decision-making., Methods: Thirty breast cancer risk counseling sessions were recorded from April 2012-August 2013 at a comprehensive cancer center and at a safety-net, community hospital in the US. Participating women and HCPs were interviewed. A cross-case synthesis was used for analysis., Results: Of 30 participants 21 received a SERM-recommendation, 11 decided to take SERMs. Counseling impacted decision-making, but did not determine it. Three categories emerged: 1.) ability to change the decision anytime, 2.) perceptions on medications, and 3.) proximity of cancer., Conclusion: Decision-making under conditions of a risk diagnosis such as increased breast cancer risk is a continuous process in which risk information is transformed into practical and experiential considerations., Practice Implications: Individuals' health care decision-making is only marginally dependent on the interactions in the clinic. Accepting patients' experiences and beliefs in their own right and letting them guide the discussion may be important for a satisfying decision-making process., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Minority women in the U.S. continue to experience inferior breast cancer outcomes compared with white women, in part due to delays in care delivery. Emerging cancer care delivery models like patient navigation focus on social barriers, but evidence demonstrating how these models increase social capital is lacking. This pilot study describes the social networks of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients and explores the contributing role of patient navigators., Materials and Methods: Twenty-five women completed a one hour interview about their social networks related to cancer care support. Network metrics identified important structural attributes and influential individuals. Bivariate associations between network metrics, type of network, and whether the network included a navigator were measured. Secondary analyses explored associations between network structures and clinical outcomes., Results: We identified three types of networks: kin-based, role and/or affect-based, or heterogeneous. Network metrics did not vary significantly by network type. There was a low prevalence of navigators included in the support networks (25%). Network density scores were significantly higher in those networks without a navigator. Network metrics were not predictive of clinical outcomes in multivariate models., Conclusion: Patient navigators were not frequently included in support networks, but provided distinctive types of support. If navigators can identify patients with poorly integrated (less dense) social networks, or who have unmet tangible support needs, the intensity of navigation services could be tailored. Services and systems that address gaps and variations in patient social networks should be explored for their potential to reduce cancer health disparities., Implications for Practice: This study used a new method to identify the breadth and strength of social support following a diagnosis of breast cancer, especially examining the role of patient navigators in providing support. While navigators were only included in one quarter of patient support networks, they did provide essential supports to some individuals. Health care providers and systems need to better understand the contributions of social supports both within and outside of health care to design and tailor interventions that seek to reduce health care disparities and improve cancer outcomes., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2017.)

Current breast cancer screening guidelines promote the use of shared decision making for women younger than 50 years of age, yet their effect on mammography utilization is largely unknown. This study aimed to examine the effect of two elements of shared decision making on the use of mammogram screening: patient-perceived choice and patient-provider communication. Data were obtained from HINTS 4, a nationally representative survey of the U.S. population, administered from 2011 to 2013. Choice was measured with the question "Has a doctor ever told you that you could choose whether or not to have a mammogram?" Communication was measured using a 7-item scale (range: 7-28; higher scores denote better communication). Binary logistic regression models assessed the effect of patient choice and communication on ever having a mammogram using weighted sample data. The sample included 1,085 women younger than 50 years of age: 31% of women perceived having a choice to undergo mammography. The mean patient-provider communication score was 22.8. Those who thought they were given a choice regarding mammography were more likely to have a mammogram relative to those who did not think a choice was given by the provider. Patient-provider communication had no significant association with mammography utilization. Patient perceived choice, but not patient-provider communication, is positively associated with mammography utilization in women younger than 50 years of age.

Objective: To determine how closely a published model of navigation reflects the practice of navigation in breast cancer patient navigation programs., Data Source: Observational field notes describing patient navigator activities collected from 10 purposefully sampled, foundation-funded breast cancer navigation programs in 2008-2009., Study Design: An exploratory study evaluated a model framework for patient navigation published by Harold Freeman by using an a priori coding scheme based on model domains., Data Collection: Field notes were compiled and coded. Inductive codes were added during analysis to characterize activities not included in the original model., Principal Findings: Programs were consistent with individual-level principles representing tasks focused on individual patients. There was variation with respect to program-level principles that related to program organization and structure. Program characteristics such as the use of volunteer or clinical navigators were identified as contributors to patterns of model concordance., Conclusions: This research provides a framework for defining the navigator role as focused on eliminating barriers through the provision of individual-level interventions. The diversity observed at the program level in these programs was a reflection of implementation according to target population. Further guidance may be required to assist patient navigation programs to define and tailor goals and measurement to community needs., (© Health Research and Educational Trust.)