Search

OBJECTIVE There is little research on the effect of social determinants of health on Chiari malformation type I (CM-I). The authors analyzed data on all children evaluated for CM-I at a single institution to assess how socioeconomic factors and race affect the surgical treatment of this population. METHODS Medical records of patients treated for CM-I at the authors’ institution between 1992 and 2017 were reviewed. Area Deprivation Index (ADI) and Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) codes for each patient were used to measure neighborhood disadvantage. Non-Hispanic White patients were compared to non-White patients and Hispanic patients of any race (grouped together as non-White in this study) in terms of insurance status, ADI, and RUCA. Patients with initially benign CM-I, defined as not having undergone surgery within 9 months of their initial visit, were then stratified by having delayed symptom presentation or not, and compared on these same measures. RESULTS The sample included 665 patients with CM-I: 82% non-Hispanic White and 18% non-White. The non-White patients were more likely to reside in disadvantaged (OR 3.4, p < 0.001) and urban (OR 4.66, p < 0.001) neighborhoods and to have public health insurance (OR 3.11, p < 0.001). More than one-quarter (29%) of patients underwent surgery. The non-White and non-Hispanic White patients had similar surgery rates (29.5% vs 28.9%, p = 0.895) at similar ages (8.8 vs 9.7 years, p = 0.406). There were no differences by race/ethnicity for symptoms at presentation. Surgical and nonsurgical patients had similar ADI scores (3.9 vs 4.2, p = 0.194), RUCA scores (2.1 vs 2.3, p = 0.252), and private health insurance rates (73.6% vs 74.2%, p = 0.878). A total of 153 patients underwent surgery within 9 months of their initial visit. The remaining 512 were deemed to have benign CM-I. Of these, 40 (7.8%) underwent decompression surgery for delayed symptom presentation. Patients with delayed symptom presentation were from less disadvantaged (ADI 3.2 vs 4.2; p = 0.025) and less rural (RUCA 1.8 vs 2.3; p = 0.023) areas than those who never underwent surgery. CONCLUSIONS Although non-White patients were more likely to be socioeconomically disadvantaged, race and socioeconomic disadvantage were not associated with undergoing surgical treatment. However, among patients with benign CM-I, those undergoing decompression for delayed symptom presentation resided in more affluent and urban areas.

Background Integrating tobacco treatment services into lung cancer screening (LCS) has the potential to leverage a 'teachable moment' to promote cessation among long-term smokers and reduce disparities in tobacco treatment access. This protocol paper describes the Screen ASSIST (Aiding Screening Support in Stopping Tobacco) trial, which will identify how to best deliver evidence-driven tobacco treatment in the context of LCS. Methods Screen ASSIST is a randomized clinical trial with a 3-factor, fully crossed factorial design that enrolls current smokers (any cigarette use in the past 30 days) scheduled to attend LCS at multiple sites in the Mass General Brigham healthcare system. To maximize reach, recruitment is conducted at 3 time points: 1) at the time of LCS scheduling, 2) at the LCS visit, and 3) after the participant has received their LCS results. Participants are stratified by LCS study site and recruitment point and randomly assigned into 8 groups that test intervention components varying on telehealth counseling duration (4 weeks vs. 8 weeks), nicotine replacement therapy duration (2 weeks vs. 8 weeks), and systematic screening and referral for social determinants of health via a service named 'AuntBertha' (referral vs. no referral). The primary study outcome is self-reported past 7-day tobacco abstinence at 6-month follow-up. This trial will also assess systems integration and evaluate implementation of the intervention. Discussion Screen ASSIST will identify the most effective combination of tobacco cessation treatments within the LCS context, in order to improve the cost-effectiveness of LCS and quality of life among long-term heavy smokers.

Background Despite the well-established risks of persistent smoking, 10–30% of cancer patients continue to smoke after diagnosis. Evidence-based tobacco treatment has yet to be integrated into routine oncology care. This paper describes the protocol, manualized treatment, evaluation plan, and overall study design of comparing the effectiveness and cost of two treatments across two major cancer centers. Methods/design A two-arm, two-site randomized controlled comparative effectiveness trial is testing the hypothesis that an Intensive Treatment (IT) intervention is more effective than a Standard Treatment (ST) intervention in helping recently diagnosed cancer patients quit smoking. Both interventions include 4 weekly counseling sessions and FDA-approved smoking cessation medication advice. The IT includes an additional 4 biweekly and 3 monthly booster sessions as well as dispensal of the recommended FDA-approved smoking cessation medication at no cost. The trial is enrolling patients with suspected or newly diagnosed cancer who have smoked a cigarette in the past 30 days. Participants are randomly assigned to receive the ST or IT condition. Tobacco cessation outcomes are assessed at 3 and 6 months. The primary study outcome is 7-day point prevalence biochemically-validated tobacco abstinence. Secondary study outcomes include the incremental cost-effectiveness of the IT vs. ST. Discussion This trial will answer key questions about delivering tobacco treatment interventions to newly diagnosed cancer patients. If found to be efficacious and cost-effective, this treatment will serve as a model to be integrated into oncology care settings nation-wide, as we strive to improve treatment outcomes and quality of life for cancer patients.

IMPORTANCE: Persistent smoking may cause adverse outcomes among patients with cancer. Many cancer centers have not fully implemented evidence-based tobacco treatment into routine care. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of sustained telephone counseling and medication (intensive treatment) compared with shorter-term telephone counseling and medication advice (standard treatment) to assist patients recently diagnosed with cancer to quit smoking. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This unblinded randomized clinical trial was conducted at Massachusetts General Hospital/Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Adults who had smoked 1 cigarette or more within 30 days, spoke English or Spanish, and had recently diagnosed breast, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, gynecological, head and neck, lung, lymphoma, or melanoma cancers were eligible. Enrollment occurred between November 2013 and July 2017; assessments were completed by the end of February 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Participants randomized to the intensive treatment (n = 153) and the standard treatment (n = 150) received 4 weekly telephone counseling sessions and medication advice. The intensive treatment group also received 4 biweekly and 3 monthly telephone counseling sessions and choice of Food and Drug Administration–approved cessation medication (nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, or varenicline). MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was biochemically confirmed 7-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were treatment utilization rates. RESULTS: Among 303 patients who were randomized (mean age, 58.3 years; 170 women [56.1%]), 221 (78.1%) completed the trial. Six-month biochemically confirmed quit rates were 34.5% (n = 51 in the intensive treatment group) vs 21.5% (n = 29 in the standard treatment group) (difference, 13.0% [95% CI, 3.0%-23.3%]; odds ratio, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.13-3.27]; P

Breast cancer screening is central to early breast cancer detection. Identifying and monitoring process measures for screening is a focus of the National Cancer Institute’s Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) initiative, which requires participating centers to report structured data across the cancer screening continuum. We evaluate the accuracy of automated information extraction of imaging findings from radiology reports, which are available as unstructured text. We present prevalence estimates of imaging findings for breast imaging received by women who obtained care in a primary care network participating in PROSPR (n = 139,953 radiology reports) and compared automatically extracted data elements to a “gold standard” based on manual review for a validation sample of 941 randomly selected radiology reports, including mammograms, digital breast tomosynthesis, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The prevalence of imaging findings vary by data element and modality (e.g., suspicious calcification noted in 2.6 % of screening mammograms, 12.1 % of diagnostic mammograms, and 9.4 % of tomosynthesis exams). In the validation sample, the accuracy of identifying imaging findings, including suspicious calcifications, masses, and architectural distortion (on mammogram and tomosynthesis); masses, cysts, non-mass enhancement, and enhancing foci (on MRI); and masses and cysts (on ultrasound), range from 0.8 to1.0 for recall, precision, and F-measure. Information extraction tools can be used for accurate documentation of imaging findings as structured data elements from text reports for a variety of breast imaging modalities. These data can be used to populate screening registries to help elucidate more effective breast cancer screening processes.

BACKGROUND Collection of data on race, ethnicity, and language preference is required as part of the “meaningful use” of electronic health records (EHRs). These data serve as a foundation for interventions to reduce health disparities.

Widening socioeconomic disparities in mortality in the United States are largely explained by slower declines in tobacco use among smokers of low socioeconomic status (SES) than among those of higher SES, which points to the need for targeted tobacco cessation interventions. Documentation of smoking status in electronic health records (EHRs) provides the tools for health systems to proactively offer tobacco treatment to socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers.To evaluate a proactive tobacco cessation strategy that addresses sociocontextual mediators of tobacco use for low-SES smokers.This prospective, randomized clinical trial included low-SES adult smokers who described their race and/or ethnicity as black, Hispanic, or white and received primary care at 1 of 13 practices in the greater Boston area (intervention group, n = 399; control group, n = 308).We analyzed EHRs to identify potentially eligible participants and then used interactive voice response (IVR) techniques to reach out to them. Consenting patients were randomized to either receive usual care from their own health care team or enter an intervention program that included (1) telephone-based motivational counseling, (2) free nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for 6 weeks, (3) access to community-based referrals to address sociocontextual mediators of tobacco use, and (4) integration of all these components into their normal health care through the EHR system.Self-reported past-7-day tobacco abstinence 9 months after randomization ("quitting"), assessed by automated caller or blinded study staff.The intervention group had a higher quit rate than the usual care group (17.8% vs 8.1%; odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-4.0; number needed to treat, 10). We examined whether use of intervention components was associated with quitting among individuals in the intervention group: individuals who participated in the telephone counseling were more likely to quit than those who did not (21.2% vs 10.4%; P .001). There was no difference in quitting by use of NRT. Quitting did not differ by a request for a community referral, but individuals who used their referral were more likely to quit than those who did not (43.6% vs 15.3%; P .001).Proactive, IVR-facilitated outreach enables engagement with low-SES smokers. Providing counseling, NRT, and access to community-based resources to address sociocontextual mediators among smokers reached in this setting is effective.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01156610.