Search

Objectives In 2012, onetime hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening was recommended for all baby boomers (people born during 1945-1965) in the United States, but only 4.0%-12.9% of baby boomers have ever had a screening ordered by a health care provider. This study examined the HCV screening prevalence among adult patients in a large academic health care system and assessed factors associated with the completion of screening when ordered for baby boomers. Methods We defined HCV screening completion as the completion of an HCV antibody test when it was ordered. We used electronic health records to examine HCV screening completion rates among adults (N = 106 630) from August 1, 2015, through July 31, 2020, by birth cohort. Among baby boomers whose health care provider ordered HCV screening, we examined frequency and percentages of HCV screening completion by sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. We conducted univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses to assess factors associated with HCV screening completion among baby boomers. Results During the study period, 73.0% of baby boomers completed HCV screening when it was ordered. HCV completion did not differ by sex or race and ethnicity among baby boomers. Baby boomers with Medicare supplemental health insurance compared with commercial health insurance (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.87) and those seeing only advanced practice professionals compared with specialty care physicians (aOR = 2.24) were more likely to complete HCV screening when it was ordered. Conclusions Noncompletion of HCV screening is one of many barriers along the HCV treatment continuum. Our findings suggest a need for interventions targeting systems, health care providers, and patients to increase HCV screening rates in the United States.

Despite the release of a growing number of direct-acting antivirals and evolving policy landscape, many of those diagnosed with hepatitis C virus (HCV) have not received treatment. Those from vulnerable populations are at particular risk of being unable to access treatment, threatening World Health Organization (WHO) HCV elimination goals. The aim of this study was to understand the association between direct-acting antivirals approvals, HCV-related policy changes and access to HCV virus treatment in Indiana, and to explore access to treatment by race, birth cohort and insurance type. We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults with HCV from 05/2011-03/2021, using statewide electronic health data. Nine policy and treatment changes were defined a priori. A Lowess curve evaluated treatment trends over time. Monthly screening and treatment rates were examined. Multivariable logistic regression explored predictors of treatment. The population (N = 10,336) was 13.4% Black, 51.8% was born after 1965 and 44.7% was Medicaid recipients. Inflections in the Lowess curve defined four periods: (1) Interferon + DAA, (2) early direct-acting antivirals, (3) Medicaid expansion/optimization and (4) Medicaid restrictions (fibrosis/prescriber) removed. The largest increase in monthly treatment rates was during period 4, when Medicaid prescriber and fibrosis restrictions were removed (2.4 persons per month [PPM] in period 1 to 72.3 PPM in period 4, p 0.001; 78.0% change in slope). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed being born after 1965 (vs. before 1945; OR 0.69; 95% 0.49-0.98) and having Medicaid (vs. private insurance; OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.42-0.53), but not race was associated with lower odds of being treated. In conclusion, DAAs had limited impact on HCV treatment rates until Medicaid restrictions were removed. Additional policies may be needed to address HCV treatment-related age and insurance disparities.

In 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration extended the licensure for human papillomavirus vaccination to include everyone aged 27-45 years. In 2019, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices issued a recommendation that adults aged 27-45 years and their providers engage in shared clinical decision making about human papillomavirus vaccination. In addition, in 2019, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices reiterated that all previously unvaccinated individuals receive catch-up vaccination through age 26 years. This study estimates the pre-recommendation prevalence of human papillomavirus vaccination and factors associated with vaccination in 2 age groups (19-26 years [young adults] and 27-45 years [mid-adults]), forming a baseline to monitor future coverage among U.S. adults.The final sample included 9,744 individuals (2,522 young adults and 7,222 mid-adults) who participated in the 2017 National Health Interview Survey. The main outcomes were receipt of 1 or more human papillomavirus vaccination and whether the participant had been vaccinated as an adult. Demographic characteristics and healthcare factors were included as covariates in statistical analyses.Population estimate of receiving 1 or more human papillomavirus vaccine doses among young adults was 36.3% (female: 51.5%, male: 21.2%; p0.001) and 9.7% for mid-adults (females: 15.8%, males: 3.2%; p0.001). In the best-fit model, age was inversely associated with vaccination for mid-adults (female: OR=0.84, 95% CI=0.81, 0.86; male: OR=0.86; 95% CI=0.82, 0.90) and male young adults (OR=0.79, 95% CI=0.71, 0.88). Of the entire vaccinated sample aged 19-45 years, 26.6% had received their first vaccination as an adult (95% CI=23.9, 29.4).These data emphasize the continued need for vaccinating adolescents aged 11-12 years given that few adults were vaccinated against human papillomavirus.

Objective Recent guidelines indicate adults 27–45 years old can receive the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine based on a shared-decision with their healthcare provider. With this expansion in recommendations, there is a need to examine the awareness and knowledge of HPV and HPV vaccination among this age group for cancer prevention. Methods HINTS-5 Cycle-2 is a national survey of US adults, and was restricted to a complete case analysis of adults ages 27–45 years (N = 725). Sociodemographic, healthcare, and health information correlates were assessed for the outcomes of HPV awareness, HPV vaccine awareness, knowledge of HPV and cervical cancer, and knowledge of HPV and non-cervical cancers. Survey-weighted logistic regression models were conducted. Results Most respondents were aware of HPV (72.9%) and HPV vaccination (67.1%). Respondents were more likely to be aware of HPV and HPV vaccination if they were female, had a higher level of education, and had previous cancer information seeking behaviors. Although there was widespread knowledge of HPV as a cause of cervical cancer (79.6%), knowledge of HPV as a cause of non-cervical cancers was reported by a minority of respondents (36.1%). College education was positively associated with cervical cancer knowledge (aOR = 4.62; 95%CI: 1.81–11.78); however, no significant correlates were identified for non-cervical HPV associated cancer knowledge. Conclusion While more than half of adults ages 27–45 years are aware of HPV and HPV vaccination, there are opportunities to improve awareness and knowledge, particularly related to non-cervical cancers, as these are critical first steps toward shared decision-making for HPV vaccination in mid-adulthood.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented public health crisis, and vaccines are the most effective means of preventing severe consequences of this disease. Hesitancy regarding vaccines persists among adults in the United States, despite overwhelming scientific evidence of safety and efficacy. Objective The purpose of this study was to use the Health Belief Model (HBM) and reasoned action approach (RAA) to examine COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy by comparing those who had already received 1 vaccine to those who had received none. Methods This study examined demographic and theory-based factors associated with vaccine uptake and intention among 1643 adults in the United States who completed an online survey during February and March 2021. Survey items included demographic variables (eg, age, sex, political ideology), attitudes, and health belief variables (eg, perceived self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility). Hierarchical logistic regression analyses were used for vaccine uptake/intent. The first model included demographic variables. The second model added theory-based factors to examine the association of health beliefs and vaccine uptake above and beyond the associations explained by demographic characteristics alone. Results The majority of participants were male (n=974, 59.3%), White (n=1347, 82.0%), and non-Hispanic (n=1518, 92.4%) and reported they had already received a COVID-19 vaccine or definitely would when it was available to them (n=1306, 79.5%). Demographic variables significantly associated with vaccine uptake/intent included age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.05, 95% CI 1.04-1.06), other race (AOR 0.47, 95% CI 0.27-0.83 vs White), and political ideology (AOR 15.77, 95% CI 7.03-35.35 very liberal vs very conservative). The theory-based factors most strongly associated with uptake/intention were attitudes (AOR 3.72, 95% CI 2.42-5.73), self-efficacy (AOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.34-2.29), and concerns about side effects (AOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.76). Although race and political ideology were significant in the model of demographic characteristics, they were not significant when controlling for attitudes and beliefs. Conclusions Vaccination represents one of the best tools to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as other possible pandemics in the future. This study showed that older age, attitudes, injunctive norms, descriptive norms, and self-efficacy are positively associated with vaccine uptake and intent, whereas perceived side effects and lack of trust in the vaccine are associated with lower uptake and intent. Race and political ideology were not significant predictors when attitudes and beliefs were considered. Before vaccine hesitancy can be addressed, researchers and clinicians must understand the basis of vaccine hesitancy and which populations may show higher hesitancy to the vaccination so that interventions can be adequately targeted.

This study examined associations between general attitudes toward seeking medical care, attitudes about vaccines/fear of shots, and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake and intentions in college women. Hypothesized associations were framed by the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). Participants ( N = 330, mean age = 18.9 years, 75% White) completed a one-time survey. The majority (61%; n = 201) had received ≥1 HPV vaccine dose. Hierarchical logistic regression examined relationships between attitudes and vaccine uptake. Pearson correlation coefficients and Kruskal-Wallis tests examined associations between attitudes and vaccine intentions. Results were partially consistent with the TPB. In the final model, perceived benefits, but not fear of shots, were associated with vaccine uptake. Among the unvaccinated, perceived benefits, but not fear of shots, were associated with vaccine intentions. Provider recommendation was the strongest predictor of vaccine uptake. Findings suggest interventions incorporating discussion of perceived benefits and provider recommendation may improve HPV vaccine receipt among college women.

OBJECTIVE: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients have distinct medical and psychosocial needs and fertility is a key concern. Early age of onset is a risk factor for hereditary cancer and AYAs are more likely to experience reduced fertility. This has implications for future family building decisions and fertility preservation (FP) and genetic testing/counseling (GT/GC) education. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with cancer between the ages of 18 and 39 and health care providers (HCPs) who treat AYA cancer patients were recruited from a single institution. Qualitative interviews explored AYA patients’ and HCPs’ concerns regarding their experiences discussing genetics and FP. RESULTS: The majority of patients (n = 17) were female (59%), and the majority of HCPs (n = 18) were male (67%). Overall, participants had differing perceptions of FP and GT/GC-related information provided during the clinical visit. Patients indicated initiating the conversation about FP and did not recall HCPs discussing GT/GC with them. HCPs indicated patients were often overwhelmed with too much information and comprehension of this discussion is limited. HCPs also felt patients’ emotions/beliefs determined their information-seeking behavior specific to FP and GT/GC. Participants felt educational materials should be developed and delivered in a video format depicting a patient–provider interaction or patient testimonial. CONCLUSION: AYA patients are often overwhelmed by a cancer diagnosis; the complexity/volume of information regarding FP and GT/GC may hinder understanding and decision-making about family building. Educational materials that help patients understand what questions to ask HCPs about FP and GT/GC should be developed to improve knowledge, psychosocial well-being, and future family building decisions.

Despite higher incidence and mortality of breast cancer among younger Black women, genetic testing outcomes remain severely understudied among Blacks. Past research on disclosure of genetic testing results to family members has disproportionately focused on White, educated, high socioeconomic status women. This study addresses this gap in knowledge by assessing (1) to whom Black women disclose genetic test results and (2) if patterns of disclosure vary based on test result (e.g., BRCA1/2 positive, negative, variant of uncertain significance [VUS]). Black women (N=149) with invasive breast cancer diagnosed age ≤50 years from 2009–2012 received free genetic testing through a prospective, population-based study. At 12 months post-testing, women reported with whom they shared their genetic test results. The exact test by binomial distribution was used to examine whether disclosure to female relatives was significantly greater than disclosure to male relatives, and logistic regression analyses tested for differences in disclosure to any female relative, any male relative, parents, siblings, children, and spouses by genetic test result. Most (77%) women disclosed their results to at least one family member. Disclosure to female relatives was significantly greater than disclosure to males (p0.12). Results suggest that in Black families, one benefit of genetic testing – to inform patients and their family with cancer risk information – is not being realized. To increase breast cancer preventive care among high-risk Black women, the oncology care team should prepare Black BRCA1/2 positive women to share genetic test results with family members and, in particular, their daughters.

Black women are overrepresented among premenopausal breast cancer (BC) survivors. These patients warrant genetic testing (GT) followed by risk-reducing behaviors. This study documented patterns and predictors of cancer risk-management behaviors among young black BC survivors after GT. Black women (n = 143) with a diagnosis of BC at the age of 50 years or younger received GT. At 1 year after GT, participants reported receipt of risk-reducing mastectomy, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, mammogram, breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), CA125 test, and transvaginal/pelvic ultrasound. Logistic regression was used to examine predictors of BC risk management (risk-reducing mastectomy or breast MRI) and ovarian cancer risk management (risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, CA125 test, or transvaginal/pelvic ultrasound). Of the study participants, 16 (11%) were BRCA1/2-positive, 43 (30%) had a variant of uncertain significance, and 84 (59%) were negative. During the 12 months after GT, no women received risk-reducing mastectomy. The majority (93%) received a mammogram, and a smaller proportion received breast MRI (33%), risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (10%), CA125 test (11%), or transvaginal/pelvic ultrasound (34%). Longer time since the BC diagnosis predicted lower likelihood of BC risk management (odds ratio [OR] 0.54). BRCA1/2 carrier status (OR 4.57), greater perceived risk of recurrence (OR 8.03), and more hereditary breast and ovarian cancer knowledge (OR 1.37) predicted greater likelihood of ovarian cancer risk management. Young black BC survivors appropriately received mammograms and ovarian cancer risk management based on their BRCA1/2 test result. However, the low usage of MRI among BRCA1/2 carriers contrasts with national guidelines. Future research should examine barriers to MRI among black BC survivors. Finally, modifiable variables predicting risk management after GT were identified, providing implications for future interventions.

Background Baby boomers are at increased risk for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and related cancer; therefore, one‐time HCV screening is recommended. Methods To assess prevalence of, and factors associated with providers ordering HCV screening, we examined a retrospective cohort of electronic medical records for patient visits from 01 August 2015 until 31 July 2017 in a large health system. HCV screening ordered was examined by patient age, gender, race/ethnicity, provider specialty, and number of clinical visits, stratified by birth cohort: born ≤1945, 1945‐1965 (baby boomers), 1966‐1985, and ≥1985. Multivariable regression identified factors independently associated with HCV screening ordered among average risk baby boomers. Results A total of 65 114 patients ages ≥18 years were evaluated. Among baby boomers HCV screening test order increased threefold between the two study years (4.0%‐12.9%). Odds of screening test ordered were significantly higher for non‐Hispanic Blacks (multivariable adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=1.36; 95% CI = 1.19‐1.55), males (aOR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.33‐1.57), and having a clinic visit with a primary care provider alone or with specialty care (aOR = 3.25‐4.16). Medicare (aOR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.80‐0.99), Medicaid (aOR 0.89; 95% CI 0.80‐0.99), and an unknown provider type (aOR = 0.16; 95% CI = 0.08‐0.33), were associated with lower odds of screening tests ordered. Conclusions While the proportion of baby boomers with an HCV screening test ordered increased during the study, the rate of screening remains far below national goals. Data from this study indicate that providers are not ordering HCV screening universally for all of their baby boomer patients. Continued efforts to increase HCV screening are needed to reduce the incidence of HCV‐related morbidity and mortality.

BACKGROUND: 50% of liver cancer is caused by hepatitis C virus (HCV). Baby boomers are at increased risk and are recommended for one-time HCV screening. However

Narrative messages may be superior to didactic messages when providing educational information due to their natural format for information sharing, ability to engage audiences, and engender positive thoughts about the message. Although narrative messages are gaining popularity in health promotion, little guidance exists regarding the development phase. Our team created a psychosocial narrative video intervention grounded in the Health Belief Model to increase breast cancer survivors’ attendance at genetic counseling after treatment. Here we report the use of Learner Verification (LV) during an iterative video development process. Using LV, we conducted individual semi-structured interviews with patients and providers, after they viewed the video. Demographic information was analyzed using descriptive statistics, and verbatim interview transcripts were used to conduct a two-phase qualitative content analysis. Patient and provider participants (n = 30) believed the video was attractive, relatable, and informative, and they identified areas for improvement including narrative coherence, changes to text and graphical information, and including more specific information. LV framework elicited audience feedback on the video intervention relevant to theoretical principles of narrative interventions, and highlighted audience preferences. In this study, LV interviews tapped into theoretical constructs of narratives and facilitated the iterative intervention design process.

Vaccination for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 illness, is an important public health tool to reduce hospitalizations and deaths.This report focuses on intentions and behaviors related to COVID-19 vaccination among United States (U.S.) adults ages 18-45.From February 25-March 24, 2021, we conducted an online survey assessing COVID-19 vaccine intentions and behaviors, health beliefs, vaccine attitudes, and sociodemographic characteristics. Participants were adults aged 18-45, living throughout the U.S. with oversampling in Florida, panelists of a research panel company directly or via verified partners, and able to read, write, and understand English. Associations between COVID-19 vaccination uptake, intentions, and other study variables were examined through multivariable logistic and proportional odds regression analyses.Among participants in the final analytic sample (n = 2722), 18% reported having received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Approximately 31% of unvaccinated participants reported strong intentions to receive a COVID-19 vaccine in the next year, whereas 35% reported strong intentions to receive a COVID-19 vaccine if it were strongly recommended by a healthcare provider. All COVID-19 vaccination outcomes were associated with male gender, sexual minority status, higher levels of education, and previous influenza vaccination. All vaccination intention outcomes were associated with vaccine attitudes and geographic region. Vaccination status and intentions were differentially associated with multiple additional sociodemographic, attitudinal, and/or healthcare experience variables.Several demographic variables, vaccine attitudes, and healthcare experiences were found to contribute to COVID-19 vaccine receipt and intentions. Targeted efforts are necessary to increase uptake of the vaccine in the U.S.

PURPOSE: Cancer screening uptake differs between groups in ways that cannot be explained by socioeconomic status alone. This study examined associations between material, psychosocial, and behavioral aspects of financial hardship and cancer screening behaviors. METHODS: Surveys were mailed to 7,979 people ages 18–75 who were seen in the statewide health system in Indiana. Participants reported SES, feelings about finances, and whether they had to forgo medical care due to cost. This was compared to uptake of mammogram, colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, and Pap testing in best-fit multivariable logistic regression analyses controlling for demographic and healthcare characteristics. RESULTS: 970 surveys were returned, the majority of respondents were female (54%), non-Hispanic White (75%), and over 50 years old (76%). 15% reported forgoing medical care due to cost; this barrier was higher among Black than White participants (24% vs. 13%; p=0.001). In a best fit regression model for colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, those who reported they had to forgo medical care due to cost had lower odds of screening (aOR=0.41; 95%CI=0.22–0.74). Forgoing medical care due to cost was not significantly associated with Pap testing in bivariate analyses. For mammogram, forgoing medical care due to cost was significant in bivariate analyses (OR=0.44; 95% CI=0.22–0.88), but was not significant in the multivariable model. CONCLUSION: Associations between financial hardship and cancer screening suggest the need to reduce barriers to cancer screening even among patients who have access to healthcare. Future research should explore barriers related to both healthcare and personal costs.

INTRODUCTION: Decisions about influenza vaccination for fall-winter 2020 were made against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. During May 2020, the authors examined intended vaccination in the next 12 months in relationship to demographic variables, healthcare attitudes, and personal COVID-19 experiences for two samples of adults--those who did not receive influenza vaccine during the prior 12 months, and those who did. METHODS: In May 2020, a cross-sectional online survey was conducted with a national US sample. Participants reported prior influenza vaccination (yes/no during prior 12 months) and anticipated vaccination (yes/no during next 12 months). Covariates included demographic characteristics (e.g., gender, race-ethnicity, political ideology), general beliefs (e.g., benefits of vaccines, altruistic attitudes), and COVID-19 health beliefs and experiences (COVID-19 worry and severity, perception of COVID-19 as a community threat, knowing someone with COVID-19). For each group, hierarchical multivariable logistic regression was conducted with intent to vaccinate as the outcome. RESULTS: Among participants (n = 3502), 47% did not receive influenza vaccine in the prior 12 months and 53% had; 25.5% of non-vaccinators and 91.9% of vaccinators intended future vaccination. For non-vaccinators, odds of intending vaccination was associated with race/ethnicity (Hispanics were more likely to intend than white-NH; AOR = 1.74; 95% CI = 1.23-2.4), greater perceived benefits of vaccination (AOR = 2.19; 95% CI = 1.88-2.54), and perception of COVID-19 as a community threat (AOR = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.49-2.45). For vaccinators, odds of intending vaccination was associated with age (AOR = 1.04; 95% CI = 1.03-1.05), race/ethnicity (Black-NH and Other-NH were less likely to intend than white-NH, AOR = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.36-0.999; and AOR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.24-0.84, respectively), greater perceived benefits of vaccination (AOR = 1.88; 95% CI = 1.45-2.45) and greater perception of collective benefits of vaccines (AOR = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.15-1.90). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic may have served as a cue to action for influenza vaccination intention among some prior non-vaccinators whereas intention among prior vaccinators is more related to positive attitudes toward vaccination.

HPV vaccine is recommended for 27-45 year olds in the U.S. based on a shared clinical decision. This study examined knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of adults 27-45 years old and the association with the likelihood of asking a healthcare provider about the HPV vaccine and the likelihood of getting the HPV vaccine. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of U.S. adults aged 27-45 years between April-May 2020 (n = 691). Primary outcomes were likelihood of asking their provider about the HPV vaccine and likelihood of getting the HPV vaccine. Demographic variables, knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs were covariates. Adjusted models were estimated for each outcome variable with a Poisson distribution and log function. More than half (55.7%) were likely to ask their provider about the HPV vaccine, but less than half (42.9%) were likely to get the HPV vaccine. Likelihood of asking their provider about the HPV vaccine was significantly associated with perceived likelihood of benefitting from the vaccine (aOR = 2.45; 95%CI = 1.69-3.57). Likelihood of receiving the vaccine was associated with attitudes (aOR = 1.04; 95%CI = 1.01-1.07), perceived effectiveness against HPV infection (aOR = 4.03; 95%CI = 1.20-13.53), and perceived likelihood of benefitting from the vaccine (aOR = 4.31; 95%CI = 2.64-7.03). Our findings suggest increasing positive attitudes, perceived effectiveness against infection, and perceived likelihood of benefitting from the vaccination are important factors to address when facilitating a shared clinical decision for HPV vaccination. Understanding factors associated with likelihood of discussing and receiving the HPV vaccine among people aged 27-45 years is important to successfully implement the guidelines for shared clinical decision-making.

Background: Many women see an obstetrician/gynecologist (OB/GYN) annually and receive their primary care from an OB/GYN. Understanding OB/GYNs' human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination practices, including knowledge of and barriers to vaccination, is essential to design effective interventions to increase vaccination. This study evaluated OB/GYN knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs regarding vaccinating both younger (18–26 years) and mid-adult (27–45 years) women. Materials and Methods: Data were collected from OB/GYN providers in October 2019 through a nationwide web-based survey. Items included the following: HPV-related vaccination practices, recommendation strength, knowledge (seven items), benefits (four items), and barriers (eight items). Results: The sample (n = 224) was majority were White (69%), men (56%), and practice in suburban clinics (55%). Most (84%) reported they usually or always recommend HPV vaccine to eligible patients, but estimated only about half (51%) of other OB/GYNs did the same. Recommendation strength varied by patient age with 84% strongly recommending it to patients ≤18 years, compared with 79% and 25% strongly recommending to younger and mid-adult patients, respectively (p

Background Liver cancer rates are rising and hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the primary cause. The CDC recommends a one-time HCV screening for all persons born 1945–1965 (baby boomers). However, 14% of baby boomers have been screened. Few studies have examined primary care providers’ (PCP) perspectives on barriers to HCV screening. This study examines current HCV screening practices, knowledge, barriers, and facilitators to HCV screening recommendation for baby boomers among PCPs. Methods We conducted a mixed methods pilot study of PCPs. Quantitative: We surveyed PCPs from 3 large academic health systems assessing screening practices, knowledge (range:0–9), self-efficacy to identify and treat HCV (range:0–32), and barriers (range:0–10). Qualitative: We conducted interviews assessing patient, provider, and clinic-level barriers to HCV screening for baby boomers in primary care. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed with content analysis. Results The study sample consisted of 31 PCPs (22 survey participants and nine interview participants). All PCPs were aware of the birth cohort screening recommendation and survey participants reported high HCV testing recommendation, but qualitative interviews indicated other priorities may supersede recommending HCV testing. Provider knowledge of viral transmission was high, but lower for infection prevalence. While survey participants reported very few barriers to HCV screening in primary care, interview participants provided a more nuanced description of barriers such as lack of time. Conclusions There is a need for provider education on both HCV treatment as well as how to effectively recommend HCV screening for their patients. As HCV screening guidelines continue to expand to a larger segment of the primary care population, it is important to understand ways to improve HCV screening in primary care.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented public health threat, both in scope and response. With no vaccine available, the public is advised to practice non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) including social distancing, mask-wearing, and washing hands. However, little is known about public perceptions of the effectiveness of these measures, and high perceived effectiveness is likely to be critical in order to achieve widespread adoption of NPI.MethodsIn May 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among U.S. adults (N = 3,474). The primary outcome was a six-item measure assessing perceived effectiveness of recommended behaviors to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection from 1 (not at all effective) to 5 (extremely effective). The sample was divided into "higher" and "lower" perceived effectiveness groups. Covariates included demographics, healthcare characteristics, and health beliefs. Variables that were significant at pResultsMean age was 45.5 years and most participants were non-Hispanic White (63%) and female (52.4%). The high perceived effectiveness group was slightly larger than the low perceived effectiveness group (52.7% vs. 47.3%). Almost all health belief variables were significant in the best-fit regression model. COVID-19-related worry (aOR = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.64-2.02), and perceived threat to physical health (aOR = 1.32; 95% CI = 1.20-1.45) were positively associated with perceived effectiveness while perceived severity of COVID-19 (0.84; 95% CI = 0.73-0.96) and perceived likelihood of infection (0.85; 95% CI = 0.77-0.94) switched directions in the adjusted model and were negatively associated with perceived effectiveness.ConclusionsThis research indicates people generally believe NPI are effective, but there was variability based on health beliefs and there are mixed rates of engagement in these behaviors. Public health efforts should focus on increasing perceived severity and threat of SARS-CoV-2-related disease, while promoting NPI as effective in reducing threat.

Objective Shared decision-making (SDM) is an important approach to patient-centered care in women’s reproductive healthcare. This study explored SDM experiences and perceptions among non-physician healthcare professionals. Methods We completed 20 key-informant interviews with non-physician healthcare professionals (i.e., NP, RN, CNM, doula, pharmacist, chiropractor) living in Indiana (September 2019-May 2020) who provided community-based women’s reproductive healthcare. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using an expanded grounded theory framework. Constant comparative analysis identified emergent themes. Results Professionals noted community-based healthcare required contextualized decision-making approaches. Results identified listening, decisional ownership, and engagement strategies that enhanced SDM involvement. Findings suggested outcome-oriented SDM concepts, including decisional ownership and investigative listening to enhance SDM. Providers redefined ‘challenging’ patients as engaged in their healthcare and discussed ways SDM improved healthcare experience beyond one visit. Conclusion Findings offered insight into actionable and practical strategies for enhancing SDM in community-based women’s reproductive healthcare. The findings offer strategies to improve SDM by addressing barriers and facilitators among professionals. This extends SDM beyond the patient-physician dyad and supports broader application of SDM. Practice implications Incorporating professionals’ experiences into SDM concepts can enhance SDM in community-based women’s healthcare practice, offering opportunities to support a culture of SDM across settings.

HPV vaccination rates in Florida are low. To increase rates, the CDC recommends clinics adhere to components of their evidence-based quality improvement program, AFIX (Assessment, Feedback, Incentives, and eXchange of information). We explored factors associated with engaging in HPV-specific AFIX-related activities. In 2016, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of 770 pediatric and family medicine physicians in Florida and assessed vaccination practices, clinic characteristics, and HPV-related knowledge. Data were analyzed in 2017. The primary outcome was whether physicians' clinics engaged in ≥1 AFIX activity. We stratified by physician specialty and developed multivariable models using a backward selection approach. Of the participants in the analytic sample (n = 340), 52% were male, 60% were White of any ethnicity, and 55% were non-Hispanic. Pediatricians and family medicine physicians differed on: years practicing medicine (p 0.001), HPV-related knowledge (p 0.001), and VFC provider status (p 0.001), among others. Only 39% of physicians reported engaging in ≥1 AFIX activity. In the stratified multivariable model for pediatricians, AFIX activity was significantly associated with HPV-related knowledge (aOR = 1.33;95%CI = 1.08-1.63) and provider use of vaccine reminder prompts (aOR = 3.61;95%CI = 1.02-12.77). For family medicine physicians, HPV-related knowledge was significant (aOR = 1.57;95%CI = 1.20-2.05) as was majority race of patient population (non-Hispanic White vs. Other: aOR = 3.02;95%CI = 1.08-8.43), daily patient load (20 vs. 20-24: aOR = 9.05;95%CI = 2.72-30.10), and vaccine administration to male patients (aOR = 2.98;95%CI = 1.11-8.02). Fewer than half of Florida pediatric and family medicine physicians engaged in any AFIX activities. Future interventions to increase AFIX engagement should focus on implementing and evaluating AFIX activities in groups identified as having low engagement in AFIX activities.

Objective Prior studies demonstrating minimal psychological consequences for women receiving genetic counseling/genetic testing (GC/GT) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer rely on predominantly Caucasian women. We conducted a prospective follow-up of a subset of participants from a population-based study of Black breast cancer (BC) survivors receiving GC/GT for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Methods Black women with invasive BC at age ≤ 50 years diagnosed between 2009 and 2012 were recruited through the Florida Cancer Registry. Participants (n = 215, age M = 44.7, SD = 6.2) were offered telephone pre- and post-test GC, a subset completed questionnaires assessing sociodemographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables. Results There were no baseline differences in cancer-related distress, psychological distress, or quality of life between test result groups. Social well-being improved in women receiving negative results (P = .01), but no other outcomes demonstrated significant changes over time between groups. Conclusions Our study is among the first to demonstrate minimal negative psychosocial outcomes following GC/GT among young Black BC survivors, irrespective of test results.

Purpose We sought to establish which human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine communication approaches by pediatricians were associated with same-day HPV vaccination of 11- to 12-year-olds by evaluating audio recordings of visits. Methods Verilogue, a market research company maintaining a panel of primary care pediatricians, provided audio recordings and transcriptions of well-child visits for 11- to 12-year-old patients from January through June 2013. Seventy-five transcripts from 19 pediatricians were coded for use of presumptive language (i.e., words conveying assumption of vaccine delivery), offer of delay, recommendation strength, and information provision. Using logistic regression, we evaluated the association between pediatrician communication approaches and agreement to same-day HPV vaccination. Generalized estimating equations accounted for clustering of patients within pediatricians. Results Same-day agreement to HPV vaccination occurred in 29% of encounters. Pediatricians in the sample often provided parents with inconsistent, mixed messages and sometimes offered information about HPV or HPV vaccination that was inaccurate. Pediatricians used presumptive language in only 11 of 75 encounters; when used, presumptive language was associated with higher odds of accepting HPV vaccine (73% vs. 22%; odds ratio = 8.96; 95% confidence interval = 2.32–34.70). Pediatricians offered or recommended delay in most encounters (65%). HPV vaccine acceptance occurred far more often when pediatricians did not mention delaying vaccination (82% vs. 6%; odds ratio = 80.84; 95% confidence interval = 15.72–415.67). Same-day vaccination was not associated with strength of recommendation or pediatrician reference to vaccinating their own children. Conclusions Our findings highlight the need to develop and evaluate physician-focused trainings on using presumptive language for same-day HPV vaccination.

Understanding physician preferences for educational materials to support male HPV vaccination is critical to improving vaccine uptake. Pediatric (Peds) and Family Medicine (FM) physicians in Florida completed a survey from May–August, 2014 assessing current use of male-specific HPV vaccination patient education materials, and preferences for materials to increase HPV vaccination uptake. Peds and FM responses were compared with chi-squared or nonparametric tests. Most participants were FM (53.2%), White (66.6%), non-Hispanic (74.1%), and provided male patients/parents with HPV educational materials (59.1%). More than half (55.5%) provided a CDC factsheet for parents. Peds were more likely to indicate they provide educational materials (p

Understanding physician recommendation practices for HPV vaccination is a crucial step to developing interventions that can increase high quality recommendations and improve vaccination acceptance. Florida physicians (n = 340) completed a survey assessing recommendation strategies, specifically strength, consistency, and presentation. Physicians were also asked to provide suggestions for improving HPV vaccination in Florida. Responses were dichotomized for each outcome: strength (i.e., strongly recommend vs. other), consistently recommend (i.e., always recommend vs. other), and recommendation presentation (i.e., presented in the same manner as mandatory vaccines for adolescents vs. other). Bivariate logistic regression was conducted to determine the association between physician/practice characteristics and each outcome. Variables significant (p

Objective Breast cancer (BC) survivors with a genetic mutation are at higher risk for subsequent cancer; knowing genetic risk status could help survivors make decisions about follow-up screening. Uptake of genetic counseling and testing (GC/GT) to determine BRCA status is low among high risk BC survivors. This study assessed feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a newly developed psychoeducational intervention (PEI) for GC/GT. Methods High risk BC survivors (N = 119) completed a baseline questionnaire and were randomized to the intervention (PEI video/booklet) or control (factsheet) group. Follow-up questionnaires were completed 2 weeks after baseline (T2), and 4 months after T2 (T3). We analyzed recruitment, retention (feasibility), whether the participant viewed study materials (acceptability), intent to get GC/GT (efficacy), and psychosocial outcomes (eg, perceived risk, Impact of Events Scale [IES]). t tests or chi-square tests identified differences between intervention groups at baseline. Mixed models examined main effects of group, time, and group-by-time interactions. Results Groups were similar on demographic characteristics (P ≥ .05). Of participants who completed the baseline questionnaire, 91% followed through to study completion and 92% viewed study materials. A higher percentage of participants in the intervention group moved toward GC/GT (28% vs 8%; P = .027). Mixed models demonstrated significant group-by-time interactions for perceived risk (P = .029), IES (P = .027), and IES avoidance subscale (P = .012). Conclusions The PEI was feasible, acceptable, and efficacious. Women in the intervention group reported greater intentions to pursue GC, greater perceived risk, and decreased avoidance. Future studies should seek to first identify system-level barriers and facilitators before aiming to address individual-level barriers.

Background: Provider recommendation is a significant predictor of HPV vaccine uptake. Prior research suggests that concerns regarding risk compensation could cause some providers to hesitate recommending the HPV vaccine. Methods: During 15–30 min semi-structured interviews in early 2015, 22 U.S. pediatric providers were asked about their beliefs regarding sexual risk compensation and cervical cancer screening following HPV vaccination. Providers were asked if these beliefs result in reservations recommending the vaccine. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using inductive content analysis. Results: None of the providers believed the HPV vaccine would result in risky sexual behavior. Half indicated it was better to start vaccination early, before sexual activity was a worry. Others noted that patients’ risky behavior decisions happen independently of vaccination. When providers were asked if they were concerned about decreased cervical cancer screening, half said they did not know and some stated they had never thought about it before. The main themes addressed were the significant time lapse between vaccination and screening and that women tend to get over-screened as opposed to under-screened. Conclusion: Providers were generally in favor of HPV vaccination and do not perceive risk compensation as a barrier to HPV recommendation. Keywords: Behavior, Risk compensation, Human Papillomavirus vaccination, Cervical cancer screening, Healthcare provider

The 9-valent Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, 9vHPV, was licensed in the U.S. in December, 2014. We assessed healthcare provider (HCP) awareness of the newly approved vaccine and identified questions HCPs have about the vaccine. As part of a larger study, we used semi-structured interviews to ask 22 pediatric HCPs about their awareness of 9vHPV, questions they have about the vaccine, and questions they anticipate from patients and parents. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed then analyzed using inductive content analysis. Over half were aware of the vaccine but few HCPs claimed to be familiar with it. HCPs indicated several questions with common themes pertaining to efficacy, side effects, and cost. Only half of HCPs believed patients or parents would have questions. The results suggest strategies and areas for health systems and public health organizations to target in order to resolve unmet educational needs among HCPs regarding 9vHPV.

There has been some concern among parents and in the media that vaccinating children against human papillomavirus could be seen as giving children permission to engage in risky sexual behaviors (also known as sexual disinhibition). Several studies have found this concern to be unfounded but there have been no attempts to synthesize the relevant studies in order to assess if there is evidence of sexual disinhibition. The aim of this study was to synthesize recent literature examining sexual behaviors and biological outcomes (e.g., sexually transmitted infections) post-HPV vaccination. We reviewed literature from January 1, 2008-June 30, 2015 using PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase with the following search terms: [(sex behavior OR sex behavior OR sexual) AND (human papillomavirus OR HPV) AND (vaccines OR vaccine OR vaccination)] followed by a cited reference search. We included studies that examined biological outcomes and reported behaviors post-vaccination in both males and females. Studies were reviewed by title and abstract and relevant studies were examined as full-text articles. We identified 2,503 articles and 20 were eventually included in the review. None of the studies of sexual behaviors and/or biological outcomes found evidence of riskier behaviors or higher rates of STIs after HPV vaccination. Instead, the studies found that vaccinated compared to unvaccinated individuals were less likely to report vaginal intercourse without a condom (OR = 0.5; 95%CI = 0.4–0.6) and non-use of contraception (OR = 0.27; 95%CI = 0.15–0.48) and unvaccinated participants had higher rates of Chlamydia (OR = 2.3; 95%CI = 1.06–5.00). These results should be reassuring to parents and health care providers.

PURPOSE: Uptake of genetic counseling among breast cancer survivors is low. We used the Health Belief Model (HBM) to explore factors associated with readiness for genetic counseling among breast cancer survivors. METHODS: Breast cancer survivors meeting NCCN genetic counseling referral criteria were recruited through clinics and community settings. Participants completed questionnaires capturing demographic and clinical information and factors guided by the HBM, including health beliefs, psychosocial variables, and cues to action. Using logistic regression, we examined whether the above variables differed based on readiness group (pre-contemplators, who did not plan to make a genetic counseling appointment, and contemplators, who planned to make a genetic counseling appointment in the next 1– 6 months). RESULTS: Of 111 participants, 57% were pre-contemplators and 43% were contemplators. In the multivariable model, higher cancer worry was associated with increased odds of being a contemplator (OR=2.99; 95% CI=1.37–6.54) and higher perceived barriers to genetic counseling were associated with decreased odds of being a contemplator (OR=0.31; 95% CI= 0.11–0.85). Those who reported a family member encouraged them to get tested were more likely to be contemplators (OR=3.57; 95% CI=1.19– 10.70). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest key factors for predicting genetic counseling readiness include cancer worry, perceived barriers, and family influence. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Ideally genetic counseling occurs prior to treatment, but significant advantages exist for survivors. There is need for increased genetic counseling awareness. Better understanding of factors related to survivors’ decisions about counseling can inform tailored interventions to improve uptake and ultimately reduce cancer recurrence risk.

Barriers to genetic counseling services (GCS) utilization for Spanish-speaking patients (SSP) may include language barriers and limited availability of bilingual genetic counselors (GCs). The sample included GCs who: (1) practice cancer genetic counseling, (2) report a cancer practice setting, and (3) have a US mailing address. We assessed: (1) number of Spanish-speaking GCs, (2) estimated proportion of Hispanic patients, and (3) approaches used to counsel SSP. Of respondents (n = 229), 10% (n = 23) spoke Spanish. A higher proportion of GCs practicing in states with ≥ 25% Hispanics reported speaking Spanish compared to those in states with lower Hispanic populations (p = 0.02). While there was a significantly higher percentage of Spanish-speaking GCs in states with larger Hispanic populations, the absolute number was low and unlikely to meet the needs of patients. There is need to increase availability of GCS for SSPs and to understand the impact of services on patient health outcomes.

Purpose Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine series completion rates among females and males remain low in Florida (46.4% and 34.5%, respectively). Multiple stakeholders influence vaccination uptake, including health care providers (HCPs), public health professionals (PHPs), and members of professional organizations. We examined stakeholder efforts related to increasing vaccine uptake and education among parents/adolescents and HCPs. Methods We conducted an environmental scan of stakeholder efforts and identified stakeholders using our professional networks and a snowball sampling approach. Stakeholders (n = 46) completed a survey about involvement in and barriers to vaccination promotion efforts. A subset (n = 12) of stakeholders participated in follow-up interviews further exploring vaccination efforts and barriers. Survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Interview data were analyzed using deductive analysis and coded using constructs from the PRECEDE-PROCEED model. Results The majority of our survey sample was PHPs (50.0%) and HCPs (32.6%). Stakeholder efforts were focused on adolescent/parent/HCP education including providing: educational materials for HCPs (55.8%) and adolescents/parents (59.6%), one-on-one consultations for adolescents/parents (55.3%), and HCP education (54.7%). Lack of knowledge/understanding and education/information were barriers reported across almost all groups/areas. Office staff/HCP education and distribution of patient education materials were efforts described as important during qualitative interviews. Stakeholders also noted HCP discomfort when recommending HPV vaccine, parental perceptions that the vaccine is unnecessary, and a lack of education/understanding among parents and HCPs. Conclusions Results suggest the need for parent/adolescent education, specifically targeting key areas we identified: importance and benefits of HPV vaccine, and education and skill building in vaccine communication for HCPs.

Residency training is a pivotal time to establish skills for career-long practices, particularly for challenging skills such as human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine recommendation. Training experience and preferences related to delivering HPV vaccine recommendations were examined for family medicine (FM) residents and faculty.Residents (n=28) and faculty (n=19) were identified through a national FM residency directory and recruited from training programs in Florida. Participants completed a phone interview assessing key aspects of HPV vaccine recommendation training. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using content analysis. A brief follow-up survey assessing training, practices, and demographics was emailed after the interview.Residents' training experience with HPV vaccine recommendation varied from none to extensive, and was often self-directed. Variation in training was seen between and within programs. Faculty often noted HPV vaccination training was not standardized and residents lacked instruction about effective communication. Most programs relied on preceptors for training residents but training from preceptors varied widely and was often not standardized within the program.This study identified a lack of consistent and standardized training for delivering HPV vaccine recommendations. A training curriculum that uses multiple modalities and reflects resident and faculty preferences is needed.

Background: Rates of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are markedly higher for baby boomers compared with other birth cohorts, and they are now recommended for universal one-time screening. This study examines HCV screening rates and predictors for four birth cohorts [born 1985] of a nationally representative sample over time. Methods: We used data from the 2013–2015 National Health Interview Surveys, an annual weighted survey of the U.S. civilian noninstitutionalized population. We assessed HCV screening prevalence stratified birth cohort with bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses. Results: There were 15,100 participants born 1985 in the final analytic sample. Screening was 11.5%–12.8% for baby boomers. The second youngest birth cohort was similar to baby boomers (13.7%–14.9%), whereas the older birth cohort was screened less. After excluding participants who typically have higher rates of HCV screening than the general population, we developed a multivariable model of the general population. In the final model for baby boomers the odds of HCV screening increased significantly with each subsequent year (OR=1.20; 95% CI=1.05–1.38 and OR=1.31; 95% CI=1.13–1.52). HCV screening was also significantly associated with age, gender, and race/ethnicity in baby boomers. Conclusions: While HCV screening is increasing over time, these increases are minimal and there is substantial room for improvement. Impact: Future research should develop interventions to increase HCV screening with special focus on groups demonstrating significantly lower screening rates, such as Hispanics and females. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(4); 503–13. ©2018 AACR.

PurposeBlack women are more likely to develop early-onset (≤50years) breast cancer (BC) and have the lowest five-year, cause-specific survival rate of any United States (U.S.) racial or ethnic group. These disparities can be attributed partially to the higher rate of triple-negative BC (TNBC) in Blacks. Yet, little is known about health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among Black women with TNBC.MethodsBlack women with invasive BC≤50years were recruited via the Florida Cancer Data System as part of a population-based case-only study of etiology and outcomes of early-onset invasive BC. Of 460 consented participants, a subset of 355 self-reported sociodemographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables. Descriptive analyses included participants with known TNBC (n=85) or non-TNBC (n=245) disease. Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted to examine differences in factors associated with HRQOL.ResultsIn unadjusted analyses, TNBC participants had significantly lower FACT-B total scores (90.1±27.9) compared to non-TNBC (98.5±27.6) participants (p&nbsp

Many adults in the U.S. do not receive recommended vaccines, and the research literature remains inconclusive on the best communication strategies for increasing this behavior. This study examined the association of message framing (gained-framed vs. loss-framed vs. control), and healthcare provider (HCP) recommendation (offered vs. recommended) on uptake of adult hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination in a high risk population using a 3 × 2 block design randomized controlled trial. Fear of shots, fear of vaccines, and perceived message framing were examined in secondary analyses. Of the 1747 participants, 47.7% (n = 833) received 0 doses of HBV vaccine, 27.8% (n = 485) received 1 dose, 10.4% received 2 doses, and 14.1% received all 3 recommended doses. There was not a significant interaction between message framing and HCP recommendation (p = .59). Mean number of doses received by the gain-framed group (m = 0.96) was not significantly different from the loss-framed group (m = 0.97, RR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.88–1.12). However, those receiving any framing message received significantly more doses (m = 0.96) than those in the control condition (m = 0.81, RR = 1.17, 95%CI = 1.06–1.31). Participants who received a HCP recommendation received significantly more vaccine doses (m = 0.95) than those in the vaccine-offered condition (mean = 0.82, RR = 1.16, 95%CI = 1.05–1.28). These results suggest there is no difference in vaccine uptake between gain-frame and loss-frame messages, but both are better than a control message. These results also support advising HCP to provide a strong recommendation for vaccinations beyond merely offering it to patients. This study has implications for vaccine uptake beyond HBV, and can inform future research on effective vaccine communication research. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00739752 . Registration date: August 20, 2008.

Background Human Papillomavirus (HPV) leads to serious health issues and remains the most common sexually transmitted infection. Despite availability of effective vaccines, HPV vaccination rates are suboptimal. Furthermore, providers recommend the HPV vaccine less than half the time for eligible patients. Prior informatics research has demonstrated the effectiveness of computer-based clinical decision support (CDS) in changing provider behavior, especially in the area of preventative services. Methods Following a randomized clinical trial to test the effect of a CDS intervention on HPV vaccination rates, we conducted semi-structured interviews with health care providers to understand whether they noticed the CDS reminders and why providers did or did not respond to the prompts. Eighteen providers, a mix of medical doctors and nurse practitioners, were interviewed from five publicly-funded, urban health clinics. Interview data were qualitatively analyzed by two independent researchers using inductive content analysis. Results While most providers recalled seeing the CDS reminders, few of them perceived the intervention as effective in changing their behavior. Providers stated many reasons for why they did not perceive a change in their behavior, yet the results of the trial showed HPV vaccination rates increased as a result of the intervention. Conclusions CDS reminders may be effective at changing provider behavior even if providers perceive them to be of little use. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02551887 Registered on September 15, 2015 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12911-017-0521-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BACKGROUND Men who have sex with men (MSM) are disproportionately affected by human papillomavirus (HPV)-related outcomes and would benefit from HPV vaccination in adolescence. We assessed HPV vaccine attitudes, uptake, and barriers in this high-risk young MSM (YMSM) population. METHODS An online US sample of 1457 YMSM aged 18 to 26 years were recruited in December 2011 to examine HPV vaccine acceptability and uptake. The online survey included sociodemographics, HPV vaccine attitudes, acceptability, HPV vaccination status, health care use, and HPV knowledge. RESULTS Despite high use of health care in the past year (86%) and high acceptability (87.8/100) for free HPV vaccine, only 6.8% had received one or more vaccine doses. In addition, only 4% of unvaccinated men had been offered the vaccine by their health care provider (HCP). In a multivariate regression of unvaccinated men, increased vaccine acceptability was associated with an HCP recommendation, worry about getting infected with HPV, and being tested for a sexually transmitted disease in the past year, whereas safety concerns, lower perceived risk of infection, and shame associated with HPV infection/disease were associated with decreased vaccine acceptability. Through logistic regression, vaccine uptake was associated with being tested for a sexually transmitted disease in the past year, disclosure of being gay or bisexual to a doctor, and greater HPV knowledge. CONCLUSIONS Health care providers need to use routine points of contact with YMSM patients to vaccinate against HPV. These data indicated missed opportunities to vaccinate YMSM who are open to HPV vaccination. In the future, HCPs of YMSM should be careful to avoid missed opportunities to vaccinate.

Nearly 1 in 5 people living with HIV in the United States are unaware they are infected. Therefore, it is important to develop and evaluate health communication messages that clinicians can use to encourage HIV testing. The objective was to evaluate health communication messages designed to increase HIV testing rates among women and evaluate possible moderators of message effect. We used a randomized four-arm clinical trial conducted at urban community outpatient health clinics involving 1,919 female patients, 18 to 64 years old. The four health message intervention groups were: i) information-only control; ii) one-sided message describing the advantages of HIV testing; iii) two-sided message acknowledging a superficial objection to testing (i.e., a 20 minute wait for results) followed by a description of the advantages of testing; and iv) two-sided message acknowledging a serious objection (i.e., fear of testing positive for HIV) followed by a description of the advantages of testing. The main outcome was acceptance of an oral rapid HIV test. Participants were randomized to receive the control message (n = 483), one-sided message (n = 480), two-sided message with a superficial objection (n = 481), or two-sided message with a serious objection (n = 475). The overall rate of HIV test acceptance was 83%. The two-sided message groups were not significantly different from the controls. The one-sided message group, however, had a lower rate of testing (80%) than the controls (86%) (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47-0.93; P = 0.018). “Perceived obstacles to HIV testing” moderated this effect, indicating that the decrease in HIV test acceptance for the one-sided message group was only statistically significant for those who had reported high levels of obstacles to HIV testing (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.19-0.67; P = 0.001). None of the messages increased test acceptance. The one-sided message decreased acceptance and this effect was particularly true for women with greater perceived obstacles to testing, the very group one would most want to persuade. This finding suggests that efforts to persuade those who are reluctant to get tested, in some circumstances, may have unanticipated negative effects. Other approaches to messaging around HIV testing should be investigated, particularly with diverse, behaviorally high-risk populations. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00771537 . Registration date: October 10. 2008