Search

PURPOSE Delays initiating guideline-adherent postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) are common, contribute to excess mortality, and are a modifiable target for improving survival. However, the barriers that prevent the delivery of timely, guideline-adherent PORT remain unknown. This study aims to identify the multilevel barriers to timely, guideline-adherent PORT and organize them into a conceptual model. MATERIALS AND METHODS Semi-structured interviews with key informants were conducted with a purposive sample of patients with HNSCC and oncology providers across diverse practice settings until thematic saturation (n = 45). Thematic analysis was performed to identify the themes that explain barriers to timely PORT and to develop a conceptual model. RESULTS In all, 27 patients with HNSCC undergoing surgery and PORT were included, of whom 41% were African American, and 37% had surgery and PORT at different facilities. Eighteen clinicians representing a diverse mix of provider types from 7 oncology practices participated in key informant interviews. Five key themes representing barriers to timely PORT were identified across = health care delivery levels: (1) inadequate education about timely PORT, (2) postsurgical sequelae that interrupt the tight treatment timeline (both intrapersonal level), (3) insufficient coordination and communication during care transitions (interpersonal and health care team levels), (4) fragmentation of care across health care organizations (organizational level), and (5) travel burden for socioeconomically disadvantaged patients (community level). CONCLUSION This study provides a novel description of the multilevel barriers that contribute to delayed PORT. Interventions targeting these multilevel barriers could improve the delivery of timely, guideline-adherent PORT and decrease mortality for patients with HNSCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Secondhand smoke exposure harms children. The objectives of the study were to determine the prevalence of secondhand smoke exposure in children ≤2 years and determine the predictors of smoking and smoking cessation in parents. Methods. We surveyed parents of children ≤2 years of age, asking about parental smoking patterns, interest in quitting and children’s respiratory symptoms. Data were analyzed with chi-square and multiple logistic regression. Results. Thirteen percent were current smokers and 18% had quit. The most common reason for quitting was being pregnant (42%). Children’s respiratory symptoms did not predict quitting. Parents on Medicaid were more likely to smoke than those on private insurance (OR = 5.7, 95% CI = 2.0-16.5) and less likely to quit (OR = 0.2, 95% CI = 0.1-0.9). Conclusion. Having a new baby may be a motivator for parents to quit. We must address socioeconomic factors to develop a successful intervention in pediatric practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. Secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure is an important cause of morbidity in children. We assessed the impact of family rules about smoking in the home and car on SHS exposure prevalence in students in grades six to 12. Methods. We studied never-smoking young people (n= 1,698) in the random sample cross-sectional South Carolina Youth Tobacco Survey, a 2006 survey of middle and high school students in South Carolina. Results. Overall, 40% of the students reported SHS exposure in either the home or car in the past week; among these, 85% reported exposure in cars. Subsequent analyses focused on students who lived with a smoker (n=602). Compared with those whose families prohibited smoking in the home or car, SHS exposure prevalence was 30% (p<0.0001) higher for households with smoke-free rules for only one place (home or car) and 36% (p<0.0001) higher for households with no rules. Compared with students from households with strict rules, SHS exposure prevalence was 48% greater (p<0.0001) among those with only partial rules against smoking in the home or car, and 55% (p<0.0001) greater among those from households with no rules. Similarly, compared with students with strict family rules for home and car that were adhered to, SHS exposure prevalence was significantly higher (p<0.0001) among students when only one or no rules were followed. Conclusions. Young people from families that made and enforced strong rules against smoking in homes and cars were much less likely to report SHS exposure. Parents would be wise to endorse and enforce strong smoke-free policies for both homes and cars. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Compared to European Americans (EAs), African Americans (AAs) suffer a disproportionate share of the lung cancer mortality burden. To investigate whether this disparity in lung cancer mortality is due to differential racial risks related to socioeconomic status (education, occupation), body mass index (BMI), hypertension, or cigarette smoking, we compared associations between these factors and lung cancer mortality by race in a biracial prospective cohort study. Methods: The Charleston (South Carolina) Heart Study (N = 2,054) was established in 1960; 40% of the study participants are AAs. The participants have been followed up for mortality for 40 years. Using Cox proportional hazards models, we investigated whether there were racial differences in the associations between the study factors and lung cancer mortality. Results: Cigarette smoking was the strongest lung cancer risk factor in both races. The association between cigarette smoking and lung cancer mortality was stronger in EAs than AAs (hazards ratio [HR] 26.1 vs. 7.6). In both races, men were at significantly greater risk than women and BMI was significantly inversely associated with lung cancer mortality. Conclusions: The evidence from the present study does not yield strong clues for the excess lung cancer mortality in AAs. Our results do not support the hypothesis that differential susceptibility to cigarette smoking is a major contributor to the racial disparity in lung cancer. This suggests we must expand our scope of inquiry beyond the factors included in the present study to fully understand why lung cancer mortality rates are greater in AAs than EAs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]