Search

The goal of the US coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination campaign is to substantially reduce the overall burden of COVID-19 by preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infections, reducing virus [...]

BackgroundThis paper identifies and describes measures of constructs relevant to the adoption or implementation of innovations (i.e., new policies, programs or practices) at the organizational-level. This work is intended to advance the field of dissemination and implementation research by aiding scientists in the identification of existing measures and highlighting methodological issues that require additional attention.MethodsWe searched for published studies (1973-2013) in 11 bibliographic databases for quantitative, empirical studies that presented outcome data related to adoption and/or implementation of an innovation. Included studies had to assess latent constructs related to the "inner setting" of the organization, as defined by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.ResultsOf the 76 studies included, most (86%) were cross sectional and nearly half (49%) were conducted in health care settings. Nearly half (46%) involved implementation of evidence-based or "best practice" strategies; roughly a quarter (26%) examined use of new technologies. Primary outcomes most often assessed were innovation implementation (57%) and adoption (34%); while 4% of included studies assessed both outcomes. There was wide variability in conceptual and operational definitions of organizational constructs. The two most frequently assessed constructs included "organizational climate" and "readiness for implementation." More than half (55%) of the studies did not articulate an organizational theory or conceptual framework guiding the inquiry; about a third (34%) referenced Diffusion of Innovations theory. Overall, only 46% of articles reported psychometric properties of measures assessing latent organizational characteristics. Of these, 94% (33/35) described reliability and 71% (25/35) reported on validity.ConclusionsThe lack of clarity associated with construct definitions, inconsistent use of theory, absence of standardized reporting criteria for implementation research, and the fact that few measures have demonstrated reliability or validity were among the limitations highlighted in our review. Given these findings, we recommend that increased attention be devoted toward the development or refinement of measures using common psychometric standards. In addition, there is a need for measure development and testing across diverse settings, among diverse population samples, and for a variety of types of innovations.

Introduction: Understanding changes in vaccine hesitancy, overall and by sociodemographic characteristics, may highlight sub-populations for whom more intensive efforts are needed to increase vaccine uptake and confidence. Methods: We analyzed data using the CDC's Research and Development Survey (RANDS), a nationally representative survey of U.S. adults ≥18years, collected from 17 May 2021-30 June 2021 (n=5,458) and 3 November 2022-12 December 2022 (n=6,821). We assessed changes in vaccine hesitancy, changes in vaccine attitudes and attitudes, and factors associated with hesitancy toward both vaccines in general and COVID-19 vaccines among a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults. Results: Although COVID-19 vaccination (≥1 dose) increased from 67.2% (2021) to 74.7% (2022), COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy increased from 40.7% to 44.6% during the same period. During the same period, hesitancy toward both COVID-19 vaccines and vaccines in general increased among those who were aged ≥65 years and who were non-Hispanic White. However, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy decreased among non-Hispanic Black adults. Current or former smokers were more hesitant toward vaccines in general (aPR = 1.13, 95%CI: 1.03-1.24) and toward COVID-19 vaccines (aPR = 1.08, 95%CI: 1.01-1.16) compared to never smokers. Among adults who did not receive any COVID-19 vaccines, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy increased from 86.6% in 2021 to 92.4% in 2022. Furthermore, belief in the overall social benefit of the COVID-19 vaccine decreased from 47.5% to 25.1%. Conclusion: This study highlights concerning trends in vaccine hesitancy and uptake of the COVID-19 and other recommended vaccines. We found that some high-risk groups (e.g. smokers) and population subgroups have become more vaccine hesitant, suggesting the need for improved and intensified strategies to increase vaccine confidence and uptake. Future research may focus on qualitative inquiry to understand specific concerns and determinants contributing to increased hesitancy among these groups to help inform interventions and communication campaigns to support vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ContextColorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death among cancers affecting both men and women in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) supports both direct clinical screening services (screening provision) and activities to promote screening at the population level (screening promotion).ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to characterize patient navigation (PN) programs for screening provision and promotion for the first 1 to 2 years of program funding.ParticipantsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of the 29 CRCCP grantees (25 states and 4 tribal organizations) and 14 in-depth interviews to assess program implementation.Main outcome measuresThe survey and interview guide collected information on CRC screening provision and promotion activities and PN, including the structure of the PN program, characteristics of the navigators, funding mechanism, and navigators' activities.ResultsTwenty-four of 28 CRCCP grantees of the survey used PN for screening provision whereas 18 grantees used navigation for screening promotion. Navigators were often trained in nursing or public health. Navigation activities were similar for both screening provision and promotion, and common tasks included assessing and responding to patient barriers to screening, providing patient education, and scheduling appointments. For screening provision, activities centered on making reminder calls, educating patients on bowel preparation for colonoscopies, and tracking patients for completion of the tests. Navigation may influence screening quality by improving patients' bowel preparation for colonoscopies.ConclusionsOur study provides insights into PN across a federally funded CRC program. Results suggest that PN activities may be instrumental in recruiting people into cancer screening and ensuring completed screening and follow-up.

BackgroundSpecial events are common community-based strategies for health promotion. This paper presents findings from a systematic literature review on the impact of special events to promote breast, cervical or colorectal cancer education and screening.MethodsArticles in English that focused on special events involving breast, cervical, and/or colorectal cancer conducted in the U.S. and published between January 1990 and December 2011 were identified from seven databases: Ovid, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstract, Cochrane Libraries, and EconLit. Study inclusion and data extraction were independently validated by two researchers.ResultsOf the 20 articles selected for screening out of 1,409, ten articles on special events reported outcome data. Five types of special events were found: health fairs, parties, cultural events, special days, and plays. Many focused on breast cancer only, or in combination with other cancers. Reach ranged from 50-1732 participants. All special events used at least one evidence-based strategy suggested by the Community Guide to Preventive Services, such as small media, one-on-one education, and reducing structural barriers. For cancer screening as an outcome of the events, mammography screening rates ranged from 4.8% to 88%, Pap testing was 3.9%, and clinical breast exams ranged from 9.1% to 100%. For colorectal screening, FOBT ranged from 29.4% to 76%, and sigmoidoscopy was 100% at one event. Outcome measures included intentions to get screened, scheduled appointments, uptake of clinical exams, and participation in cancer screening.ConclusionsSpecial events found in the review varied and used evidence-based strategies. Screening data suggest that some special events can lead to increases in cancer screening, especially if they provide onsite screening services. However, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that special events are effective in increasing cancer screening. The heterogeneity of populations served, event activities, outcome variables assessed, and the reliance on self-report to measure screening limit conclusions. This study highlights the need for further research to determine the effectiveness of special events to increase cancer screening.

BackgroundAlthough cancer research has advanced at a rapid pace, a gap remains between what is known about how to improve cancer prevention and control (CPC) and what is implemented as best practices within health care systems and communities. The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN), with more than 10 years of dissemination and implementation research experience, aims to accelerate the uptake and use of evidence-based CPC interventions.MethodsThe collective work of the CPCRN has facilitated the analysis and categorization of research and implementation efforts according to the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation (ISF), providing a useful heuristic for bridging the gap between prevention research and practice. The ISF authors have called for examples of its application as input to help refine the model.ResultsWe provide examples of how the collaborative activities supported by the CPCRN, using community-engaged processes, accelerated the synthesis and translation of evidence, built both general and innovation-specific capacity, and worked with delivery systems to advance cancer control research and practice.ConclusionsThe work of the CPCRN has provided real-world examples of the application of the ISF and demonstrated that synthesizing and translating evidence can increase the potential that evidence-based CPC programs will be used and that capacity building for both the support system and the delivery system is crucial for the successful implementation and maintenance of evidence-based cancer control.ImpactAdoption and implementation of CPC can be enhanced by better understanding ISF systems and intervening to improve them.

Men aged 27 to 45 are eligible for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination as of 2019, yet relatively little is known about whether they have received or intend to receive it. We conducted a cross-sectional, online survey among fathers aged 27 to 45 between March and April 2022, to assess associations between HPV vaccination awareness, behaviors, intentions, and psychosocial constructs from the Health Belief Model. We examined the characteristics of those who had (a) heard of the HPV vaccine, (b) already received ≥ 1 dose, and (c) intentions for future vaccination among those who had never been vaccinated. Among 400 men who completed the survey, 32% were not aware of the HPV vaccine. Among those who were aware, 41% had received ≥ 1 dose. Sixty-three percent of unvaccinated men reported that they intended to get vaccinated in the future. Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed that age and race/ethnicity were associated with having been vaccinated previously. Among the unvaccinated, multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed that those with a higher perceived risk of HPV-associated cancer had 3.73 greater odds of reporting they would seek vaccination compared to those with lower perceived risk (95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.28, 12.3]). We did not find perceived benefits, barriers, or decision self-efficacy to be related to future vaccine intentions. Since recommendations for this group include shared clinical decision-making, public health efforts should focus on raising awareness of vaccine eligibility, emphasizing risk factors for HPV-associated cancers so that individuals have an accurate perception of risk, and encouraging conversation between men and their providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundPhysical activity has a strong positive impact on both physical and mental health, and public health interventions often encourage walking as a means to promote physical activity. Social connectivity, such as that among spouses, families, friends, and colleagues, highly influences physical activity. Although technology-based interventions have some influence on human behavior, they have not been fully implemented and evaluated for their influence on walking through social connectivity. ObjectiveWe aimed to pilot-test the organization of neighborhood walking clubs and use of a mobile app (Runkeeper) to encourage social connectedness and neighborhood cohesion, as well as to increase physical activity. MethodsWe used a convenience sampling method to recruit 46 adults from an urban location in Greater Boston, Massachusetts. We assigned participants to teams based on their geographic location and neighborhood and required them to use the app (Runkeeper). Participants completed 2 self-administered web-based surveys before and after the intervention period. The surveys included standard measures to evaluate physical activity, social connectedness, perceived social support, and neighborhood cohesion (Buckner Neighborhood Cohesion Scale) before and after the intervention. Following the intervention, we randomly selected 14 participants to participate in postintervention, in-depth phone interviews to gain an understanding of their experiences. ResultsThis study was approved by the institutional review board in June 2018 and funded in January 2018. Recruitment started in May 2019 and lasted for 2 months. Data were collected from July 2019 to January 2020. In this study, Runkeeper was of limited feasibility as an app for measuring physical activity or promoting social connectedness. Data from the app recorded sparse and uneven walking behaviors among the participants. Qualitative interviews revealed that users experienced difficulties in using the settings and features of the app. In the questionnaire, there was no change between pre-post assessments in walking minutes (b=−.79; 95% CI −4.0 to 2.4; P=.63) or miles (b=−.07; 95% CI −0.15 to 0.01; P=.09). We observed a pre-post increase in social connectedness and a decrease in neighborhood cohesion. Both quantitative and qualitative results indicated that the psychosocial aspects of walking motivated the participants and helped them relieve stress. Interview results showed that participants felt a greater virtual connection in their assigned groups and enhanced connections with friends and family members. ConclusionsOur study found that Runkeeper created a virtual connection among walking group members and its data sharing and ranking motivated walking. Participants felt that walking improved their mental health, helped to relieve stress, and made them feel more connected with friends or family members. In future studies, it will be important to use an app that integrates with a wearable physical activity device. There is also a need to develop and test intervention components that might be more effective in fostering neighborhood cohesion.

The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a pilot mindfulness program for student athletes by assessing mental health, mindfulness ability, and perceived stress before and after the intervention. The mindfulness program was adapted from a program developed at the University of Southern California. The four-session intervention taught the basics of mindfulness, self-care skills, and guided meditations. Participants completed surveys before and after the intervention. Mindfulness ability was assessed with the Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale, mental health was assessed with a modified Short Form Health Survey, and stress was assessed with the Perceived Stress Scale. After the intervention, participants reported improvement in mindfulness ability, t(28) = −2.61, p =.014, mental health, t(28) = −2.87, p =.008, and a trending improvement in perceived stress, t(28) = 1.86, p =.073. A short mindfulness program may be effective for improving mental health and mindfulness ability in collegiate student athletes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many breast cancer outreach programs assume that dissemination of information through social networks and provision of social support will promote screening. The authors prospectively examined the relationship between social network characteristics and adherence to screening guidelines. Method: Employed women age 40 years and older completed baseline and 2-year follow-up assessments (N = 1,475) as part of an intervention trial. The authors modeled screening adherence at follow-up as a function of social network characteristics at baseline. Results: Baseline adherence explained most of the variation in adherence at follow-up. For women age 40 to 51 years, having a mammogram at follow-up was predicted by encouragement by family and/or friends and subjective norms at baseline (odds ratio = 2.20 and 1.18, respectively). For women age 52 years and older, the perception that screening was normative was related to adherence at follow-up (odds ratio = 1.46). Conclusions: Previous mammography use is strongly predictive of future screening. Social network characteristics have a modest impact on screening. Outreach efforts should focus on those who have previously underutilized mammography. (Contains 5 tables.)