Search

Background: One in four South Carolinians lives in a county along a nearly 200-mile stretch of Interstate 95 (I-95). Stretching from North Carolina to Georgia, this region is among the most rural, economically depressed, and racially/ethnically diverse in the state. Research is needed to identify social factors contributing to adverse health outcomes along the I-95 corridor, guide interventions, and establish a baseline for measuring progress. This study assessed social determinants of health in counties in South Carolina's I-95 corridor relative to the rest of the state. Method: Data for South Carolina's 46 counties were extracted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Minority Health Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), which grouped 34 census variables into six themes: socioeconomic status, household composition and disability, minority status and language, housing type and transportation, health care infrastructure, and medical vulnerability. Each theme was ranked from 0 (least vulnerable) to 1 (most vulnerable). Measures between regions were compared using the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test. Results: Compared with counties outside the I-95 corridor (n = 29), counties in the corridor (n = 17) scored higher on socioeconomic status vulnerability (.67 and.82, respectively) and medical vulnerability (.65 and.79, respectively). No statistically significant differences were found across other themes. Conclusion: Identifying social determinants of health in South Carolina's I-95 corridor is a crucial first step toward alleviating health disparities in this region. Interventions and policies should be developed in collaboration with local stakeholders to address distal social factors that create and reinforce health disparities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective was to estimate race-specific proportions of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) attributable to overweight and obesity in South Carolina. South Carolina birth certificate and hospital discharge data were obtained from 2004 to 2006. Women who did not have type 2 diabetes mellitus before pregnancy were classified with GDM if a diagnosis was reported in at least one data source. Relative risks (RR) and 95 % confidence intervals were calculated using the log-binomial model. The modified Mokdad equation was used to calculate population attributable fractions for overweight body mass index (BMI: 25.0-29.9 kg/[m.sup.2]), obese (30.0-34.9 kg/[m.sup.2]), and extremely obese ([greater than or equal to] 35 kg/[m.sup.2]) women after adjusting for age, gestational weight gain, education, marital status, parity, tobacco use, pre-pregnancy hypertension, and pregnancy hypertension. Overall, the adjusted RR of GDM was 1.6, 2.3, and 2.9 times higher among the overweight, obese, and extremely obese women compared to normal weight women in South Carolina. RR of GDM for extremely obese women was higher among White (3.1) and Hispanic (3.4) women than that for Black women (2.6). The fraction of GDM cases attributable to extreme obesity was 14.0 % among White, 18.1 % among Black, and 9.6 % among Hispanic women. The fraction of GDM cases attributable to obesity was about 12 % for all racial groups. Being overweight (BMI: 25.0-29.9) explained 8.8, 7.8, and 14.4 % of GDM cases among White, Black, and Hispanic women, respectively. Results indicate a significantly increased risk of GDM among overweight, obese, and extremely obese women. The strength of the association and the proportion of GDM cases explained by excessive weight categories vary by racial/ethnic group. Keywords Health disparity * Racial difference * Population attributable fraction * Epidemiology, Introduction Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is the recognition of glucose intolerance during pregnancy among women without a previous diagnosis of diabetes [1]. The prevalence of GDM could range between 1 [...]

Objective To determine whether, given a limited budget, a state's low-income uninsured population would have greater benefit from a colorectal cancer ( CRC) screening program using colonoscopy or fecal immunochemical testing ( FIT). Data Sources/Study Setting South Carolina's low-income, uninsured population. Study Design Comparative effectiveness analysis using microsimulation modeling to estimate the number of individuals screened, CRC cases prevented, CRC deaths prevented, and life-years gained from a screening program using colonoscopy versus a program using annual FIT in South Carolina's low-income, uninsured population. This analysis assumed an annual budget of $1 million and a budget availability of 2 years as a base case. Principal Findings The annual FIT screening program resulted in nearly eight times more individuals being screened, and more important, approximately four times as many CRC deaths prevented and life-years gained than the colonoscopy screening program. Our results were robust for assumptions concerning economic perspective and the target population, and they may therefore be generalized to other states and populations. Conclusions A FIT screening program will prevent more CRC deaths than a colonoscopy-based program when a state's budget for CRC screening supports screening of only a fraction of the target population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recognizing that relatively easily detected precancerous lesions precede many cancers, there is a need to investigate the effectiveness of early interventions on the reduction of incidence rates in well-designed large randomized control trials. If early detection can reduce mortality rates of OPCA, evaluation of the capacity of dentists and physicians to screen or detect precancerous lesions related to oral cancers may have merit. Presently, there is a paucity of research regarding ecological barriers in the healthcare system, and improving access to adequate dental and medical care among the rural minority population in South Carolina certainly deserves emphasis. Additional research, specific to South Carolina, which includes comprehensive assessment of multiple social, behavioral, and biological factors, is needed. Interdisciplinary collaboration will be particularly important to dissect key factors contributing to the racial disparities observed in South Carolina. These differences should be taken into account while recommending and implementing public health strategies for the control of these cancers.

Because of its high fatality rate and our inability to detect esophageal disease early in its development, esophageal cancer represents a significant medical and public health challenge. The mortality statistics underline the importance of focusing on prevention of these conditions as a matter of state and national public health priority. Unfortunately, the measures needed for primary prevention of these conditions do not seem as clear-cut for populations at highest risk of this disease (i.e., AAs) as for the populations represented in most epidemiologic studies. Our incomplete knowledge about the etiology of esophageal cancer, especially squamous cell carcinomas in AAs and adenocarcinomas in EAs, preclude developing and disseminating effective preventive measures. Clearly, the prevention and control of esophageal cancers represent a different paradigm compared to other tobacco-related cancers of the upper aerodigestive tract. Data from a number of studies indicate that disparities exist in esophageal cancer incidence between racial groups and between geographical locations within South Carolina, and that these disparities are continuing to increase. The reasons for these disparities are only beginning to receive attention. They probably will be found to be complex and multifaceted. A combination of genetic factors, environmental influences (e.g., those related to diet), and the deleterious changes associated with smoking and alcohol consumption are the obvious parameters that should be the focus of initial epidemiologic data collection and assessment. Issues around dietary assessment, a major area of expertise among researchers in South Carolina, must be addressed in these studies. Much remains to be done for us to understand how research, health care, and educational efforts in the state of South Carolina might influence the detection, care, treatment, and, ultimately, reduction in esophageal cancer incidence and mortality rates. An important step in the process will be to coordinate data-collection efforts between clinicians, researchers, and concerned community members in South Carolina. This would allow comprehensive background profiles of patients to be collected for studies ranging from those focusing on the basic biology of the disease and its etiology to those aimed at understanding the role of health services and the effect of policy. In order to design and implement the full range of research needed to understand what we can do to prevent and control esophageal cancer in our state, it is our intention to engage all of the stakeholders within South Carolina; including community members, cancer survivors, cancer care providers, researchers, and individuals at high risk of esophageal cancer. With its large proportion of rural, socioeconomically deprived African Americans, what is learned about esophageal cancer in South Carolina will have national, and perhaps international, relevance.

A discrepancy exists between mortality and incidence rates between African-American and European-American women in South Carolina. The relationship between tumor grade and the estrogen/ progesterone receptor status is different in African-American and European-American women. African-American women with breast cancer should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials, with the goal of identifying biological factors that might facilitate the detection of tumors at an earlier stage and the development of more effective therapies. The most important of our goals is to design studies to reduce the incidence of the disease and interventions to improve survival and quality of life. The importance of participation in research cannot be overstated. Reproductive factors such as early pregnancy and multiple pregnancies are strongly related to breast cancer risk, however, promotion of these factors as a "prevention strategy," clearly does not lead to cogent, comprehensive public health messages. Data from ecological and migrant studies point clearly to other factors that may be important such as diet. Additional research around primary prevention strategies is needed. In addition, yearly mammograms (secondary prevention) are recommended for women over 50 years old or those with relatives who have developed breast cancer. The Best Chance Network, as a provider of screenings to low-income, uninsured women, has helped to narrow the racial gap in screening that otherwise might exist (see Figures 3 and 4) to a large extent. The determination for timing of surgery after diagnosis needs additional consideration. For example, factors such as effective screening in younger women, timing of screening and surgery in relationship to the ovulatory cycle, and season of screening and surgery may have a great impact on outcomes and may offer some insight into the process of carcinogenesis and therapeutic efficacy. Research into this area is so novel that the impact on possible ethnic disparities is completely unknown. The South Carolina Cancer Disparities Community Network (SCCDCN) has identified the following areas as potential research foci: Identification of small media interventions as an effective strategy to motivate targeted populations, especially those least likely to seek screening for breast cancer and those least likely to participate in research programs (African-Americans). Utilization of breast cancer survivors, self-identified as community natural helpers, can share their experiences with their church congregation. A replication of such a program in South Carolina has great potential because of the strong presence of the church, especially in rural parts of the state. Programs that closely integrate religion with screening women for breast cancer are promising in this state. Development of a mammography registry whereby information on all mammography procedures would be collected within a single database system (much like a central cancer registry). This would aid in identifying population groups that could be targeted for special programs and in the examination and exploration of the most appropriate modalities of detection. Such a resource could also be a useful tool to encourage screening. Thus, this focus area has the potential to benefit epidemiologic and health promotion research on many different levels. Additional breast cancer screening methods should not be overlooked as a potential research focus. Mammography is not the only valid screening method for breast cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging has shown some promise for screening among women with a genetic predisposition for cancer. Another promising avenue is thermography. Because detection rates may depend on age, ethnicity, and breast mammographic characteristics, women for whom regular screening methods do not detect their cancers (e.g. older age, African-American ethnicity, dense breasts) must be identified and other screening methods promoted within these populations. The above-mentioned mammography registry would support this type of research.