Search

Electronic cigarette use has become epidemic among American youth. Little is known about the extent of use among d/Deaf and hard of hearing (d/Dhh) youth or prevention programming for this population. In a qualitative study with d/Dhh youth and school staff and administrators serving them, four focus groups were conducted with middle school students (n = 19) and four with high school students (n = 15) to assess their knowledge of and experiences with e-cigarettes and other tobacco products and exposure to prevention programming. Key informant interviews were conducted with seven school staff and administrators. Considerable awareness of and curiosity about e-cigarettes were found, and many misconceptions about vaping. Besides industry marketing, e-cigarette exposure occurred through interactions with older students, alumni, and hearing students. Most participants reported no experience with e-cigarette prevention programming, a finding that highlights the need for tailored programming for d/Dhh students.

When physicians have a disability or chronic condition, they can offer deeper insight and ability into managing the needs of patients with similar conditions. Yet an alarming 2021 survey found that only 40.7% of physicians feel confident that they provide the same level of care to people with disabilities (PWD) as those without. This may contribute to troubling health care disparities for the over 61 million Americans living with disabilities. In a recent report, The American Medical Association (AMA) recognized that increased concordance between patients and physicians with disabilities is key to resolving health care inequities for PWD, yet although 1 in 5 patients reports a disability, only 1 in 33 physicians identifies as such. This is because prospective medical students with disabilities face many barriers in medical education and practice. We call for specific changes to medical school admission processes and curricula to promote a more just and diverse workforce which includes more physicians with disabilities. Key words: disability; health care disparity; education/curriculum: continuing medical education; medical education; ableism; technical standards; accommodation; universal design, 'NOTHING ABOUT US WITHOUT US' Over 61 million Americans with disabilities face troubling health care disparities. (1) The landmark Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 requires that health care [...]

PURPOSE Hearing loss (HL) is underdiagnosed and often unaddressed. A recent study of screening for HL using an electronic prompt showed efficacy in increasing appropriate referrals for subsequent testing. We build on the results of this study using a qualitative lens to explore implementation processes through the perspectives of family medicine clinicians. METHODS We collected clinic observations and semistructured interviews of family medicine clinicians and residents who interacted with the HL prompt. All data were analyzed using thematic, framework, and mixed methods integration strategies. RESULTS We interviewed 27 clinicians and conducted 10 observations. Thematic analysis resulted in 6 themes: (1) the prompt was overwhelmingly viewed as easy, simple to use, accurate; (2) clinicians considered prompt as an effective way to increase awareness and conversations with patients about HL; (3) clinician and staff buy-in played a vital role in implementation; (4) clinicians prioritized prompt during annual visits; (5) medical assistant involvement in prompt workflow varied by health system, clinic, and clinician; (6) prompt resulted in more conversations about HL, but uncertain impact on patient outcomes. Themes are presented alongside constructs of normalization process theory and intervention outcomes. CONCLUSION Integration of a HL screening prompt into clinical practice varied by clinician buy-in and beliefs about the impact on patient outcomes, involvement of medical assistants, and prioritization during clinical visits. Further research is needed to understand how to leverage clinician and staff buy-in and whether implementation of a new clinical prompt has sustained impact on HL screening and patient outcomes. Key words: hearing loss; deaf health; deaf and hard of hearing; primary care; hearing loss screening, INTRODUCTION Over 50 million adults aged 50 years and older in the United States have hearing loss (HL). (1) Hearing loss can negatively impact physical and mental health outcomes, (2-7) [...]

Introduction: To reduce COVID-19 exposure risk, virtual visits became widely adopted as a common form of healthcare delivery for the general population. It is unknown how this affected the deaf population, a sociolinguistic minority group that continues to face communication and healthcare barriers. The survey's objective was to describe the deaf participants' experiences with telehealth visits. Methods: A 28-item online survey, available in American Sign Language and English, was developed and disseminated between November 2020 and January 2021. Ninety-nine deaf participants responded. Descriptive statistics were performed to assess the participant's virtual health care use, experiences, and communication approaches. Results: Seventy-five percent of respondents used telehealth at least once in the past 12 months (n = 74; age = 37.6 ± 14.5 years). Of those who used telehealth, nearly two-thirds experienced communication challenges (65.3%; n = 49). Half of the participants reported having to connect via a video relay service that employs interpreters who maintain general certification instead of a remote interpreter with specialized health care interpreting certifications for video visits with their health care providers (n = 37) and a third of participants reported needing to use their residual hearing to communicate with their providers (n = 25). Conclusion: Standard protocols for health care systems and providers are needed to minimize the burden of access on deaf patients and ensure virtual visits are equitable. It is recommended these visits be offered on Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant platforms and include multi-way video to allow for the inclusion of remote medical interpreters and/or real-time captionists to ensure effective communication between the provider and the deaf patient occurs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE Hearing loss, the second most common disability in the United States, is under-diagnosed and under-treated. Identifying it in early stages could prevent its known substantial adverse outcomes. METHODS A multiple baseline design was implemented to assess a screening paradigm for identifying and referring patients aged [greater than or equal to] 55 years with hearing loss at 10 family medicine clinics in 2 health systems. Patients completed a consent form and the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHI). An electronic alert prompted clinicians to screen for hearing loss during visits. RESULTS The 14,877 eligible patients during the study period had 36,701 encounters. Referral rates in the family medicine clinics increased from a baseline rate of 3.2% to 14.4% in 1 health system and from a baseline rate of 0.7% to 4.7% in the other. A general medicine comparison group showed referral rate increase from the 3.0% baseline rate to 3.3%. Of the 5,883 study patients who completed the HHI 25.2% (n = 1,484) had HHI scores suggestive of hearing loss; those patients had higher referral rates, 28% vs 9.2% (P CONCLUSION An electronic alert used to remind clinicians to ask patients aged [greater than or equal to] 55 years about hearing loss significantly increased audiology referrals for at-risk patients. Audiologic and audiogram data support the effectiveness of the prompt. Clinicians should consider adopting this method to identify patients with hearing loss to reduce its known and adverse sequelae., INTRODUCTION Hearing loss affects over 30% of those aged >55 years, with over one-half suffering morbidity that includes reduced quality of life. (1-14) Untreated hearing loss is a major risk [...]

Objective(s): Deaf American Sign Language (ASL) users are subject to health care disparities resulting from communication and language barriers. Currently, few resources on advance care planning and end-of-life care exist in ASL. This study explores Deaf ASL users' perceptions and experiences with end-of-life care and advance care planning. Methods: Semi-structured 1:1 interviews with Deaf signers were translated, and transcribed into English by a bilingual researcher. Investigators inductively coded transcripts and identified themes of barriers, facilitators, knowledge, and sources of information regarding end-of-life care. Participants' knowledge of advance care planning and completion of advance care planning documents were evaluated using a brief assessment. Results: Eleven Deaf ASL users participated in the study with two deaf interviewers. Participants reported barriers to end-of-life care including poor provider communication, inaccessible sources, and inadequate provision of accommodations, leading to patient distrust. Participants' understanding of advance care planning was facilitated by accessible forms of communication and their social networks, such as family, friends, and Deaf peers. Participants primarily gained information on end-of-life care from first-hand familial experience, peers, and media. Participants' mean advance care planning knowledge was 4.6 out of 15 (SD = 2.6). Conclusions: Deaf ASL users face scarce accessible resources around end-of-life care, lowering their ability to understand and proceed with advance care planning. Implementation of ASL accessible advance care planning educational tools in health care settings is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Deaf American Sign Language (ASL) users comprise a linguistic and cultural minority group that is understudied and underserved in health education and health care research. We examined differences in health risk behaviors, concerns, and access to health care among Deaf ASL users and hearing English speakers living in Florida. Methods: We applied community-engaged research methods to develop and administer the first linguistically accessible and contextually tailored community health needs assessment to Deaf ASL users living in Florida. Deaf ASL users (n = 92) were recruited during a 3-month period in summer 2018 and compared with a subset of data on hearing English speakers from the 2018 Florida Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (n = 12 589). We explored prevalence and adjusted odds of health behavior, including substance use and health care use. Results: Mental health was the top health concern among Deaf participants; 15.5% of participants screened as likely having a depressive disorder. Deaf people were 1.8 times more likely than hearing people to engage in binge drinking during the past month. In addition, 37.2% of participants reported being denied an interpreter in a medical facility in the past 12 months. Conclusion: This study highlights the need to work with Deaf ASL users to develop context-specific health education and health promotion activities tailored to their linguistic and cultural needs and ensure that they receive accessible health care and health education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]