Search

At-home COVID-19 testing offers convenience and safety advantages. We evaluated at-home testing in Black and Latino communities through an intervention comparing community-based organization (CBO) and health care organization (HCO) outreach. From May through December 2021, 1100 participants were recruited, 94% through CBOs. The odds of COVID-19 test requests and completions were significantly higher in the HCO arm. The results showed disparities in test requests and completions related to age, race, language, insurance, comorbidities, and pandemic-related challenges. Despite the popularity of at-home testing, barriers exist in underresourced communities. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S9):S918–S922. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306989 )

Purpose Belize has among the highest cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates of Latin American and Caribbean countries. This study evaluates the perspectives of key stakeholders for cervical cancer screening in Belize and identifies the barriers and facilitators for providing equitable access to prevention services. Methods Semi-structured interviews discussing cervical cancer screening were conducted with key stakeholders across the six districts of Belize in 2018. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically; themes were organized by levels of the social-ecological model. Results We conducted 47 interviews with health care providers (45%), administrators (17%), government officials (25%), and other stakeholders (13%). Majority (78%) of interviews were from the public sector. Perceived barriers to cervical cancer screening were identified across multiple levels: (1) Individual Patient: potential delays in Pap smear results and fear of a cancer diagnosis; (2) Provider: competing clinician responsibilities; (3) Organizational: insufficient space and training; (4) Community: reduced accessibility in rural areas; and (5) Policy: equipment and staffing budget limitations. The main facilitators we identified included the following: (1) at the Community level: resource-sharing between public and private sectors and dedicated rural outreach personnel; (2) at the Policy level: free public screening services and the establishment of population-based screening. Conclusion Despite free, publicly available cervical cancer screening in Belize, complex barriers affect access and completion of management when abnormal screening tests are identified. Provider workload, education outreach, and additional funding for training and facilities are potential areas for strengthening this program and increasing detection and management for cervical cancer control.

Purpose: This study examined factors associated with healthcare providers’ (HCPs’) recommendation of HPV vaccination for younger and older adolescents. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study, using web-based survey of HCPs in New Jersey in 2018. The study outcome was a dichotomous measure of HCPs’ recommendation of the HPV vaccine. The study predictors included practice characteristics (i.e., proportions of race/ethnicity, age groups, insurance type, and VFC recipients) and HCP’s characteristics (i.e., specialty and perceived knowledge, effectiveness, concerns, parent- and system-related barriers, and facilitators). Data analysis included logistic regression models using separate blocks for practice and provider characteristics, followed by a backward stepwise approach to determine the surviving predictors. Results: Respondents (N=390) included physicians (75%) and nurse practitioners (25%), specialized in pediatrics (62%), family medicine (20%), and women’s health (18%). The HCPs’ recommendation rates for HPV vaccination were 56% for younger adolescents (11–13 years old) and 73% for older adolescents (14–17 years old). For younger adolescents, the recommendation rates were significantly higher in practices with higher proportions of younger adolescent, Black and Hispanic patients; among pediatric providers; and with HCPs’ higher levels of knowledge and lower levels of concern about the vaccine. For older adolescents, the rates were significantly higher in practices with higher proportions patients who are Hispanic, privately insured, and VFC recipients; among pediatric providers; and with HCPs’ higher levels of knowledge and lower levels of concern about the vaccine as well as higher levels of facilitators for recommending the HPV vaccine. Conclusions: Interventions targeting HCPs need to focus on improving their knowledge regarding the vaccine, reduce their concerns around its safety, and utilize facilitators strategies, particularly among non-pediatric providers.

Introduction Existing research on media examining the news content related to Tobacco 21 (T21) predate the adoption of most T21 laws. This study examined the discussion of T21 laws in top-circulating print media sources in the United States between 2012 and 2020. Aims and Methods Systematic database searches using Access World News and Factiva identified T21-related news articles appearing in the top daily circulating newspapers in each state between January 2012 and December 2020 (n = 586 articles). Content analyses documented prevalence, types of articles and context related to framing of arguments for or against T21 laws. Results Newspaper coverage of T21 was highest in 2019 (42.8% of articles). The majority were news or features (75.4%) followed by editorials or opinions (24.6%) which largely supported T21. Most articles focused on state or local T21 action. Coverage of federal T21 increased in 2019. The most common argument supporting T21 included reducing youth tobacco prevalence (64.8%) while the most frequent objection was freedom infringement (25.1%). Tobacco and vape industries began voicing support for T21 in 2019. Conclusions News coverage of state-level T21 in the United States began to increase in 2015 and peaked in 2019 with enactment of federal T21, a newsworthy event. As states adopt and amend T21 laws to align with federal law, advocates can use media to help shape the narrative and encourage strong T21 policies. Implications This study described the volume and content of T21 print media coverage from 2012 to 2020, including common arguments used to support and oppose T21. Arguments in support of T21 included reducing youth tobacco use, particularly use of e-cigarettes, and related health effects while arguments against T21 focused on individual rights. Support for T21 reached a tipping point in 2019, including the tobacco industry’s reversal in opposing such laws. States can and should continue to improve existing T21 laws and policies and increase public awareness about critical policy components such as inspection procedures and penalties.

PURPOSE Belize has one of the highest cervical cancer burdens among Latin American and Caribbean countries, despite the implementation of national policies to increase access to prevention and treatment services. This study evaluates the policies, infrastructure, and workforce of the cervical cancer management system in Belize to inform capacity building efforts. METHODS In 2018, health facility assessments were conducted across all six districts of Belize at the national pathology facility and 12 public facilities identified as critical to cervical cancer control. Human and infrastructure resource availability and existing policies related to cervical cancer screening and treatment services were assessed through a structured instrument. RESULTS The public cervical cancer screening workforce in Belize consists of 75 primary care nurses and physicians—one per 1,076 screening-eligible women, with 44% conducting rural outreach. All districts have at least one screening facility, but 50% perform screening services only once per week. Colposcopy and loop electrical excision procedures are available in three and four districts, respectively; radical hysterectomy and chemotherapy are available in two districts; and radiation therapy is unavailable. Of essential pathology equipment, 38.5% were present and functional, 23% were present but nonfunctional, and 38.5% were unavailable. Additionally, 35% of supplies were unavailable at the time of assessment, and 75% were unavailable at least once in the 12 months before assessment. CONCLUSION Public-sector cervical cancer management services differ among districts of Belize, with tertiary service availability concentrated in the largest district. Screening, outreach, and pathology are limited mostly by resource availability. This study characterizes the current capacity of services in Belize and pinpoints health system components for future investment and capacity-building efforts.

In this commentary, we discuss opportunities to optimize cancer care delivery in the next decade building from evidence and advancements in the conceptualization and implementation of multi-level translational behavioral interventions. We summarize critical issues and discoveries describing new directions for translational behavioral research in the coming decade based on the promise of the accelerated application of this evidence within learning health systems. To illustrate these advances, we discuss cancer prevention, risk reduction (particularly precision prevention and early detection), and cancer treatment and survivorship (particularly risk- and need-stratified comprehensive care) and propose opportunities to equitably improve outcomes while addressing clinician shortages and cross-system coordination. We also discuss the impacts of COVID-19 and potential advances of scientific knowledge in the context of existing evidence, the need for adaptation, and potential areas of innovation to meet the needs of converging crises (e.g., fragmented care, workforce shortages, ongoing pandemic) in cancer health care delivery. Finally, we discuss new areas for exploration by applying key lessons gleaned from implementation efforts guided by advances in behavioral health.

This cross-sectional study assesses retailer compliance with the Tobacco 21 law in New Jersey during 2019 and 2020.

Over the last decade, primary care clinics in the United States have responded both to national policies encouraging clinics to support substance use disorders (SUD) service expansion and to regulations aiming to curb the opioid epidemic.To characterize approaches to SUD service expansion in primary care clinics with national reputations as workforce innovators.Comparative case studies were conducted to characterize different approaches among 12 primary care clinics purposively and iteratively recruited from a national registry of workforce innovators. Observational field notes and qualitative interviews from site visits were coded and analysed to identify and characterize clinic attributes.Codes describing clinic SUD expansion approaches emerged from our analysis. Clinics were characterized as: avoidant (n = 3), contemplative (n = 5) and responsive (n = 4). Avoidant clinics were resistant to planning SUD service expansion; had no or few on-site behavioural health staff; and lacked on-site medication treatment (previously termed medication-assisted therapy) waivered providers. Contemplative clinics were planning or had partially implemented SUD services; members expressed uncertainties about expansion; had co-located behavioural healthcare providers, but no on-site medication treatment waivered and prescribing providers. Responsive clinics had fully implemented SUD; members used non-judgmental language about SUD services; had both co-located SUD behavioural health staff trained in SUD service provision and waivered medication treatment physicians and/or a coordinated referral pathway.Efforts to support SUD service expansion should tailor implementation supports based on specific clinic training and capacity building needs. Future work should inform the adaption of evidence-based practices that are responsive to resource constraints to optimize SUD treatment access.Primary care clinics in the US have been encouraged to expand addiction services to increase treatment access and respond to the opioid epidemic. This study uses structured observations and depth interviews to assess and compare how primary care clinics with innovative workforces have responded to the growing need for substance use disorder treatment. Each of the clinics studied represents a ‘case.’ We systematically compared cases to understand how and if addiction services were expanded. Twelve clinic ‘cases’ were coded and characterized based on a continuum of receptivity ranging from avoidant (i.e., resistant), contemplative (i.e., organization members plan to implement change) and responsive (i.e. expansions implemented). Our analysis characterized three clinics as avoidant to expanding addiction services reporting no plans to respond to calls to expand addiction services. Five clinics were characterized as contemplative, meaning they recognized the need but still had reservations and concerns about the expansion. Four clinics were characterized as responsive to addiction service expansion and had several organizational-wide strategies to assess, intervene and treat patients with addictions. Despite national and state-based policies to entice clinics to expand addiction services there was a diversity of approaches observed in clinics. Avoidant and contemplative clinics may need implementation support to build capacity for this type of delivery expansion.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of adding a video and text messages to Reach Out and Read (ROR) on parent-reported literacy activities compared to the standard version. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a mixed methods hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation randomized trial in a community health center that serves low-income Latino families. We assessed shared reading frequency and the StimQ Reading subscale, at enrollment and 6-month follow up and the StimQ Parent Verbal Responsivity subscale, Parent Reading Belief Inventory, and Survey of Wellbeing of Young Children-Milestones at follow up. We randomized 160 parent-child dyads to ROR or ROR plus video and text messages (enhanced ROR). We collected process data on ROR and engagement with texts. We interviewed 15 enhanced ROR participants. We analyzed quantitative data using regression and qualitative data using immersion/crystallization. RESULTS: 137 parent-child dyads completed the study (87% Latino, mean child age 9 months). We found differences in the StimQ Reading subscale (B=0.32; p=0.034) and marginal differences in attitudes about reading favoring enhanced ROR. Between-group differences for shared reading frequency, verbal responsivity, and developmental delay were not significant. Qualitative themes provided insight into the enhanced ROR including how it encouraged parents, remaining barriers like competing priorities and lack of social support, and unanticipated benefits (i.e., parent appreciation for attention on their families’ wellbeing). CONCLUSIONS: A video and text message enhancement to ROR resulted in modest improvements in the home literacy environment over ROR alone. Additional strategies are needed to overcome potent barriers faced by low-income families. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03242850

Physical and psychosocial effects of oral cancer result in long-term self-management needs. Little attention has been paid to survivors' self-efficacy in managing their care. Study goals were to characterise self-care self-efficacy and evaluate socio-demographics, disease, attitudinal factors and psychological correlates of self-efficacy and engagement in head and neck self-exams.Two hundred thirty-two oral cancer survivors completed measures of socio-demographics, self-care self-efficacy, head and neck self-exams and attitudinal and psychological measures. Descriptive statistics characterised self-efficacy. Hierarchical regressions evaluated predictors of self-efficacy.Survivors felt moderately confident in the ability to manage self-care (M = 4.04, SD = 0.75). Survivors with more comorbidities (β = -0.125), less preparedness (β = 0.241), greater information (β = -0.191), greater support needs (β = -0.224) and higher depression (β = -0.291) reported significantly lower self-efficacy. Head and neck self-exam engagement (44% past month) was relatively low. Higher preparedness (OR = 2.075) and self-exam self-efficacy (OR = 2.606) were associated with more engagement in self-exams.Many survivors report low confidence in their ability to engage in important self-care practices. Addressing unmet information and support needs, reducing depressive symptoms and providing skill training and support may boost confidence in managing self-care and optimise regular self-exams.

Medical debt has grown dramatically over the past few decades. While cancer and diabetes are known to be associated with medical debt, little is known about the impact of other medical conditions and health behaviors on medical debt. We analyzed cross-sectional data on 9174 households - spanning lower-income, middle-income, and higher-income based on the Census poverty threshold - participating in the 2019 wave of the nationally representative United States Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID). The outcomes were presence of any medical debt and presence of medical debt≥ $2000. Respondents reported on medical conditions (diabetes, cancer, heart disease, chronic lung disease, asthma, arthritis, anxiety disorders, mood disorders) and on health behaviors (smoking, heavy drinking). Medical debt was observed in lower-income households with heart disease (OR = 2.64, p-value = 0.006) and anxiety disorders (OR = 2.16, p-value = 0.02); middle-income households with chronic lung disease (OR = 1.73, p-value = 0.03) and mood disorders (OR = 1.53, p-value = 0.04); and higher-income households with a current smoker (OR = 2.99, p-value0.001). Additionally, medical debt ≥$2000 was observed in lower-income households with asthma (OR = 2.16, p-value = 0.009) and a current smoker (OR = 1.62, p-value = 0.04); middle income households with hypertension (OR = 1.65, p-value = 0.05). These novel findings suggest that the harms of medical debt extend beyond cancer, diabetes and beyond lower-income households. There is an urgent need for policy and health services interventions to address medical debt in a wider range of disease contexts than heretofore envisioned. Intervention development would benefit from novel conceptual frameworks on the causal relationships between health behaviors, health conditions, and medical debt that center social-ecological influences on all three of these domains.

Background: The American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Survivorship Committee established a task force to determine which survivorship care services were being denied by public and private payers for coverage and reimbursement. Methods: A quantitative survey instrument was developed to determine the clinical practice-reported rates of coverage denials for evidence-based cancer survivorship care services. Additionally, qualitative interviews were conducted to understand whether coverage denials were based on payer policies, cost-sharing, or prior authorization. Results: Of 122 respondents from 50 states, respondents reported that coverage denials were common (“always”, “most of the time,” or “some of the time”) for maintenance therapies, screening for new primary cancers or cancer recurrence. Respondents reported that denials in coverage for maintenance therapies were highest for immunotherapy (51.29%) and maintenance chemotherapy (48.72%). Coverage denials for new primary cancer screenings were highest for Hodgkin lymphoma survivors needing a PET/CT scan (57.69%) and breast cancer survivors at a high-risk of recurrence who needed an MRI (61.61%), respectively. More than half of survey respondents reported denials for symptom management and supportive care services. Fertility services, dental services when indicated, and mental health services were denied “always” or “most of the time” 23.1%, 22.5%, and 12.8%, respectively. Respondents reported they often had a process in place to automatically appeal denials for evidence-based services. The denial process, however, resulted in greater stress for the patient and provider. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that additional advocacy with payers is needed to ensure that reimbursement policies are consistent with evidence-based survivorship care services.

Cancer survivors are particularly vulnerable to adverse COVID-19-related outcomes, but limited data exist on perceptions about the pandemic and related experiences in this group.In a cross-sectional analysis of 494 survivors of genitourinary, breast, gynecologic, colorectal, lung, melanoma, or thyroid cancer, from a larger study of cancer survivors in New Jersey, we assessed perceptions about COVID-19 threat, impacts, and experiences using three validated instruments. Responses were coded on a 7-point Likert scale, and subscales were averaged across included items, with higher scores indicating greater perceptions of COVID-19 threat and greater impacts and experiences because of the pandemic. Multivariable linear regression models were used to determine factors associated with higher scores, with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.In general, cancer survivors reported moderate perceived COVID-19 threat (3 items, mean score = 3.71 ± 1.97), minimal COVID-19-related impacts (6 items, mean score = 2.23 ± 1.34), and COVID-19-related experiences (7 items, mean score = 2.17 ± 1.00). COVID-19 impact subscale scores varied little (mean subscale score range = 2.09 to 2.29), while COVID-19 experiences subscale scores were quite variable (mean subscale score range = 1.52 to 3.39). Asian American/Pacific Islander race, Black race, female sex, and having more cardiovascular and metabolic and other comorbidities were associated with higher scores on the perceived coronavirus threat questionnaire. Having completed the COVID-19 questionnaires earlier in the pandemic, younger age, American/Pacific Islander race, Hispanic ethnicity, and having more comorbidities were associated with higher scores on the COVID-19 impact questionnaire. Younger age, racial minority status, and having more cardiovascular and metabolic comorbidities were associated with higher scores on the COVID-19 experience questionnaire.Among cancer survivors in New Jersey-a state that experienced high rates of COVID-19 infection-sociodemographic and health-related factors (e.g., race and ethnicity, sex, and multimorbidity) correlate with greater perceptions of COVID-19 threat, impacts, and experiences.Studies are needed to examine the influence of vaccination status on COVID-19 perceptions and identify inequities in clinical outcomes due to pandemic-related disruptions to cancer care.

To identify predictors of financial hardship, operationalized as foregoing health care, making financial sacrifices, and being concerned about having inadequate financial and insurance information. Cancer survivors (n = 346) identified through the New Jersey State Cancer Registry were surveyed from August 2018 to September 2019. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. Cancer survivors with household incomes less than $50,000 annually were more likely than those earning $50,0000–$90,000 to report foregoing health care (15.8 percentage points, p

OBJECTIVES Prostate cancer (PCa) survivors report poor physical functioning alongside negative psychological outcomes as they cope with treatment side effects and practical concerns after treatment completion. This study evaluated PROGRESS, a web-based intervention designed to improve adaptive coping among PCa survivors. METHODS Localized PCa patients (N = 431) within one year of treatment completion were randomized to receive educational booklets or PROGRESS + educational booklets. Surveys completed at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-months assessed patient characteristics; functional quality of life and coping (primary outcomes); and psychosocial outcomes (e.g., self-efficacy, marital communication; secondary outcomes). Intent-to-treat and as-treated analyses were completed to assess change in outcomes from baseline to 6 months using linear mixed effects regression models. RESULTS In the intent-to-treat analyses, participants randomized to the intervention group had improved diversion coping (i.e., healthy redirection of worrying thoughts about their cancer), but more difficulties in marital communication (ps

BackgroundAudits of tobacco retail stores can identify marketing patterns as newer tobacco products are introduced in the US. Our study examined store and neighborhood correlates of availability of nicotine pouches and disposable e-cigarettes in four US sites.MethodsWe conducted standardized store audits of n=242 tobacco retailers in 2021 in different states: New Jersey, Kentucky, North Carolina, and New York. Store audits focused on availability of nicotine pouches and disposable e-cigarettes. We geocoded stores linking them with census tract demographics. We conducted unadjusted and adjusted Poisson regression of availability of each product with correlates of the proportion of Non-Hispanic White residents, households under poverty, proximity to schools, site, and store type.ResultsNicotine pouches and disposable e-cigarettes were each available in around half the stores, but availability differed across sites. In adjusted analyses, nicotine pouches were less likely to be available in each store type vs. chain convenience and more likely in stores in census tracts with more non-Hispanic White residents. In contrast, disposable e-cigarettes were more likely to be available in tobacco store/vape shops than convenience stores and less likely in non-specialty store types like groceries.ConclusionsThe availability of newer tobacco products like nicotine pouches and disposable e-cigarettes were widely available in stores across sites, but retail marketing patterns appear to differ. As these product types become subject to increased regulation as they go through the FDA pre-market authorization process, understanding changes in their retail environment is critical to inform potential policies regulating their sale and marketing.

Objective Literacy promotion is a pediatric standard of care in which clinicians provide guidance on shared reading. Latino parents are more likely to hear advice to read with children but are less likely to do so. We sought to understand literacy promotion from the perspective of Latino parents and to identify facilitators and barriers. Methods We purposively sampled Latino parents who participated in Reach Out and Read (ROR) for a qualitative, semistructured interview study. We identified themes using immersion/crystallization and achieved thematic saturation after 21 interviews. Results Two thirds of participants had less than high school education; half of whom had not completed eighth grade. The mean child age was 16.4 months. Primary facilitators of engagement were advice from a pediatrician during a clinical encounter and receipt of the ROR book. Barriers identified included: 1) parents' perceptions that their children were not developmentally ready and that their children's behavior (eg, activity) indicated they were not interested in shared reading; 2) self-perceived limited literacy and/or English proficiency; 3) parenting demands occurring in the context of poverty; and 4) continued child media use despite advice from pediatricians to choose alternate activities such as shared reading instead. Conclusions Parent-clinician relationships are central to ROR's impact but clinicians need to pay more attention to factors in a child's broader environment to strengthen literacy promotion. Specifically clinicians should emphasize skill building during the clinical encounter (eg, sharing knowledge about child development and modeling) and work collaboratively with other stakeholders to address poverty-related stressors.

We describe an iterative three-phase approach used to develop a cancer survivorship health-coaching intervention to guide self-management and follow-up care for post-treatment breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors. Informed by theory (e.g., Cognitive-Social Health Information Processing Model (C-SHIP)), relevant literature, and clinical guidelines, we engaged in a user-centered design process. In phase I, we conducted depth interviews with survivors of breast (n = 34), prostate (n = 4), and colorectal (n = 6) cancers to develop a health coaching prototype. In phase II, we utilized user-testing interviews (n = 9) to test and refine the health coaching prototype. For both phases, we used a template analysis independently coding each interview. In phase I, majority (n = 34, 81%) of survivors were positive about the utility of health coaching. Among these survivors (n = 34), the top areas of identified need were emotional support (44%), general health information (35.3%), changes in diet and exercise (29.3%), accountability and motivation (23.5%), and information about treatment effects (17.7%). The prototype was developed and user-tested and refined in phase III to address the following concerns: (1) the amount of time for calls, (2) density of reading materials, (3) clarity about health coaches' role, (4) customization. Collectively, this resulted in the development of the Extended Cancer Educational for Long-Term Cancer Survivors health-coaching (EXCELSHC) program, which represents the first cancer survivorship follow-up program to support follow-up care designed-for-dissemination in primary care settings. EXCELSHC is being tested in a clinical efficacy trial. Future research will focus on program refinement and testing for effectiveness in primary care.

The recent COVID-19 pandemic has affected the world and has the potential to disproportionately affect and disrupt the lives of cancer survivors, including those currently in treatment, those who have completed treatment, and those who are now living cancer-free. There are currently over 17 million cancer survivors in the USA [1] and millions more around the world [2, 3]. Much has been published over the past several decades about the late and long-term effects of cancer treatment, alongside both the challenges and potential solutions to help patients navigate the healthcare system in order to receive high-quality survivorship care [4, 5]. To date, a number of organizations have provided the cancer survivorship community (both patients and healthcare providers) recommendations pertaining to COVID-19 (Box 1). Unfortunately, at this time, there is limited evidence regarding the impact of COVID-19 on cancer survivors, particularly those who have completed treatment. As the pandemic continues to evolve and scientific evidence emerges, more directed recommendations and guidelines will follow. As editors of the Journal of Cancer Survivorship, the only international peer-reviewed publication dedicated to expanding and disseminating knowledge pertaining directly to this patient population, we wrote this commentary to describe how COVID-19 may impact the physical, psychosocial, and healthcare delivery concerns of cancer survivors. We hope that this information may be helpful in addressing the needs of cancer survivors at the present time and frame the issues that will warrant attention in the future.

BACKGROUND: Self-management regimens for oral and oropharyngeal cancer survivors can be complex and challenging. Effective self-management skills can foster better outcomes. We report on the development, feasibility, and pilot testing of a web-based self-management tool called “Empowered Survivor” (ES) for survivors of oral and oropharyngeal cancer. METHODS: ES content was developed in two phases, with modules focusing on oral care, swallowing and muscle strength, and long-term follow-up. This single-arm pilot study consisted of a pre-, 2-month, and a 6-month postintervention survey. RESULTS: Enrollment rates were relatively low. Once enrolled, data collected from the ES website indicated that 81.8% viewed ES. Participants provided positive evaluations of ES. Preliminary results indicate that ES had a beneficial impact on self-management self-efficacy, preparedness for survivorship care, and quality of life. ES improved survivors’ engagement in oral self-exams and head and neck strengthening exercises, improved ability to address barriers, and decreased information and support needs. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides preliminary evidence of engagement, acceptability, and beneficial impact of ES, which should be evaluated in a larger controlled clinical trial.

Purpose: Individuals who completed treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) often report poor coping and practical concerns when adapting to new roles in their lives—and strong patient-provider communication is critical for this period. However, there is limited research identifying factors associated with supportive needs after the completion of PCa treatment. This study aimed to identify the social and medical risk factors associated with supportive needs for adapting among individuals who completed treatment for localized PCa. Methods: Using baseline data from a study evaluating a web-based support system for patients in the first year following treatment for localized PCa, self-efficacy for re-entry (e.g., maintaining relationships, symptom management), medical interactions, and practical concerns (e.g., insurance, exercise) were assessed. Multivariable regression analyses were completed to identify risk factors for low readiness. Results: Participants (N=431) with lower health literacy or income, or with depressive symptoms had lower self-efficacy for re-entry, more negative interactions with medical providers, and more practical concerns (ps

Objective The perspectives and experiences of intrauterine device (IUD) users who consider IUD self-removal are largely unknown. This study describes the reasons for IUD self-removal as documented in internet forums by IUD users discussing self-removal. Study design This qualitative study used an internet search strategy to document IUD users’ reasons for self-removal in the United States. We employed a content analysis of online data using inductive and deductive qualitative techniques to examine the reasons why IUD users consider self-removal. Results Search results initially identified 235 websites, of which 28 had online health or parenting forums with content related to IUD self-removal. Individual websites contained between 1 and 637 posts by between 1 and 454 individual users. IUD users described a variety of reasons for IUD discontinuation including undesired symptoms or side effects as well as planning for pregnancy. IUD users discussed difficulties accessing provider-removal because of cost or lack of appointment availability. IUD users also discussed how reading about others’ successful self-removal experiences or approval by medical providers made self-removal a feasible or acceptable option. Conclusions Some IUD users utilize online forums for advice about IUD removal, and attempt IUD self-removal due to side effects or because they desire pregnancy. Lack of access to a provider led some patients to attempt self-removal who may have preferred provider-removal. Implications For those who prefer self-removal, anticipatory counseling from a clinician regarding self-removal might be useful and reassuring. Improving access to self-removal may help preserve reproductive autonomy for those who face barriers to IUD removal in the clinical setting.

PURPOSE: Understanding information seeking behaviors and experiences are essential for designing educational and supportive interventions to promote survivor’s self-management post treatment. This study examined health and cancer information seeking, use of internet to find cancer information, and information seeking experiences among breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors. METHODS: Nationally representative data collected in 2017–2018 from two cycles of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 5, Cycle 1 and 2 were merged with combined replicate weights using the jackknife replication method (n=373). Regression analysis for three information seeking behaviors (i.e., health information, cancer information, and internet for cancer information) were modeled, including sociodemographic and clinical factors as predictors. In addition, separate regression analysis predicted three experiences of information seeking (effort, quality, and hard to understand) with sociodemographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: A majority of survivors (84.7%) sought health information. Factors significantly associated with seeking health information were gender(p=0.024), education(p=0.0021), and income(p=0.018). Only 38% of survivors used the internet to seek cancer-related information. The only factor significantly associated with using the internet to seek cancer-related information was time since diagnosis (p=0.0002). Factor significantly associated with difficulty understanding information was annual household income (p=0.026). CONCLUSIONS: This study fills an important gap by identifying sociodemographic and cancer related factors associated with information seeking behaviors and experiences. These findings highlight a need to tailor information for low socioeconomic status survivors to account for the lack of skills, resources, and motivation to seek information about health and cancer related topics independently.

Development of personalized, stratified follow-up care pathways where care intensity and setting vary with needs could improve cancer survivor outcomes and efficiency of health-care delivery. Advancing such an approach in the United States requires identification and prioritization of the most pressing research and data needed to create and implement personalized care pathway models. Cancer survivorship research and care experts (n = 39) participated in an in-person workshop on this topic in 2018. Using a modified Delphi technique—a structured, validated system for identifying consensus—an expert panel identified critical research questions related to operationalizing personalized, stratified follow-up care pathways for individuals diagnosed with cancer. Consensus for the top priority research questions was achieved iteratively through 3 rounds: item generation, item consolidation, and selection of the final list of priority research questions. From the 28 research questions that were generated, 11 research priority questions were identified. The questions were categorized into 4 priority themes: determining outcome measures for new care pathways, developing and evaluating new care pathways, incentivizing new care pathway delivery, and providing technology and infrastructure to support self-management. Existing data sources to begin answering questions were also identified. Although existing data sources, including cancer registry, electronic medical record, and health insurance claims data, can be enhanced to begin addressing some questions, additional research resources are needed to address these priority questions.

Introduction:Implementation scientists increasingly recognize that the process of implementation is dynamic, leading to ad hoc modifications that may challenge fidelity in protocol-driven interventions. However, limited attention to ad hoc modifications impairs investigators’ ability to develop evidence-based hypotheses about how such modifications may impact intervention effectiveness and cost. We propose a multi-method process map methodology to facilitate the systematic data collection necessary to characterize ad hoc modifications that may impact primary intervention outcomes.Methods:We employ process maps (drawn from systems science), as well as focus groups and semi-structured interviews (drawn from social sciences) to investigate ad hoc modifications. Focus groups are conducted with the protocol’s developers and/or planners (the implementation team) to characterize the protocol “as envisioned,” while interviews conducted with frontline administrators characterize the process “as realized in practice.” Process maps with both samples are used to identify when modifications occurred across a protocol-driven intervention. A case study investigating a multistage screening protocol for autism spectrum disorders (ASD) is presented to illustrate application and utility of the multi-method process maps.Results:In this case study, frontline administrators reported ad hoc modifications that potentially influenced the primary study outcome (e.g., time to ASD diagnosis). Ad hoc modifications occurred to accommodate (1) whether providers and/or parents were concerned about ASD, (2) perceptions of parental readiness to discuss ASD, and (3) perceptions of family service delivery needs and priorities.Conclusion:Investigation of ad hoc modifications on primary outcomes offers new opportunities to develop empirically based adaptive interventions. Routine reporting standards are critical to provide full transparency when studying ad hoc modifications.

BackgroundManagement of care transitions from primary care into and out of oncology is critical for optimal care of cancer patients and cancer survivors. There is limited understanding of existing primary care-oncology relationships within the context of the changing health care environment.MethodsThrough a comparative case study of 14 innovative primary care practices throughout the United States (U.S.), we examined relationships between primary care and oncology settings to identify attributes contributing to strengthened relationships in diverse settings. Field researchers observed practices for 10–12 days, recording fieldnotes and conducting interviews. We created a reduced dataset of all text related to primary care-oncology relationships, and collaboratively identified patterns to characterize these relationships through an inductive “immersion/crystallization” analysis process.ResultsNine of the 14 practices discussed having either formal or informal primary care-oncology relationships. Nearly all formal primary care-oncology relationships were embedded within healthcare systems. The majority of private, independent practices had more informal relationships between individual primary care physicians and specific oncologists. Practices with formal relationships noted health system infrastructure that facilitates transfer of patient information and timely referrals. Practices with informal relationships described shared commitment, trust, and rapport with specific oncologists. Regardless of relationship type, challenges reported by primary care settings included lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities during cancer treatment and beyond.ConclusionsWith the rapid transformation of U.S. healthcare towards system ownership of primary care practices, efforts are needed to integrate strengths of informal primary care-oncology relationships in addition to formal system driven relationships.

Objective The aim of this study is to describe a user-centered (e.g., cancer survivors and clinicians) development process of an eHealth tool designed to facilitate self-management of cancer survivorship follow-up care. Methods Guided by Cognitive-Social Health Information Processing (C-SHIP) model and informed by core self-management skills, we engaged in a user-centered design process. In phase I, we conducted in-depth interviews with survivors of breast (n = 33), prostate (n = 4), and colorectal (n = 6) cancers, and (n = 9) primary care providers to develop content and design of the web tool. Phase II utilized iterative user testing interviews (n = 9) to test the web-based tool prototype. Data from both phases were independently coded using a template/content analytic approach. Results The top 5 functions identified in phase I for the web-based platform included: (a) educational materials to learn and prepare for health encounters (80%); (b) questions for health providers (74%); (c) ability to track contact information of providers (67%); (d) provide general information (64%); and, (e) support information (62%). Users of the prototype reported patient burden, tool fatigue, introduction timing of the tool, relevance, and security/privacy as concerns in phase II. Conclusions This study demonstrates the value of using a theoretically informed and user-centered design process to develop relevant and patient-centered eHealth resources to support cancer survivorship. A larger study is needed to establish the efficacy of this eHealth tool as an intervention to improve adherence to follow-up care guidelines.

BACKGROUND: eHealth interventions can help cancer survivors self-manage their health outside the clinic. Little is known about how best to engage and assist survivors across the age and cancer treatment spectra. METHODS: The American Cancer Society conducted a randomized controlled trial that assessed efficacy of and engagement with Springboard Beyond Cancer, an eHealth self-management program for cancer survivors. Intent-to treat analyses assessed effects of intervention engagement for treatment (on-treatment vs. completed) overall (N=176; 88 control, 88 intervention arm) and separately by age (

Since the inception of the Journal of Cancer Survivorship (JCSU), the founding editor-in-chief, the associate editors, editorial board members, and peer reviewers have played important roles in influencing the knowledge base published in JCSU. The journal editors represent key disciplines, practice areas, and research expertise in cancer survivorship, which includes oncology and hematology, pediatric oncology, health psychology/behavior medicine, primary care, oncology nursing, exercise oncology, epidemiology, rehabilitation sciences, health services research, health policy, public health, and sociology. Over the years, the journal editors have worked to facilitate peer review and provide quality reviews to prospective authors. Earlier this year, Chan et al. [1] provided an overview of the evolution of JCSU since its inception in 2007 to 2020. Chan et al.’s [1] paper included a comprehensive description of the content, impact metrics, and top cited papers. In addition, they created a neural network using the key terms of published articles (Fig. 1) that depicted both minor and major themes published since the inception of JCSU.

The aims were (1) to characterise preparedness for survivorship and (2) to evaluate sociodemographic, medical, survivorship care transition experiences (e.g., receiving a survivorship care plan), practical (e.g., cancer-related financial hardships and information needs) and psychological (e.g., fear of recurrence) factors with preparedness for survivorship.Three hundred and forty-six residents of Southern New Jersey who were diagnosed in 2015 or 2016 with bladder, breast, gynaecological, colorectal, lung, melanoma, prostate or thyroid cancer were identified and consented by the New Jersey State Cancer Registry. Participants completed a questionnaire assessing preparedness, provider care transition practices, financial hardships, information needs and fear of cancer recurrence. Correlations and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with preparedness for survivorship.Participants reported feeling somewhat prepared for survivorship. More than half reported not receiving a written survivorship care plan and many desired more information about follow-up tests, symptoms monitoring and maintaining good nutrition and health. Receipt of chemotherapy, limited transition care planning, limited discussion of medical and psychosocial effects, high information needs and financial hardship were predictors of low preparedness.Identifying and addressing factors associated with survivorship preparedness at end of treatment and over cancer survivorship trajectory will foster higher quality survivorship experiences.