RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: African American men are at a higher risk of developing and dying from prostate cancer compared to white men. The serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening test has a high risk of false-positive results and overdiagnosis; therefore, it is not routinely recommended. Rather, men are encouraged to make individualized decisions with their medical providers, after being fully informed about its potential benefits, limitations, and risks. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the development and pilot testing of an interactive Web-based decision aid (DA; Prostate Cancer Screening Preparation [PCSPrep]) for African American men, designed to promote informed decision making for prostate cancer screening. METHODS: Four focus groups (n=33) were conducted to assess men's reactions to DAs developed in prior studies and gather information to modify the content and format. The pilot test employed a pre-posttest evaluation design. A convenience sample of 41 men aged 45-70 years with no history of prostate cancer was recruited from community settings. Participants completed online surveys before and after using PCSPrep that assessed prostate cancer screening knowledge, decision self-efficacy, decisional conflict, and preparation for decision making. RESULTS: Use of PCSPrep was associated with a significant increase in prostate cancer knowledge (49% vs 62% correct responses; P<.001), and men also experienced less decisional conflict (24 vs 15 on a scale of 0-100; P=.008). No changes in self-efficacy about decision making or screening preferences were observed. Most men (81%) reported that using PCSPrep prepared them to make informed decisions in partnership with their provider. CONCLUSIONS: PCSPrep was an acceptable DA that improved men's knowledge, reduced decisional conflict, and promoted the perception of being prepared for shared decision making. Further research is needed to test the DA in a larger randomized trial.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The CRUZA trial tested the efficacy of an organizational-level intervention to increase capacity among Catholic parishes to implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for cancer control. This paper examines the external generalizability of the CRUZA study findings by comparing characteristics of parishes that agreed to participate in the intervention trial versus those that declined participation. Sixty-five Roman Catholic parishes that offered Spanish-language mass in Massachusetts were invited to complete a four-part survey assessing organization-level characteristics that, based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), may be associated with EBI implementation. Forty-nine parishes (75%) completed the survey and were invited to participate in the CRUZA trial, which randomized parishes to either a "capacity enhancement intervention" or a "standard dissemination" group. Of these 49 parishes, 31 (63%) agreed to participate in the trial, whereas 18 parishes (37%) declined participation. Parishes that participated in the CRUZA intervention trial were similar to those that did not participate with respect to "inner organizational setting" characteristics of the CFIR, including innovation and values fit, implementation climate, and organizational culture. Change commitment, a submeasure of organizational readiness that reflects the shared resolve of organizational members to implement an innovation, was significantly higher among the participating parishes (mean = 3.93, SD = 1.08) as compared to nonparticipating parishes (mean = 3.27, SD = 1.08) (Z = -2.16, p = .03). Parishes that agreed to participate in the CRUZA intervention trial were similar to those that declined participation with regard to organizational characteristics that may predict implementation of EBIs. Pragmatic tools to assess external generalizability in community-based implementation trials and to promote readiness among faith-based organizations to implement EBIs are needed to enhance the reach and impact of public health research. Clinical Trial information: The CRUZA trial identifier number with clinicaltrials.gov is NCT01740219.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Acculturation may influence health behaviors, yet mechanisms underlying its effect are not well understood. In this study, we describe relationships between acculturation and health behaviors among low-income housing residents, and examine whether these relationships are mediated by social and contextual factors. Residents of 20 low-income housing sites in the Boston metropolitan area completed surveys that assessed acculturative characteristics, social/contextual factors, and health behaviors. A composite acculturation scale was developed using latent class analysis, resulting in four distinct acculturative groups. Path analysis was used to examine interrelationships between acculturation, health behaviors, and social/contextual factors, specifically self-reported social ties, social support, stress, material hardship, and discrimination. Of the 828 respondents, 69% were born outside of the U.S. Less acculturated groups exhibited healthier dietary practices and were less likely to smoke than more acculturated groups. Acculturation had a direct effect on diet and smoking, but not physical activity. Acculturation also showed an indirect effect on diet through its relationship with material hardship. Our finding that material hardship mediated the relationship between acculturation and diet suggests the need to explicate the significant role of financial resources in interventions seeking to promote healthy diets among low-income immigrant groups. Future research should examine these social and contextual mediators using larger, population-based samples, preferably with longitudinal data.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To provide health care providers, patients, and the general public with a responsible assessment of currently available data on enhancing use and quality of colorectal cancer screening. PARTICIPANTS: A non-DHHS, nonadvocate 13-member panel representing the fields of cancer surveillance, health services research, community-based research, informed decision-making, access to care, health care policy, health communication, health economics, health disparities, epidemiology, statistics, thoracic radiology, internal medicine, gastroenterology, public health, end-of-life care, and a public representative. In addition, 20 experts from pertinent fields presented data to the panel and conference audience. EVIDENCE: Presentations by experts and a systematic review of the literature prepared by the RTI International-University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center, through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Scientific evidence was given precedence over anecdotal experience. CONFERENCE PROCESS: The panel drafted its statement based on scientific evidence presented in open forum and on published scientific literature. The draft statement was presented on the final day of the conference and circulated to the audience for comment. The panel released a revised statement later that day at http://consensus.nih.gov. This statement is an independent report of the panel and is not a policy statement of the NIH or the Federal Government. CONCLUSIONS: The panel found that despite substantial progress toward higher colorectal cancer screening rates nationally, screening rates fall short of desirable levels. Targeted initiatives to improve screening rates and reduce disparities in underscreened communities and population subgroups could further reduce colorectal cancer morbidity and mortality. This could be achieved by utilizing the full range of screening options and evidence-based interventions for increasing screening rates. With additional investments in quality monitoring, Americans could be assured that all screening achieves high rates of cancer prevention and early detection. To close the gap in screening, this report identifies the following priority areas for implementation and research to enhance the use and quality of colorectal cancer screening: • Eliminate financial barriers to colorectal cancer screening and appropriate follow up. • Widely implement interventions that have proven effective at increasing colorectal cancer screening, including patient reminder systems and one-on-one interactions with providers, educators, or navigators. • Conduct research to assess the effectiveness of tailoring programs to match the characteristics and preferences of target population groups to increase colorectal cancer screening. • Implement systems to ensure appropriate follow-up of positive colorectal cancer screening results. • Develop systems to assure high quality of colorectal cancer screening programs. • Conduct studies to determine the comparative effectiveness of the various colorectal cancer screening methods in usual practice settings.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Interventions to promote informed decision making (IDM) for cancer screening are increasingly common. The resulting body of literature provides an opportunity for a systematic review of measures in use. We searched standard databases for intervention trials and other studies of screening decisions and decision aids, finding 2,110 unique citations (most with abstracts) that we reduced to 104 full-text articles; 36 studies met inclusion criteria (prostate = 20, colorectal = 9, breast = 6, cervical = 1). Two independent coders abstracted data on study characteristics, constructs, and measures. Our findings revealed that most studies measured screening (or intention) and knowledge; fewer measured recommended IDM-related constructs and none measured all outcomes proposed for evaluating IDM interventions. Validity and reliability of measures received inadequate attention in study reports, and conceptual overlap exists among measures. Few IDM measures have been developed/carefully adapted from treatment measures and tested for cancer screening or in diverse populations. We recommend that new and in-progress studies emphasize outcomes beyond knowledge-participation in decision making according to personal preference, satisfaction with the process, and consistency between decisions and values. Also needed is better use of theory to guide conceptualization and operationalization of measures, greater attention to reliability and validity (particularly in diverse populations), more thorough reporting of sources and operating characteristics of measures, and increased emphasis and resources focused on these issues by funders, researchers, and journal editors.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

There is an urgent need to develop and test health promotion strategies that both address health disparities and elucidate the full impact of social, cultural, economic, institutional, and political elements on people's lives. Qualitative research methods, such as life history interviewing, are well suited to exploring these factors. Qualitative methods are also helpful for preparing field staff to implement a social contextual approach to health promotion. This article reports results and application of findings of life history interviews conducted as part of intervention planning for the Harvard Cancer Prevention Program Project, "Cancer Prevention in Working-Class, Multi-Ethnic Populations." The salient themes that emerged from interviews with a multi-ethnic, purposive sample are centered on six construct domains: immigration and social status, social support, stress, food, physical activity, and occupational health. Insights gained from thematic analysis of the interviews were integrated throughout intervention and materials development processes.

Asunto(s)