A qualitative study of oral health knowledge among African Americans.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this qualitative oral health needs assessment was to probe and better understand the oral health knowledge, beliefs, and barriers of District residents, particularly in DC wards where oral health disparities are most prevalent. METHODS: Forty-eight (n = 48) participants were recruited for four focus groups. The focus group instrument consisted of a structured interview guide addressing the following topics: oral health history, perceived barriers to oral health, knowledge and perceptions about oral systemic health, and preferred message channels for receiving information on oral/dental health. Content analysis was performed using NVivo, a computerized, qualitative informatics tool. RESULTS: The majority of participants in this study practiced both brushing and flossing in their daily dental routine and did not believe that tooth loss is a normal part of ageing. There was lack of knowledge on the connection between oral and systemic health, specifically impact of smoking, alcohol use, and sweets and sexual activity. Focus groups identified two main barriers to healthcare access-communication and affordability. Participants who had a dentist were satisfied and felt that their needs were met. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate a need for educational intervention and improved communication from oral health providers to increase awareness of the impact of systemic health and risky behaviors can have on oral health.

Enrolling Minority and Underserved Populations in Cancer Clinical Research.

Research suggests that community involvement is integral to solving public health problems, including involvement in clinical trials-a gold standard. Significant racial/ethnic disparities exist in the accrual of participants for clinical trials. Location and cultural aspects of clinical trials influence recruitment and accrual to clinical trials. It is increasingly necessary to be aware of defining characteristics, such as location and culture of the populations from which research participants are enrolled. Little research has examined the effect of location and cultural competency in adapting clinical trial research for minority and underserved communities on accrual for clinical trials. Utilizing embedded community academic sites, the authors applied cultural competency frameworks to adapt clinical trial research in order to increase minority participation in nontherapeutic cancer clinical trials. This strategy resulted in successful accrual of participants to new clinical research trials, specifically targeting participation from minority and underserved communities in metropolitan Washington, DC. From 2012 to 2014, a total of 559 participants enrolled across six nontherapeutic clinical trials, representing a 62% increase in the enrollment of blacks in clinical research. Embedding cancer prevention programs and research in the community was shown to be yet another important strategy in the arsenal of approaches that can potentially enhance clinical research enrollment and capacity. The analyses showed that the capacity to acquire cultural knowledge about patients-their physical locales, cultural values, and environments in which they live-is essential to recruiting culturally and ethnically diverse population samples.

Disparities in knowledge and willingness to donate research biospecimens: a mixed-methods study in an underserved urban community.

Although research involving biospecimens is essential in advancing cancer research, minorities, especially African-Americans, are underrepresented in such research. We conducted a mixed-method (qualitative focus groups among African-Americans and quantitative cross-sectional surveys) study on factors associated with biospecimen knowledge and donation intent in the medically underserved urban communities in Southeast and Southwest Washington, DC. Focus groups were conducted among 41 African-Americans and survey data was available from 302 community residents of different races/ethnicities using convenience sampling. We used logistic regression to model the association between biospecimen knowledge and donation intent with selected sociodemographic variables using survey data. Only 47 % of the participants had knowledge of the different types of biospecimens. In multivariate logistic regression models, male gender, African-American race, and low education levels were significantly associated with lower knowledge about biospecimens. Compared to Whites (79 %), fewer African-Americans (39 %) and Hispanics (57 %) had knowledge of biospecimens but the difference was significant for African-Americans only. Positive intent to donate biospecimens for research was observed among 36 % of the survey respondents. After multivariate adjustment, only biospecimen knowledge was associated with donation intent (odds ratio = 1.91, 95 % confidence interval 1.12, 3.27). Contrary to popular opinion, "mistrust of the medical community" was not the most commonly reported barrier for biospecimen donation among African-Americans. "Not knowing how biospecimens will be used" and "lack of knowledge of biospecimens" were the most common barriers. Our study highlights the importance of education on biospecimens among community residents to increase minority participation in biospecimen research.

NIH State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Role of active surveillance in the management of men with localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To provide healthcare providers, patients, and the general public with a responsible assessment of currently available data on the use of active surveillance and other observational management strategies for low-grade, localized prostate cancer. PARTICIPANTS: A non-U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, nonadvocate 14-member panel representing the fields of cancer prevention and control, urology, pathology, epidemiology, genetics, transplantation, bioethics, economics, health services research, shared decisionmaking, health communication, and community engagement. In addition, 22 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 Tufts Evidence-based Practice Center, through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). 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: Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing has identified many men with low-risk disease. Because of the very favorable prognosis of low-risk prostate cancer, strong consideration should be given to modifying the anxiety-provoking term "cancer" for this condition. Treatment of low-risk prostate cancer patients with radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy leads to side effects such as impotence and incontinence in a substantial number. Active surveillance has emerged as a viable option that should be offered to patients with low-risk prostate cancer. More than 100,000 men a year diagnosed with prostate cancer in the United States are candidates for this approach. However, there are many unanswered questions about active surveillance strategies and prostate cancer that require further research and clarification. These include: • Improvements in the accuracy and consistency of pathologic diagnosis of prostate cancer • Consensus on which men are the most appropriate candidates for active surveillance • The optimal protocol for active surveillance and the potential for individualizing the approach based on clinical and patient factors • Optimal ways to communicate the option of active surveillance to patients • Methods to assist patient decisionmaking • Reasons for acceptance or rejection of active surveillance as a treatment strategy • Short- and long-term outcomes of active surveillance. Well-designed studies to address these questions and others raised in this statement represent an important health research priority. Qualitative, observational, and interventional research designs are needed. Due to the paucity of evidence about this important public health problem, all patients being considered for active surveillance should be offered participation in multicenter research studies that incorporate community settings and partners.