Association Between Clinician Confidence and Making Guideline-Recommended Decisions in the Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Results.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for managing abnormal cervical cancer screening results are complex and adherence is challenging for clinicians. Previous studies have identified gaps in knowledge as a possible cause; few have explored the confidence clinicians have in their management decisions. Confidence in decision-making may influence management practices, particularly when guidelines are complex and evolving. OBJECTIVE: Assess whether confidence in decision-making is associated with making guideline-concordant recommendations for abnormal cervical cancer screening results. DESIGN: A clinician survey used vignettes to ask clinicians to make a management recommendation for different abnormal results and rate their level of confidence in their response. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) at three diverse health systems in Washington, Texas, and Massachusetts. MAIN MEASURES: Correct response to each vignette based on either the 2012 or 2019 American Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) management guidelines. KEY RESULTS: In total, 501 clinicians completed the survey between October and December 2020 (response rate 53.7%). Overall, most clinicians made guideline-recommended management decisions for two vignettes (73.2 and 73.7%), but fewer were confident in their selection (48.3% and 46.6%, respectively). Clinicians who reported high levels of confidence were more often correct than those who reported lower levels of confidence (85.8% vs. 62.2% and 87.5% vs. 60.7%, both p<0.001). After adjusting for clinician and practice characteristics, confidence remained significantly associated with selecting the correct answer. CONCLUSIONS: Clinician confidence in management decisions for abnormal cervical cancer screening results was significantly associated with knowing guideline-concordant recommendations. Given the complexity of cervical cancer management guidelines, solutions to improve clinician confidence in decision-making are needed.

Veteran Experiences With an mHealth App to Support Measurement-Based Mental Health Care: Results From a Mixed Methods Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Mental health conditions are highly prevalent among US veterans. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is committed to enhancing mental health care through the integration of measurement-based care (MBC) practices, guided by its Collect-Share-Act model. Incorporating the use of remote mobile apps may further support the implementation of MBC for mental health care. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate veteran experiences with Mental Health Checkup (MHC), a VHA mobile app to support remote MBC for mental health. METHODS: Our mixed methods sequential explanatory evaluation encompassed mailed surveys with veterans who used MHC and follow-up semistructured interviews with a subset of survey respondents. We analyzed survey data using descriptive statistics. We then compared responses between veterans who indicated having used MHC for ≥3 versus <3 months using χ2 tests. We analyzed interview data using thematic analysis. RESULTS: We received 533 surveys (533/2631, for a 20% response rate) and completed 20 interviews. Findings from these data supported one another and highlighted 4 key themes. (1) The MHC app had positive impacts on care processes for veterans: a majority of MHC users overall, and a greater proportion who had used MHC for ≥3 months (versus <3 months), agreed or strongly agreed that using MHC helped them be more engaged in their health and health care (169/262, 65%), make decisions about their treatment (157/262, 60%), and set goals related to their health and health care (156/262, 60%). Similarly, interviewees described that visualizing progress through graphs of their assessment data over time motivated them to continue therapy and increased self-awareness. (2) A majority of respondents overall, and a greater proportion who had used MHC for ≥3 months (versus <3 months), agreed/strongly agreed that using MHC enhanced their communication (112/164, 68% versus 51/98, 52%; P=.009) and rapport (95/164, 58% versus 42/98, 43%; P=.02) with their VHA providers. Likewise, interviewees described how MHC helped focus therapy time and facilitated trust. (3) However, veterans also endorsed some challenges using MHC. Among respondents overall, these included difficulty understanding graphs of their assessment data (102/245, 42%), not receiving enough training on the app (73/259, 28%), and not being able to change responses to assessment questions (72/256, 28%). (4) Interviewees offered suggestions for improving the app (eg, facilitating ease of log-in, offering additional reminder features) and for increasing adoption (eg, marketing the app and its potential advantages for veterans receiving mental health care). CONCLUSIONS: Although experiences with the MHC app varied, veterans were positive overall about its use. Veterans described associations between the use of MHC and engagement in their own care, self-management, and interactions with their VHA mental health providers. Findings support the potential of MHC as a technology capable of supporting the VHA's Collect-Share-Act model of MBC.

Characteristics of Clinicians Caring for Transgender Men and Nonbinary Individuals and Guideline Concordance of Clinicians' Cervical Cancer Screening Counseling for Cisgender Individuals Versus Transgender Men and Nonbinary Individuals with a Cervix.

Purpose: We examined characteristics of clinicians caring for transgender men and nonbinary (TMNB) individuals and guideline concordance of clinicians' cervical cancer screening recommendations. Methods: Using a survey of clinicians who performed ≥10 cervical cancer screenings in 2019, we studied characteristics of clinicians who do versus do not report caring for TMNB individuals and guideline concordance of screening recommendations for TMNB individuals with a cervix versus cisgender women. Results: In our sample (N = 492), 49.2% reported caring for TMNB individuals, and 25.4% reported performing cervical cancer screening for TMNB individuals with a cervix. Differences in guideline concordance of screening recommendations for TMNB individuals with a cervix versus cisgender women (45.8% vs. 50% concordant) were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Sizable proportions of clinicians cared for and performed cervical cancer screening for TMNB individuals. Research is needed to better understand clinicians' identified knowledge deficits to develop interventions (e.g., clinician trainings) to improve gender-affirming cervical cancer prevention.

The Intersection of Childcare and Health Among Women at a U.S. Safety-Net Health System During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.

Introduction: Lack of childcare has been linked to missed health care appointments for adult women, especially for lower-income women. The COVID-19 pandemic created additional stressors for many low-income families that already struggled to meet childcare and health care needs. By exploring the experiences of women who were referred for childcare services at a U.S. safety-net health system, we aimed to understand the challenges women faced in managing their health and childcare needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with participants in Dallas County, TX between August 2021 and February 2022. All participants were referred from women's health clinics at the county's safety-net hospital system to an on-site drop-off childcare center by hospital staff who identified lack of childcare as a barrier to health care access. Participants were the primary caregiver for at least one child ≤age 13. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. We analyzed data using thematic content analysis. Results: We interviewed 22 participants (mean age 34); participants were adult women, had on average 3 children, and primarily identified as Hispanic or African American. Three interrelated themes emerged: disruptions in access, competing priorities, and exacerbated psychological distress. Conclusions: Findings demonstrate how low-income women with young children in a safety-net health system struggle to address their own health needs amid childcare and other household demands. Our study advances our understanding of childcare as a social domain of health, a necessary step to inform how we build structural support systems and drive policy interventions.