Facilitators and barriers of HPV vaccination: a qualitative study in rural Georgia.

INTRODUCTION: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination protects against HPV-associated cancers and genital warts. Healthy People 2030 goal for HPV vaccine uptake is 80%, but as of 2021, only 58.5% of adolescents are up to date in Georgia. The purpose of the study is to assess the attitudes, vaccine practices, facilitators, and barriers to receiving the HPV vaccine in southwest Georgia. METHODS: We conducted 40 semi-structured interviews in the United States from May 2020-Feburary 2022 with three different audiences (young adults, parents, and providers and public health professionals) guided by the P3 (patient-, provider-, practice-levels) Model. The audiences were recruited by multiple methods including fliers, a community advisory board, Facebook ads, phone calls or emails to schools and health systems, and snowball sampling. Young adults and parents were interviewed to assess their perceived benefits, barriers, and susceptibility of the HPV vaccine. Providers and public health professionals were interviewed about facilitators and barriers of patients receiving the HPV vaccine in their communities. We used deductive coding approach using a structured codebook, two coders, analyses in MAXQDA, and matrices. RESULTS: Out of the 40 interviews: 10 young adults, 20 parents, and 10 providers and public health professionals were interviewed. Emerging facilitator themes to increase the uptake of the HPV vaccine included existing knowledge (patient level) and community outreach, providers' approach to the HPV vaccine recommendations and use of educational materials in addition to counseling parents or young adults (provider level) and immunization reminders (practice level). Barrier themes were lack of knowledge around HPV and the HPV vaccine (patient level), need for strong provider recommendation and discussing the vaccine with patients (provider level), and limited patient reminders and health education information around HPV vaccination (practice level). Related to socio-ecology, the lack of transportation and culture of limited discussion about vaccination in rural communities and the lack of policies facilitating the uptake of the HPV vaccine (e.g., school mandates) were described as challenges. CONCLUSION: These interviews revealed key themes around education, knowledge, importance of immunization reminders, and approaches to increasing the HPV vaccination in rural Georgia. This data can inform future interventions across all levels (patient, provider, practice, policy, etc.) to increase HPV vaccination rates in rural communities.

Facilitators and barriers of HPV vaccination: a qualitative study in rural Georgia.

Introduction: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination protects against HPV-associated cancers and genital warts. Healthy People 2030 goal for HPV vaccine uptake is 80%, but as of 2021, only 58.5% of adolescents are up to date in Georgia. The purpose of the study is to assess the attitudes, vaccine practices, facilitators, and barriers to receiving the HPV vaccine in southwest Georgia. Methods: We conducted 40 semi-structured interviews with three different audiences (young adults, parents, and providers and public health professionals) guided by the P3 (patient-, provider-, practice-levels) model and used deductive coding approach. Young adults and parents were interviewed to assess their perceived benefits, barriers, and susceptibility of the HPV vaccine. Providers and public health professionals were interviewed about facilitators and barriers of patients receiving the HPV vaccine in their communities. Results: Out of the 40 interviews: 10 young adults, 20 parents, and 10 providers and public health professionals were interviewed. Emerging facilitator themes to increase the uptake of the HPV vaccine included existing knowledge (patient level), providers' approach to the HPV vaccine recommendations (provider level) and immunization reminders (practice level). Barrier themes were lack of knowledge around HPV and the HPV vaccine (patient level), need for strong provider recommendation and discussing the vaccine with patients (provider level), and limited patient reminders and information (practice level). Conclusions: These interviews revealed key themes around education, knowledge, importance of immunization reminders, and approaches to increasing the HPV vaccination in rural Georgia. This data can inform future interventions across all levels (patient, provider, practice, policy, etc.) to increase HPV vaccination rates in rural communities.

A systematic review of interventions to promote HPV vaccination globally.

BACKGROUND: Despite the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine being a safe, effective cancer prevention method, its uptake is suboptimal in the United States (U.S.). Previous research has found a variety of intervention strategies (environmental and behavioral) to increase its uptake. The purpose of the study is to systematically review the literature on interventions that promote HPV vaccination from 2015 to 2020. METHODS: We updated a systematic review of interventions to promote HPV vaccine uptake globally. We ran keyword searches in six bibliographic databases. Target audience, design, level of intervention, components and outcomes were abstracted from the full-text articles in Excel databases. RESULTS: Of the 79 articles, most were conducted in the U.S. (72.2%) and in clinical (40.5%) or school settings (32.9%), and were directed at a single level (76.3%) of the socio-ecological model. Related to the intervention type, most were informational (n = 25, 31.6%) or patient-targeted decision support (n = 23, 29.1%). About 24% were multi-level interventions, with 16 (88.9%) combining two levels. Twenty-seven (33.8%) reported using theory in intervention development. Of those reporting HPV vaccine outcomes, post-intervention vaccine initiation ranged from 5% to 99.2%, while series completion ranged from 6.8% to 93.0%. Facilitators to implementation were the use of patient navigators and user-friendly resources, while barriers included costs, time to implement and difficulties of integrating interventions into the organizational workflow. CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong need to expand the implementation of HPV-vaccine promotion interventions beyond education alone and at a single level of intervention. Development and evaluation of effective strategies and multi-level interventions may increase the uptake of the HPV vaccine among adolescents and young adults.

US clinicians' perspectives on advance care planning for persons with dementia: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Although advance care planning (ACP) for persons with dementia (PWD) can promote patient-centered care by aligning future healthcare with patient values, few PWD have documented ACPs for reasons incompletely understood. The objective of this paper is to characterize the perceived value of, barriers to, and successful strategies for completing ACP for PWD as reported by frontline clinicians. METHODS: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews (August 2018-December 2019) with clinicians (physicians, nurse practitioners, nurses, social workers) at 11 US health systems. Interviews asked clinicians about their approaches to ACP with PWDs, including how ACP was initiated, what was discussed, how carepartners were involved, how decision-making was approached, and how decision-making capacity was assessed. RESULTS: Of 75 participating generalist and specialty clinicians from across the United States, 61% reported conducting ACP with PWD, of whom 19% conducted ACP as early as possible with PWD. Three themes emerged: value of early ACP preserves PWD's autonomy in cases of differing PWD carepartner values, acute medical crises, and clinician paternalism; barriers to ACP with PWD including the dynamic and subjective assessment of patient decision-making capacity, inconsistent awareness of cognitive impairment by clinicians, and the need to balance patient and family carepartner involvement; and strategies to support ACP include clarifying clinicians' roles in ACP, standardizing clinicians' approach to PWD and their carepartners, and making time for ACP and decision-making assessments that allow PWD and carepartner involvement regardless of the patients' capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians found early ACP for PWD valuable in promoting patient-centered care among an at-risk population. In sharing their perspectives on conducting ACP for PWD, clinicians described challenges that are amenable to changes in training, workflow, and material support for clinician time. Clinical practices need sustainable scheduling and financial support models.

Tick bite risk factors and prevention measures in an area with emerging Powassan virus disease.

Background: In the United States (U.S.), Powassan virus is primarily transmitted to humans by the black-legged tick (Ixodes scapularis). Rarely, infections can present as severe neuroinvasive disease. In 2019, four neuroinvasive disease cases were reported in Sussex County, New Jersey, U.S. We administered a survey to county residents to better understand tick bite risk factors and the performance of personal prevention measures. Methods: A survey was administered in October 2019 to adult residents of randomly selected households. Questions focused on tick bite prevention and risk factors. Crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for various outcomes. Results: Of 274 participants, 25% were previously diagnosed with a tick-borne disease, and 42% reported finding an attached tick in 2019. Yardwork and gardening (OR = 7.38) and spending >50 hours outdoors per week (OR = 8.15) were associated with finding an attached tick. Finding an attached tick was inversely associated with the number of prevention measures used, indicating that a layered approach could reduce the risk of tick bites. Those who performed post-outdoor activity prevention measures (e.g., tick checks) were less likely to have a tick attached compared to finding a crawling tick. Conclusion: Compliance with prevention recommendations was low, despite a high prevalence of reported tick bites and significant outdoor exposures. Older adults and persons who spend significant time outdoors or engage in yardwork or gardening were at the highest risk of tick bites. Additional research is needed to further understand the barriers to tick bite prevention.

Clusters of Rapid HIV Transmission Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men - United States, 2018-2021.

Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) accounted for 68% of new HIV diagnoses in the United States in 2020* (1). Despite advances in treatment and prevention, HIV transmission among MSM continues, in part because of stigma and barriers to accessing prevention and treatment services (2). HIV cluster detection and response, a core strategy of the Ending the HIV Epidemic in the United States initiative,† is an important tool for early identification and response to rapid HIV transmission, including among MSM. To better understand rapid HIV transmission among this population, CDC characterized large HIV molecular clusters detected using analysis of HIV-1 nucleotide sequence data from the National HIV Surveillance System (NHSS).§ Among 38 such clusters first detected during 2018-2019 that had grown to include more than 25 persons by December 2021, 29 occurred primarily among MSM. Clusters primarily among MSM occurred in all geographic regions, and 97% involved multiple states. Clusters were heterogeneous in age, gender identity, and race and ethnicity and had rapid growth rates (median = nine persons added per year). The overall transmission rate at cluster detection was 22 transmission events per 100 person-years, more than six times that of previously estimated national transmission rates (3). Most clusters of rapid HIV transmission occur among MSM. Swift response to reach diverse persons and communities with early, tailored, and focused interventions is essential to reducing HIV transmission (4).

Advance Care Planning Experiences Among Sexual and Gender Minority People.

Importance: Advance care planning (ACP) can promote patient-centered end-of-life (EOL) care and is intended to ensure that medical treatments are aligned with patient's values. Sexual and gender minority (SGM) people face greater discrimination in health care settings compared with heterosexual, cisgender people, but it is unknown whether such discrimination occurs in ACP and how it might affect the ACP experiences of SGM people. Objectives: To increase understanding of barriers and facilitators of ACP facing SGM individuals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This mixed-methods national study of ACP included a telephone survey of self-identified SGM and non-SGM participants in a nationally representative sample drawn from a larger omnibus national panel by SSRS. Qualitative interviews were conducted with a subset of survey participants who identified as SGM. Data were collected from October 2020 to March 2021. Exposures: Self-identified SGM. Main Outcomes and Measures: The survey included 4 items from the validated ACP Engagement Survey, adapted to capture experiences of discrimination. Interviews asked about participants' experiences with ACP, including the appointment of medical decision-makers, sharing preferences, and experiences within the health care system more broadly. Results: A total of 603 adults participated in the survey, with 201 SGM individuals (mean [SD] age, 45.7 [18.7] years; 101 [50.2%] female; 22 [10.9%] Black, 37 [18.4%] Hispanic, and 140 [69.7%] White individuals) and 402 non-SGM individuals (mean [SD] age, 53.7 [19.2] years; 199 [49.5%] female; 35 [8.7%] Black, 41 [10.2%] Hispanic, and 324 [80.6%] White individuals). Regarding reasons for not completing ACP, SGM respondents, compared with non-SGM respondents, were more likely to say "I don't see the need" (72 [73.5%] vs 131 [57.2%], P = .006) and "I feel discriminated against by others" (12 [12.2%] vs 6 [2.6%], P < .001). Of 25 completed interviews among SGM participants, 3 main themes were identified: how fear and experiences of discrimination affect selection of clinicians and whether to disclose SGM identity; concerns about whether EOL preferences and medical decision-makers would be supported; and a preference to discuss EOL decisions and values outside of clinical settings. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that fear of disclosing sexual orientation or gender identity information and discrimination are important barriers to ACP for SGM in clinical settings, but discussions of preferences and values still occur between many SGM people and medical decision-makers. More SGM-specific patient-centered care might better support these discussions within the health care system. Furthermore, health systems can facilitate improved engagement by supporting clinician sensitivity training, including guidance on documentation and requirements.

Seroprevalence of Powassan Virus Infection in an Area Experiencing a Cluster of Disease Cases: Sussex County, New Jersey, 2019.

In 2019, a geographically focal cluster of 3 Powassan virus neuroinvasive disease cases occurred in New Jersey. We conducted a serosurvey of 273 adult area residents and estimated that immunoglobulin M seroprevalence was 0.31% (95% confidence interval [CI], .04%-1.00%) and 23% (95% CI, 7%-100%) of infections result in neuroinvasive disease.

Educational Resources and Self-Management Support to Engage Patients in Advance Care Planning: An Interpretation of Current Practice in the US.

BACKGROUND: Educational resources and decision aids help patients, their care partners and health care providers prepare for and confidently engage in Advance Care Planning (ACP). Incorporating ACP resources as part of a self-management approach may lead to fuller engagement with ACP beyond identifying a surrogate decision-maker, towards supporting a person to identify their values and goals and to communicate them with their care partners and health care providers. OBJECTIVE: To examine the use of educational resources and decision aids to support self-management of ACP in 11 health systems across the US. METHODS: This study was a qualitative interview study examining barriers and facilitators to ACP. Guided by interpretative description and the chronic care model, we sought to describe how health care stakeholders (clinicians and administrators) and patients use ACP resources to support engagement with ACP. RESULTS: 274 health care stakeholders were interviewed, and 7 patient focus groups were conducted across 11 health systems. The majority of participants reported using resources to support completion of preference documentation, with fewer participants using resources that promote more engagement in ACP. ACP resources were reported as valuable in preparing for and complementing a complex, interpersonal, and interprofessional process. Barriers to using resources included a lack of a defined workflow and time. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that ACP resources that promote engagement are valued but under-utilized in practice. The use of ACP resources with an inter-professional team and a self-management approach is a promising strategy to mitigate the barriers of ACP implementation while improving engagement in ACP.

Is This ACP? A Focus Group Study of Patient Experiences of Advance Care Planning.

BACKGROUND: To date, most research on patients' experiences with advance care planning (ACP) focuses on motivations to engage in discussions and how patients prepare. Gaps remain in understanding how non-critically ill Medicare patients perceive ACP encounters, including how they characterize positive and negative experiences with ACP. OBJECTIVES: Understanding these patients' perceptions is imperative as Medicare has sought to incentivize provision of ACP services via two billing codes in 2016. DESIGN: Qualitative focus group study. Thematic analysis was performed to assess participants ACP experience. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries who had engaged in or were billed for ACP. KEY RESULTS: Seven focus groups were conducted with 34 Medicare beneficiaries who had engaged in ACP across 5 US health systems. Participants described a spectrum of perceptions regarding ACP, and a range of delivery approaches, including group ACP, discussions with specialists during serious illness, and ACP in primary care settings during wellness visits. Despite being billed for ACP or having ACP services noted in their medical record, many did not recognize that they had engaged in ACP, expressed lack of clarity over the term "ACP," and were unaware of the Medicare billing codes. Among participants who described quality patient-centered ACP experiences, three additional themes were identified: trusted and established patient/clinician relationships, transparent communication and documentation, and an understanding that ACP is revisable. Participants offered recommendations for clinicians and health systems to improve the patient ACP experience. CONCLUSIONS: Findings include actionable steps to promote patient-centered ACP experiences, including clinician training to support improved communication and facilitating shared decision-making, allocating sufficient clinical time for discussions, and ensuring that documentation of preferences is clear and accessible. Other approaches such as group ACP and ACP navigators may help to support patient interests within clinical constraints and need to be further explored.

Understanding The Use Of Medicare Procedure Codes For Advance Care Planning: A National Qualitative Study.

In 2016 Medicare introduced advance care planning Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes to reimburse clinicians for time spent providing the service. Despite recent increases, use of these codes remains low for reasons incompletely captured by quantitative research. To further identify barriers and facilitators to code use for Medicare fee-for-service enrollees, we conducted case studies at eleven health systems, including 272 interviews with clinicians, administrators, and key leadership. Five themes related to use of the new codes emerged: code-based constraints to billing, burdening patients with unexpected charges, ethical concerns with billing for discussion of advance care plans, incentives to signal the importance of their use in billing, and increasing both workflow burden and the need for institutional supports and training. Respondents also observed that use was facilitated by health systems' investment in clinician training and in processes to audit the codes' use. Our findings suggest that increased reimbursement, strong institutional commitment and support, and streamlined workflow could improve the use of the new CPT codes to document receipt of and ensure access to Medicare advance care planning.

"Don't Talk to Them About Goals of Care": Understanding Disparities in Advance Care Planning.

BACKGROUND: Structurally marginalized groups experience disproportionately low rates of advance care planning (ACP). To improve equitable patient-centered end-of-life care, we examine barriers and facilitators to ACP among clinicians as they are central participants in these discussions. METHOD: In this national study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with purposively selected clinicians from 6 diverse health systems between August 2018 and June 2019. Thematic analysis yielded themes characterizing clinicians' perceptions of barriers and facilitators to ACP among patients, and patient-centered ways of overcoming them. RESULTS: Among 74 participants, 49 (66.2%) were physicians, 16.2% were nurses, and 13.5% were social workers. Most worked in primary care (35.1%), geriatrics (21.1%), and palliative care (19.3%) settings. Clinicians most frequently expressed difficulty discussing ACP with certain racial and ethnic groups (African American, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American) (31.1%), non-native English speakers (24.3%), and those with certain religious beliefs (Catholic, Orthodox Jewish, and Muslim) (13.5%). Clinicians were more likely to attribute barriers to ACP completion to patients (62.2%), than to clinicians (35.1%) or health systems (37.8%). Three themes characterized clinicians' difficulty approaching ACP (preconceived views of patients' preferences, narrow definitions of successful ACP, and lack of institutional resources), while the final theme illustrated facilitators to ACP (acknowledging bias and rejecting stereotypes, mission-driven focus on ACP, and acceptance of all preferences). CONCLUSIONS: Most clinicians avoided ACP with certain racial and ethnic groups, those with limited English fluency, and persons with certain religious beliefs. Our findings provide evidence to support development of clinician-level and institutional-level interventions and to reduce disparities in ACP.

HIV Cluster and Outbreak Detection and Response: The Science and Experience.

The Respond pillar of the Ending the HIV Epidemic in the U.S. initiative, which consists of activities also known as cluster and outbreak detection and response, offers a framework to guide tailored implementation of proven HIV prevention strategies where transmission is occurring most rapidly. Cluster and outbreak response involves understanding the networks in which rapid transmission is occurring; linking people in the network to essential services; and identifying and addressing gaps in programs and services such as testing, HIV and other medical care, pre-exposure prophylaxis, and syringe services programs. This article reviews the experience gained through 30 HIV cluster and outbreak responses in North America during 2000-2020 to describe approaches for implementing these core response strategies. Numerous jurisdictions that have implemented these response strategies have demonstrated success in improving outcomes related to HIV care and viral suppression, testing, use of prevention services, and reductions in transmission or new diagnoses. Efforts to address important gaps in service delivery revealed by cluster and outbreak detection and response can strengthen prevention efforts broadly through multidisciplinary, multisector collaboration. In this way, the Respond pillar embodies the collaborative, data-guided approach that is critical to the overall success of the Ending the HIV Epidemic in the U.S. initiative.

Factors Associated With Candida auris Colonization and Transmission in Skilled Nursing Facilities With Ventilator Units, New York, 2016-2018.

BACKGROUND: Candida auris is an emerging, multidrug-resistant yeast that spreads in healthcare settings. People colonized with C. auris can transmit this pathogen and are at risk for invasive infections. New York State (NYS) has the largest US burden (>500 colonized and infected people); many colonized individuals are mechanically ventilated or have tracheostomy, and are residents of ventilator-capable skilled nursing facilities (vSNF). We evaluated the factors associated with C. auris colonization among vSNF residents to inform prevention interventions. METHODS: During 2016-2018, the NYS Department of Health conducted point prevalence surveys (PPS) to detect C. auris colonization among residents of vSNFs. In a case-control investigation, we defined a case as C. auris colonization in a resident, and identified up to 4 residents with negative swabs during the same PPS as controls. We abstracted data from medical records on patient facility transfers, antimicrobial use, and medical history. RESULTS: We included 60 cases and 218 controls identified from 6 vSNFs. After controlling for potential confounders, the following characteristics were associated with C. auris colonization: being on a ventilator (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 5.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-15.4), receiving carbapenem antibiotics in the prior 90 days (aOR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.6-7.6), having ≥1 acute care hospital visit in the prior 6 months (aOR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.9-9.6), and receiving systemic fluconazole in the prior 90 days (aOR, 6.0; 95% CI, 1.6-22.6). CONCLUSIONS: Targeted screening of patients in vSNFs with the above risk factors for C. auris can help identify colonized patients and facilitate the implementation of infection control measures. Antimicrobial stewardship may be an important factor in the prevention of C. auris colonization.

Increase in Hospital-Acquired Carbapenem-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Infection and Colonization in an Acute Care Hospital During a Surge in COVID-19 Admissions - New Jersey, February-July 2020.

Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB), an opportunistic pathogen primarily associated with hospital-acquired infections, is an urgent public health threat (1). In health care facilities, CRAB readily contaminates the patient care environment and health care providers' hands, survives for extended periods on dry surfaces, and can be spread by asymptomatically colonized persons; these factors make CRAB outbreaks in acute care hospitals difficult to control (2,3). On May 28, 2020, a New Jersey hospital (hospital A) reported a cluster of CRAB infections during a surge in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hospital A and the New Jersey Department of Health (NJDOH) conducted an investigation, and identified 34 patients with hospital-acquired multidrug-resistant CRAB infection or colonization during February-July 2020, including 21 (62%) who were admitted to two intensive care units (ICUs) dedicated to caring for COVID-19 patients. In late March, increasing COVID-19-related hospitalizations led to shortages in personnel, personal protective equipment (PPE), and medical equipment, resulting in changes to conventional infection prevention and control (IPC) practices. In late May, hospital A resumed normal operations, including standard IPC measures, as COVID-19 hospitalizations decreased, lessening the impact of personnel and supply chain shortages on hospital functions. CRAB cases subsequently returned to a pre-COVID-19 baseline of none to two cases monthly. The occurrence of this cluster underscores the potential for multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) to spread during events when standard hospital practices might be disrupted; conventional IPC strategies should be reinstated as soon as capacity and resources allow.