Reducing perceived barriers to scaling up overdose education and naloxone distribution and medications for opioid use disorder in the United States in the HEALing (helping end addiction long-term®) communities study.

BACKGROUND: Scaling up overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is needed to reduce opioid overdose deaths, but barriers are pervasive. This study examines whether the Communities That HEAL (CTH) intervention reduced perceived barriers to expanding OEND and MOUD in healthcare/behavioral health, criminal-legal, and other/non-traditional venues. METHODS: The HEALing (Helping End Addiction Long-Term®) Communities Study is a parallel, wait-list, cluster randomized trial testing the CTH intervention in 67 communities in the United States. Surveys administered to coalition members and key stakeholders measured the magnitude of perceived barriers to scaling up OEND and MOUD in November 2019-January 2020, May-June 2021, and May-June 2022. Multilevel linear mixed models compared Wave 1 (intervention) and Wave 2 (wait-list control) respondents. Interactions by rural/urban status and research site were tested. RESULTS: Wave 1 respondents reported significantly greater reductions in mean scores for three outcomes: perceived barriers to scaling up OEND in Healthcare/Behavioral Health Venues (-0.26, 95% confidence interval, CI: -0.48, -0.05, p = 0.015), OEND in Other/Non-traditional Venues (-0.53, 95% CI: - 0.84, -0.22, p = 0.001) and MOUD in Other/Non-traditional Venues (-0.34, 95% CI: -0.62, -0.05, p = 0.020). There were significant interactions by research site for perceived barriers to scaling up OEND and MOUD in Criminal-Legal Venues. There were no significant interactions by rural/urban status. DISCUSSION: The CTH Intervention reduced perceived barriers to scaling up OEND and MOUD in certain venues, with no difference in effectiveness between rural and urban communities. More research is needed to understand facilitators and barriers in different venues.

Oncology patients' communication experiences during COVID-19: comparing telehealth consultations to in-person visits.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic created significant disruptions in cancer care, much of which was transitioned to telehealth. Because telehealth alters the way clinicians and patients interact with one another, this investigation examined patients' perceptions of their communication with clinicians during the pandemic. METHOD: Patients were recruited from the Cancer Support Community, Fight Colorectal Cancer, and a market research firm to participate in an online survey. In addition to demographic and health-related information, respondents completed measures of patient-centered communication and evaluated how their communication in telehealth sessions compared with in-person visits. RESULTS: From October to December 2020, 227 respondents (65.6% female, 64.6% Non-Hispanic White, 33.5% had 6 or more telehealth sessions, 55% were 50 or older) reported having some of their cancer care provided via telehealth. Respondents who were of racial/ethnic minorities, male, had more telehealth sessions, or had poorer mental health reported less patient-centered communication with clinicians. Most patients thought communication in telehealth sessions was "about the same" as in-person visits with respect to good communication (59%). However, patients thinking communication in telehealth sessions was "better" than in-person visits were more likely to be Hispanic (49%), Non-Hispanic Black (41%), under 50 years of age (32%), male (40%), and had more telehealth sessions (34%). CONCLUSION: Respondents reporting less patient-centered communication during the pandemic-e.g., persons of racial/ethnic minorities and males-were also more likely to evaluate communication in telehealth sessions as better than in-person visits. Further research is needed to understand reasons underlying this finding. Cancer care clinicians should take into account patient preferences regarding telehealth care, which may be particularly important for racial and ethnic minority patients.

Taking Repeated Exposure into Account: An Experimental Study of Direct-To-Consumer Prescription Drug Television Ad Effects.

Introduction: Little is known about how repeated exposure to direct-to-consumer prescription drug promotion can impact consumers' retention and perceptions of drug information. The study described here tested the effects of varied ad exposure frequency on these outcomes. Methods: In an in-person experiment, participants with seasonal allergies (n = 616) were randomized to view a mock prescription drug television ad either once, twice, or four times within 1 h of television programming, embedded with six commercial breaks. Respondents then answered a 20-min survey administered via computer. Results: Those who viewed the ad more frequently were better able to recall both risk (X2 = 20.93, p < .001) and benefit information (X2 = 9.34, p = .009) and to recognize risk (F(2,597) = 11.89, p = .001) and benefit information (F(2,597) = 3.17, p = .043) than those who viewed the ad one time. Ad exposure frequency was not associated with perceptions about the magnitude or likelihood of risks or benefits. In general, risk information seemed to require more repetitions than benefit information to be accurately remembered. The recall was mediated by elaborate processing. Discussion: Effects on memory were small; retention of both risks and benefits remained low overall even after four exposures.

Prone vs supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy: does position affect renal pelvic pressures?

The purpose of this study was to measure and compare renal pelvic pressure (RPP) between prone and supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in a benchtop model. Six identical silicone kidney models were placed into anatomically correct prone or supine torsos constructed from patient CT scans in the corresponding positions. A 30-Fr renal access sheath was placed in either the upper, middle, or lower pole calyx for both prone and supine positions. Two 9-mm BegoStones were placed in the respective calyx and RPPs were measured at baseline, irrigating with a rigid nephroscope, and irrigating with a flexible nephroscope. Five trials were conducted for each access in both prone and supine positions. The average baseline RPP in the prone position was significantly higher than the supine position (9.1 vs 2.7 mmHg; p < 0.001). Similarly, the average RPP in prone was significantly higher than supine when using both the rigid and flexible nephroscopes. When comparing RPPs for upper, middle, and lower pole access sites, there was no significant difference in pressures in either prone or supine positions (p > 0.05 for all). Overall, when combining all pressures at baseline and with irrigation, with all access sites and types of scopes, the mean RPP was significantly higher in the prone position compared to the supine position (14.0 vs 3.2 mmHg; p < 0.001). RPPs were significantly higher in the prone position compared to the supine position in all conditions tested. These differences in RPPs between prone and supine PCNL could in part explain the different clinical outcomes, including postoperative fever and stone-free rates.

Risk factors for food insecurity and association with prenatal care utilization among women who took opioids during pregnancy.

Background: Food insecurity during pregnancy is associated with poorer outcomes for both mothers and their newborns. Given the ongoing opioid crisis in the United States, mothers who take opioids during pregnancy may be at particular risk of experiencing food insecurity. Methods: This research utilized data from 254 biological mothers of infants in the Advancing Clinical Trials in Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome (ACT NOW) Outcomes of Babies with Opioid Exposure (OBOE) Study. We examined factors associated with food insecurity among mothers of infants with antenatal opioid exposure and their unexposed (control) counterparts. Chi-square tests and logistic regression were used to compare food insecurity by sociodemographic characteristics, opioid use, prior traumatic experiences, and housing instability. Similar analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between food insecurity during pregnancy and receipt of adequate prenatal care. Results: Overall, 58 (23%) of the mothers screened positive for food insecurity. Food insecurity was more common among mothers who took opioids during pregnancy (28% vs. 14%; p =0.007), had public insurance (25% vs. 8%; p = 0.027), had housing instability (28% vs. 11%, p = 0.002), experienced three or more adverse experiences in their childhood (37% vs. 17%; p < 0.001), and reported physical or emotional abuse during their pregnancy (44% vs. 17%; p < 0.001). Mothers with food insecurity during pregnancy were less likely to have received adequate prenatal care (78% vs. 90%; p = 0.020). This difference remained after controlling for demographic characteristics (AOR (95% CI) = 0.39 (0.16, 1.00), p = 0.049). Conclusions: This study adds to the body of evidence supporting the need for screening and development of interventions to address food insecurity during pregnancy, particularly among mothers of infants with antenatal opioid exposure, for which limited data are available. The findings revealed that food insecurity frequently co-occurs with housing instability and prior trauma, indicating that a multifaceted intervention incorporating principles of trauma-informed health care is needed. Although those with food insecurity are at increased risk for poor pregnancy outcomes, they were less likely to have received adequate prenatal care despite high levels of public insurance coverage among study participants, suggesting additional strategies are needed to address barriers to health care among this population. Trial registration: The Outcomes of Babies with Opioid Exposure (OBOE) Study is registered at Clinical Trials.gov (NCT04149509) (04/11/2019).

Psychometric Properties of the Prenatal Opioid Use Perceived Stigma Scale and Its Use in Prenatal Care.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the psychometric properties of the Prenatal Opioid Use Perceived Stigma (POPS) scale and to assess the relationship of POPS scores to adequate prenatal care. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Medical centers in Alabama, Ohio, and Pennsylvania (N = 4). PARTICIPANTS: Women (N = 127) who took opioids during pregnancy and whose infants participated in the Outcomes of Babies With Opioid Exposure Study. METHODS: Participants reported their perceptions of stigma during pregnancy by responding to the eight items on the POPS scale. We evaluated the instrument's internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha), structural validity (factor analysis), and convergent validity (relationship with measures of similar constructs). In addition, to assess construct validity, we used logistic regression to examine the relationship of POPS scores to the receipt of adequate prenatal care. RESULTS: The internal consistency of the POPS scale was high (Cronbach's α = .88), and all item-total correlations were greater than 0.50. The factor analysis confirmed that the items cluster into one factor. Participants who reported greater perceived stigma toward substance users and everyday discrimination in medical settings had higher POPS scores, which supported the convergent validity of the scale. POPS scores were significantly associated with not receiving adequate prenatal care, adjusted OR = 1.47, 95% confidence interval [1.19, 1.83], p < .001. CONCLUSION: The psychometric testing of the POPS scale provided initial support for the reliability and validity of the instrument. It may be a useful tool with which to assess perceived stigma among women who take opioids, a potential barrier to seeking health care during pregnancy.

Community-level determinants of stakeholder perceptions of community stigma toward people with opioid use disorders, harm reduction services and treatment in the HEALing Communities Study.

BACKGROUND: Community stigma toward people with opioid use disorder (OUD) can impede access to harm reduction services and treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Such community OUD stigma is partially rooted in community-level social and economic conditions, yet there remains a paucity of large-scale quantitative data examining community-level factors associated with OUD stigma. We examined whether rurality, social inequity, and racialized segregation across communities from four states in the HEALing Communities Study (HCS) were associated with 1) greater perceived community stigma toward people treated for OUD, 2) greater perceived intervention stigma toward MOUD, and 3) greater perceived intervention stigma toward naloxone by community stakeholders in the HCS. METHODS: From November 2019-January 2020, a cross-sectional survey about community OUD stigma was administered to 801 members of opioid overdose prevention coalitions across 66 communities in four states prior to the start of HCS intervention activities. Bivariate analyses assessed pairwise associations between community rural/urban status and each of the three stigma variables, using linear mixed effect modeling to account for response clustering within communities, state, and respondent sociodemographic characteristics. We conducted similar bivariate analyses to assess pairwise associations between racialized segregation and social inequity. RESULTS: On average, the perceived community OUD stigma scale score of stakeholders from rural communities was 4% higher (ß=1.57, SE=0.7, p≤0.05), stigma toward MOUD was 6% higher (ß=0.28, SE=0.1, p≤0.05), and stigma toward naloxone was 10% higher (ß=0.46, SE=0.1, p≤0.01) than among stakeholders from urban communities. No significant differences in the three stigma variables were found among communities based on racialized segregation or social inequity. CONCLUSION: Perceived community stigma toward people treated for OUD, MOUD, and naloxone was higher among stakeholders in rural communities than in urban communities. Findings suggest that interventions and policies to reduce community-level stigma, particularly in rural areas, are warranted.

Managing uncertainty and responding to difficult emotions: Cancer patients' perspectives on clinician response during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Patients undergoing cancer treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic have experienced stress and uncertainty with respect to disruptions in cancer care and COVID-19 related risks. We examined whether clinicians' responsiveness to patients' uncertainty and difficult emotions were associated with better health and well-being. METHODS: Patients were recruited from cancer support communities and a market research firm. Respondents assessed clinicians communication that addressed uncertainty and difficult emotions. Health status measures included mental and physical health, coping during the pandemic, and psychological distress. RESULTS: 317 respondents participated in the study. Patients' perceptions of their clinicians responsiveness to patient uncertainty and negative emotions were associated with better mental health, physical health, coping, and less psychological distress (all p-values <0.001). Respondents with greater self-efficacy and social support also reported better health. CONCLUSION: Even when controlling for patients' personal and health-related characteristics, clinicians' communication addressing patients' uncertainty and difficult emotions predicted better health, better coping, and less psychological distress. Access to social support and self-efficacy also were associated with better health status. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians' communication focused on helping with uncertainty and difficult emotions is important to cancer patients, especially during the pandemic. Clinicians should also direct patients to resources for social support and patient empowerment.

Patients' Experiences with Cancer Care: Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic heightened the psychosocial impact of a cancer diagnosis as patients face concerns about the risk of infection and serious disease and uncertainties about the impact on their treatment. We conducted an online survey (n = 317) and focus groups (n = 19) with patients to examine their experiences with cancer care during the pandemic. Most survey respondents (68%) reported one or more disruptions or delays in care, including appointments switched to telehealth (49%). Patients perceived both benefits (e.g., convenience) and drawbacks (e.g., more impersonal) to telehealth. For many patients, COVID-19-related restrictions on bringing family members to support them during appointments was a major concern and left them feeling alone and vulnerable during treatment. Patients' self-reported coping during the pandemic was positively associated with age, education, and income (P < .05 for each) and better communication with their doctors during telehealth sessions (P < .001). Study findings highlight the importance of patient-centered care and communication to help patients cope with the challenges of the pandemic. Further research is needed to develop guidelines for use of telehealth as part of patient-centered cancer care.

Population-based correlates of COVID-19 infection: An analysis from the DFW COVID-19 prevalence study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has resulted in over 1 million deaths in the U.S. as of June 2022, with continued surges after vaccine availability. Information on related attitudes and behaviors are needed to inform public health strategies. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of COVID-19, risk factors of infection, and related attitudes and behaviors in a racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically diverse urban population. METHODS: The DFW COVID-19 Prevalence Study Protocol 1 was conducted from July 2020 to March 2021 on a randomly selected sample of adults aged 18-89 years, living in Dallas or Tarrant Counties, Texas. Participants were asked to complete a 15-minute questionnaire and COVID-19 PCR and antibody testing. COVID-19 prevalence estimates were calculated with survey-weighted data. RESULTS: Of 2969 adults who completed the questionnaire (7.4% weighted response), 1772 (53.9% weighted) completed COVID-19 testing. Overall, 11.5% of adults had evidence of COVID-19 infection, with a higher prevalence among Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black persons, essential workers, those in low-income neighborhoods, and those with lower education attainment compared to their counterparts. We observed differences in attitudes and behaviors by race and ethnicity, with non-Hispanic White persons being less likely to believe in the importance of mask wearing, and racial and ethnic minorities more likely to attend social gatherings. CONCLUSION: Over 10% of an urban population was infected with COVID-19 early during the pandemic. Differences in attitudes and behaviors likely contribute to sociodemographic disparities in COVID-19 prevalence.

Development and validation of prescription drug risk, efficacy, and benefit perception measures in the context of direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising.

PURPOSE: Understanding patient perceptions of prescription drug risks and benefits is an important component of determining risk-benefit tradeoffs and helping patients make informed medication decisions. However, few validated measures exist for capturing such perceptions. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate measures of perception of prescription drug risk, efficacy, and benefit. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study to develop and validate the measures, including three waves of quantitative testing (item nonresponse, criterion-related validity, and convergent validity). We conducted quantitative testing with a probability-based online consumer panel of U.S. adults (n = 7635), eliminating weaker items after each testing wave. RESULTS: Upon completion of all testing, we identified 21 validated measures that represent 11 distinct risk/benefit constructs. The final measures demonstrated face validity, convergent validity, criterion-related validity, and scale reliability in both illness and general population samples, among patients with both symptomatic and asymptomatic health conditions, and in response to both television and print direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertisements. CONCLUSIONS: Our study produced a set of items that researchers and practitioners can use to assess patient perceptions of prescription drug risk, benefit, and efficacy and to ensure greater future comparability between studies.

Psychometric evaluation and design of patient-centered communication measures for cancer care settings.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of questions that assess patient perceptions of patient-provider communication and design measures of patient-centered communication (PCC). METHODS: Participants (adults with colon or rectal cancer living in North Carolina) completed a survey at 2 to 3 months post-diagnosis. The survey included 87 questions in six PCC Functions: Exchanging Information, Fostering Health Relationships, Making Decisions, Responding to Emotions, Enabling Patient Self-Management, and Managing Uncertainty. For each Function we conducted factor analyses, item response theory modeling, and tests for differential item functioning, and assessed reliability and construct validity. RESULTS: Participants included 501 respondents; 46% had a high school education or less. Reliability within each Function ranged from 0.90 to 0.96. The PCC-Ca-36 (36-question survey; reliability=0.94) and PCC-Ca-6 (6-question survey; reliability=0.92) measures differentiated between individuals with poor and good health (i.e., known-groups validity) and were highly correlated with the HINTS communication scale (i.e., convergent validity). CONCLUSION: This study provides theory-grounded PCC measures found to be reliable and valid in colorectal cancer patients in North Carolina. Future work should evaluate measure validity over time and in other cancer populations. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The PCC-Ca-36 and PCC-Ca-6 measures may be used for surveillance, intervention research, and quality improvement initiatives.

Psychological factors associated with development of TMD: the OPPERA prospective cohort study.

UNLABELLED: Case-control studies have consistently associated psychological factors with chronic pain in general and with temporomandibular disorder (TMD) specifically. However, only a handful of prospective studies have explored whether preexisting psychological characteristics represent risk factors for first-onset TMD. The current findings derive from the prospective cohort study of the Orofacial Pain: Prospective Evaluation and Risk Assessment (OPPERA) cooperative agreement. For this study, 3,263 TMD-free participants completed a battery of psychological instruments assessing general psychological adjustment and personality, affective distress, psychosocial stress, somatic symptoms, and pain coping and catastrophizing. Study participants were then followed prospectively for an average of 2.8 years to ascertain cases of first-onset of TMD, and 2,737 provided follow-up data and were considered in the analyses of TMD onset. In bivariate and demographically adjusted analyses, several psychological variables predicted increased risk of first-onset TMD, including reported somatic symptoms, psychosocial stress, and affective distress. Principal component analysis of 26 psychological scores was used to identify latent constructs, revealing 4 components: stress and negative affectivity, global psychological and somatic symptoms, passive pain coping, and active pain coping. In multivariable analyses, global psychological and somatic symptoms emerged as the most robust risk factor for incident TMD. These findings provide evidence that measures of psychological functioning can predict first onset of TMD. Future analyses in the OPPERA cohort will determine whether these psychological factors interact with other variables to increase risk for TMD onset and persistence. PERSPECTIVE: This article reports that several premorbid psychological variables predict first-onset TMD in the OPPERA study, a large prospective cohort study designed to discover causal determinants of TMD pain. Measures of somatic symptoms were most strongly associated with TMD onset, but perceived stress, previous life events, and negative affect also predicted TMD incidence.