Contextual Factors Relevant to Implementing Social Risk Factor Screening and Referrals in Cancer Survivorship: A Qualitative Study.

Introduction: Social risk factors such as food insecurity and lack of transportation can negatively affect health outcomes, yet implementation of screening and referral for social risk factors is limited in medical settings, particularly in cancer survivorship. Methods: We conducted 18 qualitative, semistructured interviews among oncology teams in 3 health systems in Washington, DC, during February and March 2022. We applied the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment Framework to develop a deductive codebook, performed thematic analysis on the interview transcripts, and summarized our results descriptively. Results: Health systems varied in clinical and support staff roles and capacity. None of the participating clinics had an electronic health record (EHR)-based process for identifying patients who completed their cancer treatment ("survivors") or a standardized cancer survivorship program. Their capacities also differed for documenting social risk factors and referrals in the EHR. Interviewees expressed awareness of the prevalence and effect of social risk factors on cancer survivors, but none employed a systematic process for identifying and addressing social risk factors. Recommendations for increasing screening for social risk factors included designating a person to fulfill this role, improving data tracking tools in the EHR, and creating systems to maintain up-to-date information and contacts for community-based organizations. Conclusion: The complexity of cancer care workflows and lack of reimbursement results in a limited ability for clinic staff members to screen and make referrals for social risk factors. Creating clinical workflows that are flexible and tailored to staffing realities may contribute to successful implementation of a screening and referral program. Improving ongoing communication with community-based organizations to address needs was deemed important by interviewees.

American Cancer Society Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The American Cancer Society Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline was developed to assist primary care clinicians and other health practitioners with the care of head and neck cancer survivors, including monitoring for recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, assessment and management of long-term and late effects, health promotion, and care coordination. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed through April 2015, and a multidisciplinary expert workgroup with expertise in primary care, dentistry, surgical oncology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, clinical psychology, speech-language pathology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, the patient perspective, and nursing was assembled. While the guideline is based on a systematic review of the current literature, most evidence is not sufficient to warrant a strong recommendation. Therefore, recommendations should be viewed as consensus-based management strategies for assisting patients with physical and psychosocial effects of head and neck cancer and its treatment. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:203-239. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The purpose of the American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline is to provide recommendations to assist primary care and other clinicians in the care of female adult survivors of breast cancer. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed through April 2015. A multidisciplinary expert workgroup with expertise in primary care, gynecology, surgical oncology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nursing was formed and tasked with drafting the Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline. A total of 1073 articles met inclusion criteria; and, after full text review, 237 were included as the evidence base. Patients should undergo regular surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, including evaluation with a cancer-related history and physical examination, and should be screened for new primary breast cancer. Data do not support performing routine laboratory tests or imaging tests in asymptomatic patients to evaluate for breast cancer recurrence. Primary care clinicians should counsel patients about the importance of maintaining a healthy lifestyle, monitor for post-treatment symptoms that can adversely affect quality of life, and monitor for adherence to endocrine therapy. Recommendations provided in this guideline are based on current evidence in the literature and expert consensus opinion. Most of the evidence is not sufficient to warrant a strong evidence-based recommendation. Recommendations on surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, assessment and management of physical and psychosocial long-term and late effects of breast cancer and its treatment, health promotion, and care coordination/practice implications are made.

Technical Assistance and Training Needs of Comprehensive Cancer Control Programs: a Qualitative Analysis.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) was established in 1998 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to advance national cancer control implementation across US states and affiliated tribes and territories. To build capacity of NCCCP recipients, technical assistance and training (TAT) is offered in the form of online trainings, webinars, toolkits, workshops, tip sheets, and other products. To determine TAT needs of NCCCP recipients, the George Washington University (GW) Cancer Center conducted a qualitative evaluation to inform TAT planning and implementation. Data on the utilization, applicability, impact, and dissemination of TAT received were collected from comprehensive cancer control practitioners through semi-structured interviews. Detailed memos of interviewee responses were documented and deductively coded based on three themes: promotion of TAT, use of existing TAT, and recommendations for future TAT. Interviewees reported a need for diverse topics, modalities, and TAT reminders. The most widely used TAT resources were social media toolkits, webinars, newsletters, patient navigation resources, and online trainings. Recommendations for future TAT included a focus on coalition support, adaptation and evaluation of evidence-based cancer control strategies, and health equity. Offering a blend of TAT, including educational webinars and trainings, was preferred by CCC professionals and could increase use. Future TAT will provide new opportunities for coalition capacity building, adaptation of evidence-based strategies for cancer control, and center health equity.

Advancing Patient-Centered Cancer Survivorship Care: Evaluation of a Dissemination Project.

Care coordination among primary care providers and oncologists continues to be a challenge in cancer survivorship care. The Advancing Patient-Centered Cancer Survivorship Care Toolkit ("Toolkit") was developed to provide a "workshop in a box" for comprehensive cancer control (CCC) stakeholders to advance patient-centered cancer survivorship care in their region. The Toolkit was disseminated through an e-learning module, established webpages, an online forum, and social media. Toolkit dissemination was evaluated using the RE-AIM framework. For effectiveness, e-learning module and workshop participants were surveyed to assess changes in confidence in learning objectives. The Toolkit Web page received over 10,000 impressions. E-learning module participants (n = 212) reported statistically significant improvement (p < 0.001) between the pre- (M = 3.42, SD = 0.85) and post-test (M = 4.18, SD = 0.60) mean scores on self-confidence to describe patient-reported priorities for cancer survivorship care. Among virtual workshop trainees (n = 121), 28 participants completed paired pre- and post-workshop surveys. Among those with matched responses, there were statistically significant improvements from pre- to post-workshop self-reported knowledge on what patients want in cancer survivorship care (M = 2.5, SD = 1.0, vs. M = 3.3, SD = 1.0; p = 0.001); confidence in describing critical components of patient-centered cancer survivorship care (M = 3.1, SD = 1.2, vs. M = 4.2, SD = 0.5; p < 0.001); and confidence in describing patient priorities for cancer survivorship care (M = 3.0, SD = 1.1, vs. M = 4.1, SD = 0.6; p < 0.001). Provision of technical assistance resources in a variety of formats can successfully build capacity of healthcare providers and comprehensive cancer coalition stakeholders to feel more prepared to deliver patient-centered, coordinated cancer survivorship care.

Together-Equitable-Accessible-Meaningful (TEAM) Training to Improve Cancer Care for Sexual and Gender Minorities (SGM): Outcomes from a Pilot Study.

To alleviate health disparities experienced by sexual and gender minority (SGM) patients, cancer care professionals need further education on the needs of SGM cancer patients and their loved ones and caregivers. The Together-Equitable-Accessible-Meaningful (TEAM) Training to Improve Cancer Care for SGM Patients (TEAM SGM) was developed and piloted to address this need. This study reports healthcare professional learner outcomes from the TEAM SGM pilot intervention. The TEAM SGM Training pilot consisted of 2.5 h of content from the original online self-paced TEAM Training plus 12 1-h Zoom sessions on specialized topics in addition to readings and activities. Participants (n = 28), representing seven cancer service organizations from six states in the USA, were recruited through newsletter listservs and social media. All participants (n = 28) completed the pre-test and twenty-two participants completed the post-test. Using five factors confirmed in a separate Confirmatory Factor Analysis, paired t-tests of TEAM SGM participant pre- and post-test data were conducted. Statistically significant improvements were found in four of five factors: Environmental Cues (t(21) = 2.56, p = .018), Knowledge (t(21) = 2.15, p = .043), Clinical Preparedness (t(7) = 3.89, p = .006), Clinical Behaviors (t(21) = 2.48, p = .022). The Attitudes factor was not significantly improved from pre-intervention to post-intervention likely due to strong affirming attitudes toward SGM patients at baseline. TEAM SGM is a feasible, effective training to build capacity in SGM-affirming care for cancer care providers.

Piloting the Sexual and Gender Minority Cancer Curricular Advances for Research and Education (SGM Cancer CARE) Workshop: Research Training in the Service of SGM Cancer Health Equity.

The purpose of this study is to describe the context, curriculum design, and pilot evaluation of the educational program "Sexual and Gender Minority Cancer Curricular Advances for Research and Education" (SGM Cancer CARE), a workshop for early-career researchers and healthcare providers interested in gaining knowledge and skills in sexual and gender minority (SGM) cancer research and healthcare advocacy. A needs assessment of a sample of clinicians and researchers (n = 104) and feedback from an Advisory Board informed the curriculum design of the SGM Cancer CARE workshop. Four SGM-tailored modules, focusing on epidemiology, clinical research, behavioral science and interventions, and community-based participatory approaches, were developed and tested in a 2.5-day virtual format among 19 clinicians and researchers. A fifth module to provide feedback to participants on brief presentations about their SGM cancer research ideas or related efforts was added later. A mixed-methods evaluation comprised of pre- and post-modular online evaluation surveys and virtual focus groups was used to determine the degree to which the workshop curriculum met participant needs. Compared to pre-module evaluations, participants reported a marked increase in SGM cancer research knowledge in post-module scores. Quantitative results were supported by our qualitative findings. In open field response survey questions and post-workshop focus groups, participants reported being extremely pleased with the content and delivery format of the SGM Cancer CARE workshop. Participants did regret not having the opportunity to connect with instructors, mentors, and colleagues in person. The SGM Cancer CARE curriculum was shown to increase the knowledge, skills, and level of preparedness of early-career clinicians and scientists to conduct culturally relevant and appropriate research needed to improve care for SGM persons across the cancer care continuum from prevention to survivorship.

Building implementation science capacity among practitioners of cancer control: development of a pilot training curriculum.

PURPOSE: Cancer control interventions are difficult to implement with fidelity, while tailoring to fit contexts. Engaged approaches are suggested to advance equity. On-the-ground practitioners are needed to serve as collaborators in the implementation process with research teams, but few trainings are designed with them in mind. METHODS: The Cancer Control Implementation Science Base Camp (CCISBC) was created to improve capacity among cancer control practitioners when implementing evidence-based cancer screening programs in specific contexts. Development of the curriculum included the following: (1) performing a literature review assessing extant curricula, (2) comparing competencies of these curricula, (3) user-centered design, (4) producing learning materials, (5) recruiting two teams to test a pilot, (6) running the pilot, and (7) evaluating results. RESULTS: Nine competencies overlapped between four of the curricula scanned in this study, all of which served as the basis for learning objectives. Principles that emerged from design sessions included staying clear about terminology, supporting the brokerage of knowledge, reframing theories, models, and frameworks as tools, and including equity in everything. Pilot testing showed that the average learner increased 74.5% in knowledge and 75% in confidence regarding implementing evidence-based cancer screening. Evidence suggests that the training increased the skill of implementing evidence-based interventions (EBIs) with a health equity lens. CONCLUSION: In order to scale practice-based evidence, practitioners will need to be engaged. This engagement is optimized when practitioners are trained to collaborate on implementation research. The CCISBC is a feasible program to develop capacity among practitioners in comprehensive cancer control in order to optimize EBIs tailored to context.

Healthcare utilization in cancer survivors: six-month longitudinal cohort data.

PURPOSE: To describe healthcare utilization and reasons for delaying medical care and to identify factors that influence high healthcare utilization and care delay among cancer survivors. METHODS: Baseline (n = 991) and 6 month follow-up data (n = 777) were collected among breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer survivors from 32 US cancer centers. Participants completed surveys on healthcare utilization (e.g., number of visits to specific providers) and delay of medical care. We categorized participants as high or low users based on median number of visits. We used logistic regression models to examine factors that predicted high healthcare utilization or delay. RESULTS: Survivors reported a median of 10.5 visits to healthcare providers and 28% reported ever delaying medical care over 6 months. Compared to prostate cancer survivors, breast and colorectal survivors were 2.4 times more likely (CI = 1.2-4.8) and 4 times more likely (CI = 2.2-7.3) to be high healthcare users, respectively. A higher quality of life score predicted high healthcare utilization (OR = 2.4, CI = 2.0-2.8) and delay of medical care (OR = 1.8, CI = 1.5-2.2). Black survivors were 1.5 times more likely than White survivors to be high healthcare users (CI = 1.1-2.0) and respondents reporting a race category other than White or Black were 1.8 times more likely to delay care (CI = 1.3-2.5). Lower levels of self-efficacy predicted greater healthcare use (OR = 0.7, CI = 0.6-0.8) and delay (OR = 0.6, CI = 0.5-0.7). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that race, education, marital status, cancer type, time since diagnosis, quality of life, and self-efficacy are associated with both high healthcare utilization and delay among cancer survivors.

Results of the George Washington University cancer center's comprehensive cancer control cancer communication mentorship program and implications for future practice.

PURPOSE: The Comprehensive Cancer Control Cancer Communication Mentorship Program ("Mentorship Program") was created by the George Washington University Cancer Center (GWCC) to provide technical assistance (TA) in implementing evidence-based cancer screening communication interventions and support networking for comprehensive cancer control (CCC) professionals. The Mentorship Program matched entry-to mid-level CCC professionals with health communication and/or CCC experts and offered monthly web-based discussions with academic researchers and practitioners who shared their knowledge and provided applied learning opportunities throughout mentees' project planning, implementation and evaluation. The program objective was for mentees to improve health communication skills and apply evidence-based knowledge to reduce the burden of cancer. METHODS: A mixed methods evaluation was conducted, including a qualitative description of each project and its outcomes as well as quantitative measures of satisfaction with the program and self-rated changes in competence. RESULTS: Mentees represented the following locations: New Jersey, Arkansas, Michigan, West Virginia, and Republic of Palau. Project topics ranged from increasing Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccinations to increasing screening uptake for colorectal cancer, lung cancer, cervical cancer, and breast cancer. Evaluation results from pre- and post-program communication competency self-assessments and mid- and post-program surveys revealed that the Mentorship Program advanced personal and professional goals and improved public health communication skills. CONCLUSION: The Mentorship Program achieved its objectives for peer networking and offering expert TA in cancer prevention and control communication, offering a promising model for others involved in supporting implementation of evidence in practice.

Type 2 Diabetes Management, Control and Outcomes During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Older US Veterans: an Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic required a change in outpatient care delivery models, including shifting from in-person to virtual visits, which may have impacted care of vulnerable patients. OBJECTIVE: To describe the changes in management, control, and outcomes in older people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) associated with the shift from in-person to virtual visits. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: In veterans aged ≥ 65 years with T2D, we assessed the rates of visits (in person, virtual), A1c measurements, antidiabetic deintensification/intensification, ER visits and hospitalizations (for hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, other causes), and A1c level, in March 2020 and April-November 2020 (pandemic period). We used negative binomial regression to assess change over time (reference: pre-pandemic period, July 2018 to February 2020), by baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI; > 2 vs. <= 2) and A1c level. KEY RESULTS: Among 740,602 veterans (mean age 74.2 [SD 6.6] years), there were 55% (95% CI 52-58%) fewer in-person visits, 821% (95% CI 793-856%) more virtual visits, 6% (95% CI 1-11%) fewer A1c measurements, and 14% (95% CI 10-17%) more treatment intensification during the pandemic, relative to baseline. Patients with CCI > 2 had a 14% (95% CI 12-16%) smaller relative increase in virtual visits than those with CCI <= 2. We observed a seasonality of A1c level and treatment modification, but no association of either with the pandemic. After a decrease at the beginning of the pandemic, there was a rebound in other-cause (but not hypo- and hyperglycemia-related) ER visits and hospitalizations from June to November 2020. CONCLUSION: Despite a shift to virtual visits and a decrease in A1c measurement during the pandemic, we observed no association with A1c level or short-term T2D-related outcomes, providing some reassurance about the adequacy of virtual visits. Further studies should assess the longer-term effects of shifting to virtual visits in different populations to help individualize care, improve efficiency, and maintain appropriate care while reducing overuse.

Applying User-Centered Design to Develop Practical Strategies that Address Overuse in Primary Care.

INTRODUCTION: Engaging patients and frontline clinicians in re-designing clinical care is essential for improving care delivery in a complex clinical environment. This study sought to assess an innovative user-centered design approach to improving clinical care quality, focusing on the use cases of de-intensifying non-beneficial care within the following areas: (1) de-intensifying diabetes treatment in high-risk patients; (2) stopping screening for carotid artery stenosis in asymptomatic patients; and (3) stopping colorectal cancer screening in average-risk, older adults. METHODS: The user-centered design approach, consisting of patient and patient-clinician charrettes (defined as intensive workshops where key stakeholders collaborate to develop creative solutions to a specific problem) and participant surveys, has been described previously. Following the charrettes, we used inductive coding to identify and categorize themes emerging from the de-intensification ideas prioritized by participants as well as facilitator notes and audio recordings from the charrettes. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients participated in the patient design charrettes, generating 134 unique de-intensification ideas and prioritizing 32, which were then distilled into six patient-generated principles of de-intensification by the study team. These principles provided a starting point for a subsequent patient-clinician charrette. In this follow-up charrette, 9 patients who had participated in an earlier patient design charrette collaborated with 7 clinicians to generate 63 potential de-intensification solutions. Six of these potential solutions were developed into multi-faceted, fully operationalized de-intensification strategies. DISCUSSION: The de-intensification strategies that patients and clinicians prioritized and operationalized during the co-design charrette process were detailed and multi-faceted. Each component of a strategy had a rationale based on feasibility, practical considerations, and ways of overcoming barriers. The charrette-based process may be a useful way to engage clinicians and patients in developing the complex and multi-faceted strategies needed to improve care delivery.

American Cancer Society Colorectal Cancer Survivorship Care Guidelines.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and third leading cause of cancer death in both men and women and second leading cause of cancer death when men and women are combined in the United States (US). Almost two-thirds of CRC survivors are living 5 years after diagnosis. Considering the recent decline in both incidence and mortality, the prevalence of CRC survivors is likely to increase dramatically over the coming decades with the increase in rates of CRC screening, further advances in early detection and treatment and the aging and growth of the US population. Survivors are at risk for a CRC recurrence, a new primary CRC, other cancers, as well as both short-term and long-term adverse effects of the CRC and the modalities used to treat it. CRC survivors may also have psychological, reproductive, genetic, social, and employment concerns after treatment. Communication and coordination of care between the treating oncologist and the primary care clinician is critical to effectively and efficiently manage the long-term care of CRC survivors. The guidelines in this article are intended to assist primary care clinicians in delivering risk-based health care for CRC survivors who have completed active therapy.

Planning and Reporting Effective Web-Based RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method Panels: Literature Review and Preliminary Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM), a variant of the Delphi Method, was developed to synthesize existing evidence and elicit the clinical judgement of medical experts on the appropriate treatment of specific clinical presentations. Technological advances now allow researchers to conduct expert panels on the internet, offering a cost-effective and convenient alternative to the traditional RAM. For example, the Department of Veterans Affairs recently used a web-based RAM to validate clinical recommendations for de-intensifying routine primary care services. A substantial literature describes and tests various aspects of the traditional RAM in health research; yet we know comparatively less about how researchers implement web-based expert panels. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study are twofold: (1) to understand how the web-based RAM process is currently used and reported in health research and (2) to provide preliminary reporting guidance for researchers to improve the transparency and reproducibility of reporting practices. METHODS: The PubMed database was searched to identify studies published between 2009 and 2019 that used a web-based RAM to measure the appropriateness of medical care. Methodological data from each article were abstracted. The following categories were assessed: composition and characteristics of the web-based expert panels, characteristics of panel procedures, results, and panel satisfaction and engagement. RESULTS: Of the 12 studies meeting the eligibility criteria and reviewed, only 42% (5/12) implemented the full RAM process with the remaining studies opting for a partial approach. Among those studies reporting, the median number of participants at first rating was 42. While 92% (11/12) of studies involved clinicians, 50% (6/12) involved multiple stakeholder types. Our review revealed that the studies failed to report on critical aspects of the RAM process. For example, no studies reported response rates with the denominator of previous rounds, 42% (5/12) did not provide panelists with feedback between rating periods, 50% (6/12) either did not have or did not report on the panel discussion period, and 25% (3/12) did not report on quality measures to assess aspects of the panel process (eg, satisfaction with the process). CONCLUSIONS: Conducting web-based RAM panels will continue to be an appealing option for researchers seeking a safe, efficient, and democratic process of expert agreement. Our literature review uncovered inconsistent reporting frameworks and insufficient detail to evaluate study outcomes. We provide preliminary recommendations for reporting that are both timely and important for producing replicable, high-quality findings. The need for reporting standards is especially critical given that more people may prefer to participate in web-based rather than in-person panels due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Disparities in traditional and alternative tobacco product use across sexual orientation groups of young adult men and women in the US.

Background: Despite literature documenting disparities in tobacco use among sexual minority young adults, research is just emerging regarding alternative tobacco product (ATP) use among specific sexual minority men versus women. The current study examined associations between sexual orientation and traditional and ATP use among young adult men and women. Methods: We analyzed survey data (September-December 2018) from 2,809 young adults (ages 18-34) recruited via social media. Multivariable regression models were used to examine the binary outcomes of any past 30-day use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, cigars, hookah, and any tobacco product (logistic regression), and the continuous outcome of number of categories of tobacco products used (linear regression), in relation to sexual orientation (bisexual, gay/lesbian, heterosexual) among men versus women, controlling for age and race/ethnicity. Results: In this sample (Mage = 24.60, SD = 4.73; 56.0% women, 71.5% White, 5.4% Black, 12.6% Asian, 11.5% Hispanic), 9.3% of participants identified as gay/lesbian (13.1% of men, 6.2% of women) and 17.6% bisexual (8.3% of men, 25.0% of women). Gay men were less likely to use e-cigarettes, cigars, and any tobacco product, and used fewer products relative to heterosexual men. Bisexual women were more likely to use each tobacco product and any tobacco product, and used more categories of products relative to heterosexual women. Conclusions: Specific tobacco use disparities differ with respect to type of product, gender, and sexual orientation, underscoring the need to better understand the underlying mechanisms of these differences (e.g., marketing, social influences) and developing interventions to address them.

Quality of life among cancer survivors by model of cancer survivorship care.

BACKGROUND: There were an estimated 16.9 million cancer survivors in the United States in 2019, but there is wide variation in survivorship care. Patient-reported outcomes associated with distinct care models are unknown. Thus, we examined differences in quality of life by cancer survivorship care model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a comparative effectiveness trial, recruiting 32 Commission on Cancer-accredited centers in 2015-2016. Sites were characterized as one of three models: 1) Single Consultative visit, 2) Specialized Longitudinal care with ongoing visits at predetermined intervals, 3) Oncology-Embedded care with visits as needed. We included breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer survivors who had completed active treatment but had not yet attended a survivorship visit (n = 991). Quality of life was assessed using 20 physical, 14 social/emotional, and 7 practical concerns, adapted from the Quality of Life-Breast Cancer Survivors and Functional Living Index Cancer scales.1,2 We used frequencies to describe prevalent symptoms and ANOVA to test for global differences in concerns by survivorship care model, post-hoc Tukey's test for pairwise comparisons, and mixed-effects models to describe changes in quality of life by care model over six-months. RESULTS: While unadjusted results suggested that nearly all concerns worsened over six months, no differences were observed in quality of life concerns by care model for physical or practical concerns. At baseline, social/emotional concerns showed a global difference by model (p = 0.008; pairwise results showed fewer concerns among Oncology-Embedded survivors compared to Specialized Consultative survivors; 12.1 vs 15.2, p < 0.05), but no differences were found at six months (global p = 0.311). Mixed effects models showed no change in quality of life by model over six-months. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support an association between quality of life and care model over six-months. Still, participants reported many quality of life concerns across domains that must be addressed, regardless of care model.

Nutrients' behavior and removal in an activated sludge system receiving Olive Mill Wastewater.

This work aims to monitor inorganic nutrients (phosphorus and ammonium) behavior during the injection of Olive Mill Wastewater (OMWW) in an activated sludge process. The system was fed firstly with urban wastewater (UWW) and was alimented after its stabilization with OMWW (at 0.1% (v/v) and 1%) for 100 days. Total polyphenols, chemical oxygen demand (CODT), nutrients, and biomass behavior against OMWW injection were investigated. The results showed a satisfactory biomass growth of 7.12 gMLVSS.L-1 and a high microbial activity of 21.88 mg O2.gMLVSS-1.h-1. An overall removal reached 90%, 92%, 59% and 93% respectively for, CODT, total polyphenols, PO43- and NH4+. Adding OMWW at 1% seems to improve the nutrients elimination, especially phosphorus by the biological process probably though bringing more biodegradable organics. The chemical processes (precipitation/complexation) could also be involved in phosphorus removal, due to the OMWW wealth on salts elements such as calcium.

Learning Outcomes of Diverse Oncology Professionals After the TEAM Cultural Competency Training.

Racial, ethnic, sexual, and gender minorities are more likely to report challenges with oncology provider communication and quality of care. The Together-Equitable-Accessible-Meaningful (TEAM) training was developed to improve health equity across cancer care organizations by guiding teams of interprofessional learners through planning and implementation of quality improvements to advance equitable, accessible, and patient-centered cancer care. This study compared changes to self-reported cultural competence as measured by the Cultural Competency Assessment (CCA); Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Development of Clinical Skills Scale (LGBT-DOCSS); and Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale (ISVS). The primary aim of the study was to assess changes to self-reported cultural competence; the secondary aim was to examine changes to interprofessional valuation from baseline to post-intervention. Results indicated statistically significant improvements in self-reported Cultural Competency Behaviors (p = .055), a subscale of the CCA, and Attitudinal Awareness toward sexual and gender minorities (p = .046), a subscale of the LGBT-DOCSS, using p < .10 as statistically significant. These subscale results drove statistically significant improvements for their respective composite scales. No other statistically significant results were found. This study suggests that cultural competency training among interprofessional oncology health care professionals can be effective. Given the growing diversity within the USA, additional opportunities for cultural competency training are needed.

Oncology Patient Navigation Training: Results of a Pilot Study in Nigeria.

The purpose of this pilot study was to test the efficacy of an online navigation training designed to improve trainee confidence in performing core patient navigation tasks among Nigerian nurses, patient advocates, and cancer survivors. The online training originally designed for US patient navigators was supplemented by a Nigerian health system interactive session. Nurses, advocates, and cancer survivors (n = 36) were recruited to take a patient navigation training from May-June 2020 that consisted of approximately 10 h of online content and a 2-h online session. Trainees enrolled in the no-cost training and completed all 20 lessons. Post-intervention interviews (n = 10) were conducted to garner feedback from trainees. Trainees reported statistically significant improvements in confidence in performing core competencies for cancer patient navigation across all lessons. Feedback was generally positive with trainees expressing satisfaction and appreciation for the training. Challenges included lack of free, broadband Internet access leading to data streaming costs on the part of trainees. Trainees who were oncology nurses indicated that funding, time, and staffing constraints could impede implementation of patient navigation in practice; but these trainees also expressed new ideas for patient support and advocacy to alleviate some barriers to care for their patients as a result of the training. This study provided preliminary data that supports the feasibility and utility of using the GW Cancer Center online patient navigation training in non-US settings. Small adaptations to training content and technological delivery could improve access to the training experience. Implementation science approaches are needed to inform sustainable patient navigation in low-resource settings.

Affirming Care for Sexual and Gender Minority Prostate Cancer Survivors: Results from an Online Training.

Sexual and gender minority people have unique, unaddressed healthcare needs following prostate cancer. The research team along with a group of established subject matter experts developed a training and companion materials for healthcare professionals to address this need. Post-assessment evaluation was reported in frequencies and percentages by combining results from learners who attended an original, live web-based training and learners who completed the same training on-demand via a Learning Management System. Learners from both the live and archived training reported that the training increased their knowledge to effectively work with sexual and gender minority prostate cancer survivors. Learners also reported gaining new resources and strategies they could apply to their work. Results indicate the training fills an educational gap for healthcare professionals and supports the need for additional training of healthcare professionals focused on the healthcare needs of SGM cancer survivors.