Perceived neighborhood factors, health behaviors, and related outcomes in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos.

Hispanic/Latino populations may experience significant neighborhood disadvantage, but limited research has explored whether these factors affect their health behaviors. Associations between perceived neighborhood factors at Visit 1 and health behaviors and related outcomes at Visit 2 in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression assessed cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships between perceived neighborhood social cohesion (NSC, 5 items), and neighborhood problems (NP, 7 items), with cancer screening, current smoking, excessive/binge drinking, hypertension, obesity, physical activity, and poor diet by gender and birthplace. NSC and NP scores were converted into quartiles. Mean age of participants was 42.5 years and 62.1% were women. Perceived NP, but not perceived NSC, differed by gender (p < 0.001). In unstratified models, no significant associations were observed between perceived NSC and any health behavior, whereas greater perceived NP was associated with less adherence to colon cancer screening (moderate level: aOR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.51, 090) and more physical activity (very high level: aOR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.06, 1.69) compared to low perceived NP. Women with moderate perceived NP, versus low NP, had a lower odds of colon cancer screening at Visit 1 (aOR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.43, 0.91) and higher odds of mammogram adherence at Visit 2 (aOR = 2.86, 95% CI = 1.44, 5.68). Men with high perceived NP had a higher odds of excessive or binge drinking at Visit 2 (aOR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.19, 3.31). We conclude that perceived NP were significantly related to health behaviors among HCHS/SOL individuals. Perceptions of neighborhood environment may be considered modifiable factors of structural neighborhood environment interventions.

Limited English proficiency and reported receipt of colorectal cancer screening among adults 45-75 in 2019 and 2021.

Introduction: Substantial barriers to screening exist for medically underserved populations, especially adults with limited English proficiency (LEP). We examined the proportion of US adults aged 45-75 up-to-date with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by LEP after 2018. The American Cancer Society began recommending CRC screening for adults 45-49 in 2018. Methods: We analyzed cross-sectional data of adults 45-75 years old participating in the 2019 or 2021 National Health Interview Survey (N = 25,611). Adults were considered up-to-date with screening if they reported any stool test within 1 year, stool-DNA testing within 3 years, or colonoscopy within 10 years. Adults who interviewed in a language other than English were considered to have LEP. Adults not up-to-date with screening were asked if a healthcare professional (HCP) recommended screening, and if so which test(s). Regression models conducted in 2022-2023 evaluated receipt of screening, adjusting for sociodemographics, year, and healthcare access. Results: Overall, 54.0 % (95 % CI 53.1-54.9 %) of participants were up-to-date with screening (9.4 % aged 45-49 vs 75.5 % aged 65-75); prevalence increased from 2019 (52.9 %) to 2021(55.2 %). Adults with LEP (vs English proficiency) were less likely to be up-to-date with screening (31.6 % vs. 56.8 %, [aPR 0.86 (0.77-0.96)]). Among adults not up-to-date, 15.0 % reported their HCP recommended screening (8.4 % among adults with LEP). Conclusions: Nearly half of US adults were not up-to-date with CRC screening in 2019 and 2021 and few reported being recommended screening. Adults with LEP and those 45-49 were least likely to be screened suggesting targeted interventions are needed for these populations.

Secondhand Exposure to Aerosols From Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems and Asthma Exacerbations Among Youth With Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Current research suggests an association between the use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and asthma symptoms in youth, but little is known about the association of secondhand ENDS aerosol exposure and asthma control. The present study examines the relationship of secondhand ENDS aerosol exposure and asthma exacerbations among youth with asthma. METHODS: Youth who participated in the 2016 Florida Youth Tobacco survey (aged 11-17 years) with a self-reported diagnosis of asthma (N = 11,830) reported asthma attacks in the past 12 months, demographic characteristics, cigarette use, cigar use, hookah use, ENDS use, past 30-day secondhand smoke exposure, and past 30-day secondhand ENDS aerosol exposure. Weighted multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the association between secondhand ENDS aerosol exposure and past 12-month asthma attack status, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Overall, 21% of youth with asthma reported having an asthma attack in the past 12 months, and 33% reported secondhand ENDS aerosol exposure. Secondhand ENDS aerosol exposure was associated with higher odds of reporting an asthma attack in the past 12 months, adjusting for covariates (adjusted OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.11-1.47). CONCLUSIONS: Secondhand exposure to ENDS aerosols may be related to asthma symptoms in youth. Physicians may need to counsel youth with asthma regarding the potential risks of exposure. Future research is necessary to evaluate the longitudinal relationship between secondhand ENDS aerosol exposure and asthma control.

Barriers and Facilitators to Expanding Roles of Medical Assistants in Patient-Centered Medical Homes (PCMHs).

BACKGROUND: Many primary care practices participating in patient-centered medical home (PCMH) transformation initiatives are expanding the work roles of their medical assistants (MAs). Little is known about attitudes of MAs or barriers and facilitators to these role changes. METHODS: Secondary data analysis of qualitative cross-case comparison study of 15 New Jersey primary care practices participating in a PCMH project during 2012 to 2013. Observation field notes and in-depth and key informant interviews (with physicians, office managers, staff and care coordinators) were iteratively analyzed using grounded theory. RESULTS: MA roles and responsibilities changed from a mostly reactive role, completing tasks dependent on physician orders during the patient visit and facilitating patient flow through the office, to a more proactive one, conducting previsit planning, engaging in the overall care for patients, and assisting with population management. MAs differed in their attitudes about increased responsibilities, with some welcoming the opportunity to take on expanded roles, others resenting their increased responsibilities, and some expressing insufficient understanding regarding why new tasks and procedures were being implemented. Major barriers to MA role shifts included 1) insufficient understanding of the PCMH concept, 2) lack of time for added responsibilities, 3) additional workload without additional compensation, 4) disparate levels of medical knowledge and training, 5) reluctance of clinicians to delegate tasks, 6) uncertainty in making new workflow changes routine, 7) staff turnover, and 8) change fatigue. MAs were more positive about their role shifts when they 1) understood how their responsibilities fit within broader PCMH practice transformation goals; 2) received formal training in new tasks; 3) had detailed protocols and standing orders; 4) initiated role changes with small, achievable goals; 5) had open communication with clinicians and practice leaders; and 5) received additional compensation or paths to career advancement. CONCLUSIONS: Practice leaders need to be conscious of obstacles when they increase expectations of MAs, and they must be willing to invest time and resources into developing their MA workforce. An environment that allows open dialog with MAs and rewards and compensation that recognizes their increased efforts will help make expansion of MA roles occur more smoothly and efficiently.