RESUMO
IMPORTANCE: Disparities research in Black women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDs) has primarily focused on epidemiology or surgical outcomes, but little is known about the patient perspective on seeking PFD care. OBJECTIVE: To provide quality and equitable care to Black women with PFDs, we conducted a qualitative study to hear their perspectives and lived health care experiences. STUDY DESIGN: Black women seeking care for PFDs at a tertiary care institution were invited to participate in qualitative interviews. Open-ended questions explored participants' knowledge, attitudes, and health care experiences. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded line-by-line. Inductive content analysis was performed to identify key themes, and consensus was achieved among the research team. RESULTS: Eight Black women aged 21-83 years consented to participate. Patients noted a stigma surrounding PFDs, both among health care professionals and their community. They noted several barriers to care: financial, logistical, and racial bias. They cited difficulties in patient-health care professional communication, including not feeling heard or treated as an individual. They preferred gender and racial concordance with their physicians. These women expressed both a desire for more knowledge and to share this knowledge and advocate for other women. CONCLUSIONS: Black women expressed distinct obstacles in their PFD health care. They reported not feeling heard or treated as a unique individual. The themes derived from this study identify complex patient-centered needs that can serve as the basis for future quality improvement work and/or hypothesis-driven research. By grounding health disparities research in patient perspectives, we can improve the health care experiences of Black women.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate trends in the utilization of active surveillance (AS) in a nationally representative cancer database. AS has been increasingly recognized as an effective strategy for patients with small renal masses but little is known about national usage patterns. METHODS: We identified patients with clinical T1a renal masses within the National Cancer Database in 2010 through 2014. Patients were classified according to initial management strategy received including AS, surgery, ablation, or other treatment. We characterized time trends in the use of AS vs definitive therapy and examined clinical and socio-demographic determinants of AS among patients with small renal masses using multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: We identified 59,189 patients who satisfied the inclusion criteria. Of the total cohort, 1733 (2.9%) individuals received initial management with AS, while 57,456 (97.1%) received definitive treatment. Surveillance rates remained below 5% in all years. On multivariate analysis, patient age (OR: 1.08, 95% CI 1.08-1.09), smaller tumor size of <2 cm vs ≥2 cm (OR: 2.43, 95% CI: 2.20-2.7, P < .0001), management at an academic center vs community center (OR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.83-2.29), and African American vs Caucasian race (OR: 1.56, 95% CI:1.35-1.80) were independently associated with use of AS as initial management. CONCLUSION: In a representative national cohort of patients with small renal masses, we observed clinical and facility-level differences in the utilization of active surveillance in patients with T1a renal masses. Further investigation is warranted to better understand the forces underlying initial management decisions for patients with small renal masses.