The Landscape of Care for Women Veterans with Cancer: An Evidence Map.

BACKGROUND: Women are the fastest growing veteran group in the US and the number of women veterans (WVs) with cancer is rising; however, little is known about this population. Cancer care for WVs is complex and it is essential to understand their unique needs and care coordination challenges to provide evidence-based care. The purpose of this review is to map the quantity, distribution, and characteristics of literature describing cancer and its treatment among WVs. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase (Elsevier), and Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate) from inception through January, 2024. Publications were eligible that reported gender-specific data on any aspect of cancer care among WVs. Data was abstracted by a single investigator with over-reading. RESULTS: Forty-six reports were included; 44 were observational and 19 had a women-only sample. There were no interventional reports and no qualitative reports had a patient sample. Breast cancer was the most commonly addressed (n = 19). There were six additional reports on sex-specific cancers. Many reports used large VA databases or previous trial data, creating the potential for patient overlap between reports. Among VA-specific areas of interest, only three reports evaluated the potential implications of racial differences and only two included a transgender population. No reports examined the effects of toxic exposures on cancer. Within the NCI Cancer Control Continuum, crosscutting areas were more commonly represented; over half (25) of the reports addressed epidemiology. There were few reports on focus areas and little overlap between focus and crosscutting areas. DISCUSSION: Existing literature provides an inadequate understanding of the population of WVs with cancer. There is scant information regarding the population of WVs with cancer, their care preferences or experiences, or how to best identify and address unmet healthcare needs. It is imperative to expand research to provide evidence-based care for this population.

Summary and Roadmap of Breast Cancer Research in the Veterans Affairs.

Women are the largest growing population of Veterans within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System. Among women Veterans, breast cancer is the most common malignancy (30% of all cancers), yet little is known about the unique needs of women Veterans with cancer and how to provide them with high quality care. The VA health care system has initiated multiple system-wide systemic efforts, including launching the Breast and Gynecologic Cancer System of Excellence (BGSOE) to address this knowledge gap. This report summarizes the outcomes of the inaugural 2023 VA Women's Cancer Research Conference, which assembled 37 multidisciplinary clinicians, scientists, the VA and civilian partners with a shared goal of advancing VA breast cancer research. Conference objectives were to build a collective vision for improving: (1) referral patterns for breast cancer treatment and patient-level outcomes and (2) molecular and genetic testing patterns across the breast cancer continuum among women Veterans. The meeting hosted 15 speakers at the Houston VA Medical Center. Future research priorities for women Veterans with cancer were identified from discussions and a post-conference survey. We then administered a 13-question post-conference survey to conference attendees. Respondents ranked the research priorities. The survey results show that the cross-cutting cancer research priorities designed to transform cancer care for women Veterans at the VA fit into 5 broad areas of study, including (1) care quality for treatment, (2) improving treatment, (3) care quality of molecular and genetic testing, (4) risk reduction through risk assessment and germline genetic testing, and (5) establishing strategic partnerships. Our data elucidate areas for further investigation to improve the delivery of cancer care.

A Framework for Integrating Telehealth Equitably across the cancer care continuum.

The COVID-19 pandemic placed a spotlight on the potential to dramatically increase the use of telehealth across the cancer care continuum, but whether and how telehealth can be implemented in practice in ways that reduce, rather than exacerbate, inequities are largely unknown. To help fill this critical gap in research and practice, we developed the Framework for Integrating Telehealth Equitably (FITE), a process and evaluation model designed to help guide equitable integration of telehealth into practice. In this manuscript, we present FITE and showcase how investigators across the National Cancer Institute's Telehealth Research Centers of Excellence are applying the framework in different ways to advance digital and health equity. By highlighting multilevel determinants of digital equity that span further than access alone, FITE highlights the complex and differential ways structural determinants restrict or enable digital equity at the individual and community level. As such, achieving digital equity will require strategies designed to not only support individual behavior but also change the broader context to ensure all patients and communities have the choice, opportunity, and resources to use telehealth across the cancer care continuum.

Telehealth Research and Innovation for Veterans with Cancer: the THRIVE Center.

BACKGROUND: In recent years the US health-care system has witnessed a substantial increase in telehealth use. Telehealth enhances health-care access and quality and may reduce costs. However, there is a concern that the shift from in-person to telehealth care delivery may differentially improve cancer care access and quality in certain clinical settings and for specific patient populations while potentially exacerbating disparities in care for others. Our National Cancer Institute-funded center, called Telehealth Research and Innovation for Veterans with Cancer (THRIVE), is focused on health equity for telehealth-delivered cancer care. We seek to understand how social determinants of telehealth-particularly race and ethnicity, poverty, and rurality-affect the use of telehealth. METHODS: THRIVE draws from the Health Disparities Research Framework and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. THRIVE consists of multiple cores that work synergistically to assess and understand health equity for telehealth-delivered cancer care. These include the Administrative Core, Research and Methods Core, Clinical Practice Network, and Pragmatic Trial. RESULTS: As of October 2023, we identified and trained 5 THRIVE scholars, who are junior faculty beginning a research career. We have reviewed 20 potential pilot studies, funding 6. Additionally, in communication with our funders and advisory boards, we have adjusted our study design and analytic approach, ensuring feasibility while addressing our operational partners' needs. CONCLUSIONS: THRIVE has several key strengths. First, the Veterans Health Administration's health-care system is large and diverse regarding health-care setting type and patient population. Second, we have access to longitudinal data, predating the COVID-19 pandemic, about telehealth use. Finally, equitable access to high-quality care for all veterans is a major tenet of the Veterans Health Administration health-care mission. As a result of these advantages, THRIVE can focus on isolating and evaluating the impact of social determinants of telehealth on equity in cancer care.

Mapping implementation strategies to reach community-dwelling older adults in Northwest Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: In Northwestern Switzerland, recent legislation tackles the needs of community-dwelling older adults by creating Information and Advice Centers (IACs). IACs are a new service in the community that aims to assess the needs and provide information on age-related issues to community-dwelling older adults and their families. Previous studies reported difficulties in reaching community-dwelling older adults for community-based programs. We aimed to: 1) systematically identify implementation strategies to promote the IAC among community care providers, older adults and informal caregivers; 2) monitor the delivery of these strategies by the IAC management; and 3) describe the impact of those strategies on reach of community-dwelling older adults. This study was conducted as part of the TRANS-SENIOR project. METHODS: As part of the INSPIRE feasibility assessment, we conducted a pre-test post-test study between March and September 2022. The sample included 8,840 older adults aged 65 + visiting/calling or being referred to the IAC for the first time. Implementation strategies were selected using implementation mapping and organized in bundles for each group of community care providers and older adults/caregivers. Our evaluation included: estimation of fidelity to the delivery of implementation strategies and bundles by the IAC management and their coverage; referral source of older adults to the IAC; and impact of the strategies on reach of the IAC on the 65 + population living in the care region. Adaptations to the strategies were documented using the FRAME-IS. Descriptive statistics were calculated and reported. RESULTS: Seven implementation strategies were selected and organized in bundles for each community care provider and older adults and their caregivers. The lowest fidelity score was found in implementation strategies selected for nursing homes whereas the highest score corresponded to strategies targeting older adults and caregivers. "Informational visits" was the strategy with the lowest coverage (2.5% for nursing homes and 10.5% for hospitals and specialized clinics). The main referral sources were self-referrals and referrals by caregivers, followed by nursing homes. The IAC reach among the 65 + population was 5.4%. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the use of implementation mapping to select implementation strategies to reach community-dwelling older adults. The reach was low suggesting that higher fidelity to the delivery of the strategies, and reflection on the causal pathway of the implementation strategies might be needed.

Summary of Veterans Health Administration Cancer Data Sources.

Objectives: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is a leader in generating transformational research across the cancer care continuum. Given the extensive body of cancer-related literature utilizing VHA data, our objectives are to: (1) describe the VHA data sources available for conducting cancer-related research, and (2) discuss examples of published cancer research using each data source. Methods: We identified commonly used data sources within the VHA and reviewed previously published cancer-related research that utilized these data sources. In addition, we reviewed VHA clinical and health services research web pages and consulted with a multidisciplinary group of cancer researchers that included hematologist/oncologists, health services researchers, and epidemiologists. Results: Commonly used VHA cancer data sources include the Veterans Affairs (VA) Cancer Registry System, the VA Central Cancer Registry (VACCR), the Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW)-Oncology Raw Domain (subset of data within the CDW), and the VA Cancer Care Cube (Cube). While no reference standard exists for cancer case ascertainment, the VACCR provides a systematic approach to ensure the complete capture of clinical history, cancer diagnosis, and treatment. Like many population-based cancer registries, a significant time lag exists due to constrained resources, which may make it best suited for historical epidemiologic studies. The CDW-Oncology Raw Domain and the Cube contain national information on incident cancers which may be useful for case ascertainment and prospective recruitment; however, additional resources may be needed for data cleaning. Conclusions: The VHA has a wealth of data sources available for cancer-related research. It is imperative that researchers recognize the advantages and disadvantages of each data source to ensure their research questions are addressed appropriately.

Congressional Expansion of Enhancing Breast Cancer Screening and Care at the Veterans Health Administration.

Despite high screening rates, breast cancer disparities persist among women veterans because of occupational risks and barriers to access. Three essential bills recently passed in Congress seek to expand access to breast cancer screenings and cancer care within the Veterans Health Administration. The Making Advances in Mammography and Medical Options for Veterans Act expands screening via partnerships with the National Cancer Institute, integrating telescreening and upgrading imaging technology. The Dr. Kate Hendricks Thomas Supporting Expanded Review for Veterans In Combat Environments Act broadens eligibility for those exposed to toxins and personalized risk assessments. The bipartisan Sergeant First Class Health Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act extends benefits for toxin-exposed veterans with presumptive conditions, including breast cancer. Further programs such as National TeleOncology, the Breast & Gynecologic Oncology System of Excellence, and research collaborations between the Veterans Health Administration, National Cancer Institute, and Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program seek to improve access, enhance understanding and care for women veterans with cancer, and mark significant progress in comprehensive care.

Gender Differences in Adoption and Frequency of Virtual Primary Care Among Men and Women Veterans.

Background: Women Veterans have unique health care utilization patterns; however, video-based primary care utilization among and between women and men has not been well examined. Methods: In a retrospective cohort study, we calculated gender-stratified video visit adoption (i.e., likelihood) and frequency (i.e., rate of use among users) between April 1, 2020, and March 31, 2022, by demographic and clinical characteristics known to impact health care utilization. Results: Among 5,389,139 Veterans (9.2% women), 32% of women and 18.6% of men had a video-based primary care visit over the 2-year study period. Gender interacted with Veteran characteristics and the likelihood of any video care. Men often had associations stronger in magnitude (both positive and negative) than women, including by age, rurality, history of housing instability, mental health conditions, and marital status. The direction of effect never diverged by gender. A positive association among women always coincided with a positive association among men, and vice versa, across all characteristics assessed. Only the risk ratio for video care use comparing Veterans of Black race with White race was stronger among women. In contrast to the video care adoption differences by gender, we found few differences in the frequency of video-based care by gender. Conclusions: The findings suggest there are fewer disparities by demographic and clinical characteristics in any video care use among women compared with men and little to no disparities in the frequency of video care use by gender. Understanding the variation in video care utilization by gender could help improve acceptance, appropriate utilization, and uptake of video-based visits for all.

Barriers and Facilitators Impacting Lung Cancer Screening Uptake Among Black Veterans: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in lung cancer screening (LCS) are well established. Black Veterans are among those at the highest risk for developing lung cancer but are less likely to complete LCS. We sought to identify barriers and facilitators to LCS uptake among Black Veterans. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A qualitative study using semistructured interviews was conducted with 32 Black Veterans to assess for barriers, facilitators, and contextual factors for LCS and strategies to improve screening. Veterans were purposively sampled by age, sex, and LCS participation status (ie, patients who received a low-dose CT [LDCT], patients who contacted the screening program but did not receive an LDCT, and patients who did not connect with the screening program nor receive an LDCT). Interview guides were developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework and Health Belief Model. Data were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Barriers of LCS uptake among Black Veterans include self-reported low LCS knowledge and poor memory, attention, and decision processes associated with the centralized LCS process. Facilitators of LCS uptake among Black Veterans include social/professional role; identity and social influences; perceived susceptibility, threat, and consequences due to smoking status and military or occupational exposures; emotion, behavioral regulation, and intentions; and high trust in providers. Environmental context and resources (eg, transportation) and race and racism serve as contextual factors that did not emerge as having a major impact on LCS uptake. Strategies to improve LCS uptake included increased social messaging surrounding LCS, various forms of information dissemination, LCS reminders, balanced and repeated shared decision-making discussions, and streamlined referrals. CONCLUSIONS: We identified addressable barriers and facilitators for LCS uptake among Black Veterans that can help focus efforts to improve disparities in screening. Future studies should explore provider perspectives and test interventions to improve equity in LCS.

Defining and Improving Outcomes Measurement for Virtual Care: Report from the VHA State-of-the-Art Conference on Virtual Care.

Virtual care, including synchronous and asynchronous telehealth, remote patient monitoring, and the collection and interpretation of patient-generated health data (PGHD), has the potential to transform healthcare delivery and increase access to care. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Office of Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D) convened a State-of-the-Art (SOTA) Conference on Virtual Care to identify future virtual care research priorities. Participants were divided into three workgroups focused on virtual care access, engagement, and outcomes. In this article, we report the findings of the Outcomes Workgroup. The group identified virtual care outcome areas with sufficient evidence, areas in need of additional research, and areas that are particularly well-suited to be studied within VHA. Following a rigorous process of literature review and consensus, the group focused on four questions: (1) What outcomes of virtual care should we be measuring and how should we measure them?; (2) how do we choose the "right" care modality for the "right" patient?; (3) what are potential consequences of virtual care on patient safety?; and (4) how can PGHD be used to benefit provider decision-making and patient self-management?. The current article outlines key conclusions that emerged following discussion of these questions, including recommendations for future research.

Evaluation of strategies to support implementation of a hospital walking program: protocol for a type III effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial.

BACKGROUND: STRIDE is a supervised walking program designed to address the negative consequences of immobility during hospitalization for older adults. In an 8-hospital stepped wedge randomized controlled trial, STRIDE was associated with reduced odds of hospital discharge to skilled nursing facility. STRIDE has the potential to become a system-wide approach to address hospital-associated disability in Veteran's Affairs; however, critical questions remain about how best to scale and sustain the program. The overall study goal is to compare the impact of two strategies on STRIDE program penetration (primary), fidelity, and adoption implementation outcomes. METHODS: Replicating Effective Programs will be used as a framework underlying all implementation support activities. In a parallel, cluster randomized trial, we will use stratified blocked randomization to assign hospitals (n = 32) to either foundational support, comprised of standard, low-touch activities, or enhanced support, which includes the addition of tailored, high-touch activities if hospitals do not meet STRIDE program benchmarks at 6 and 8 months following start date. All hospitals begin with foundational support for 6 months until randomization occurs. The primary outcome is implementation penetration defined as the proportion of eligible hospitalizations with ≥ 1 STRIDE walks at 10 months. Secondary outcomes are fidelity and adoption with all implementation outcomes additionally examined at 13 and 16 months. Fidelity will be assessed for STRIDE hospitalizations as the percentage of eligible hospital days with "full dose" of the program, defined as two or more documented walks or one walk for more than 5 min. Program adoption is a binary outcome defined as ≥ 5 patients with a STRIDE walk or not. Analyses will also include patient-level effectiveness outcomes (e.g., discharge to nursing home, length of stay) and staffing and labor costs. We will employ a convergent mixed-methods approach to explore and understand pre-implementation contextual factors related to differences in hospital-level adoption. DISCUSSION: Our study results will dually inform best practices for promoting successful implementation of an evidence-based hospital-based walking program. This information may support other programs by advancing our understanding of how to apply and scale-up national implementation strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered on June 1, 2021, at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT04868656 ).

Embedding implementation science in the research pipeline.

Clinical and health services researchers seek to discover effective programs, practices, and interventions to improve people's health. The current paradigm for evidence generation is incremental and misaligned to translate evidence-based discoveries into real-world settings. This persistent challenge are "valleys of death" that represent missed opportunities and preventable missteps to actually use scientific advancements in real-world clinical settings where they can improve health and well-being (De Geest S, Zúñiga F, Brunkert T et al. Powering Swiss health care for the future: implementation science to bridge "the valley of death". 2020;150:w20323). Only one in seven of evidence-based interventions is ever implemented. It is after an average of 17 years. We propose embedding the principles of implementation science throughout the research pipeline, from discovery to adoption, to efficiently translate discoveries into real-world contexts (Balas EA, Boren SA. Managing clinical knowledge for health care improvement. 2000;9:65-70). We outline implications for capacity building, including composition of the research team, study design, and competencies that could bolster the value proposition of implementation science. We describe a research paradigm that recognizes scientists' responsibility to ensure their discoveries be translated into real-world settings.

Most innovative research is not used in clinical care settings. When it is, it takes a very long time to get into the real world. This means that patients may not get the best care possible to improve their health. The research community has tools that can help design innovative research in ways that it could work in clinical care settings and tools to help that happen faster, so that clinical care teams and patients can use innovative research. This is called implementation science. We outline why it is important to use implementation science ideas and teams earlier and how we can support infrastructure to do so.

Health Care Access Barriers and Self-Reported Health Among Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors.

Purpose: Adolescents and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors (15-39 years at diagnosis) are at risk for treatment-related late effects but face barriers in accessing survivorship care. We examined the prevalence of five health care access (HCA) barriers: affordability, accessibility, availability, accommodation, and acceptability. Methods: We identified AYA survivors from the University of North Carolina (UNC) Cancer Survivorship Cohort who completed a baseline questionnaire in 2010-2016. Participants had a history of cancer, were ≥18 years of age, and receiving care at a UNC oncology clinic. The sample was restricted to AYA survivors who were interviewed ≥1 year postdiagnosis. We used modified Poisson regression to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) for the association between HCA barriers and self-reported fair or poor health, adjusted for sociodemographic and cancer characteristics. Results: The sample included 146 AYA survivors who were a median age of 39 at the time of the survey. The majority (71%)-and 92% of non-Hispanic Black survivors-reported at least one HCA barrier, including acceptability (40%), accommodation (38%), or affordability (31%). More than one-quarter of survivors (28%) reported fair or poor health. Affordability barriers (PR: 1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-3.18) and acceptability barriers (PR: 1.60, 95% CI: 0.96-2.66) were associated with a higher prevalence of fair/poor health, as were the cumulative effects of multiple HCA dimensions reported as barriers. Conclusions: Barriers across multiple HCA dimensions were prevalent and associated with worse health in AYA survivors. Findings highlight the need to better understand and target specific barriers to care for diverse AYA survivors to improve their long-term health.

Implementation evaluation of a teledermatology virtual clinic at an academic medical center.

BACKGROUND: Teledermatology (TD) is an evidence-based practice that may increase access to dermatologic care. We sought to use the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) and the Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) frameworks to evaluate implementation of TD at Duke. METHODS: The EPIS and RE-AIM frameworks were deployed to design and implement a TD program that leveraged the strengths of the Duke University Health System and addressed previously reported barriers to implementation of store-and-forward and synchronous TD models. In the resultant hybrid TD model, trained primary care providers (PCPs) sent e-comm referrals with clinical and dermatoscopic images to dermatology. These e-consults were reviewed asynchronously and patients were scheduled for a synchronous video visit with dermatology within days. Dermatologists managed the patient plan. This hybrid TD model was piloted at four primary care clinics. Pertinent outcomes from a TD-adapted RE-AIM framework were tracked using electronic health record data. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a post-video visit survey (n = 18). Implementation barriers and facilitators were also collected through provider surveys (n = 24 PCPs, n = 10 dermatologists, n = 10 dermatology residents). RESULTS: At four PCP clinics throughout 9/1/2021-4/30/2022, there were 218 TD referrals. Video visits occurred on average 7.5 ± 0.5 days after referral and 18/18 patients completing the post-visit survey were satisfied. Adoption varied between clinics, with one placing 22% of all dermatology referrals as TD and another placing 2%. The primary PCP barriers to TD were time burdens, lack of fit in clinic flow, and discomfort with image taking. Top-endorsed potential facilitating interventions included allowing for rash referrals without dermoscopy and assurance for clinical evaluation within 3 days. CONCLUSIONS: The use of implementation science frameworks allowed for identification of system and contextual strengths which informed the hybrid TD pilot. Barriers and facilitating interventions will provide guidance for expansion and ongoing maintenance of TD.

Group physical therapy for knee osteoarthritis: protocol for a hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of chronic pain and disability and one of the most common conditions treated in outpatient physical therapy (PT). Because of the high and growing prevalence of knee OA, there is a need for efficient approaches for delivering exercise-based PT to patients with knee OA. A prior randomized controlled trial (RCT) showed that a 6-session Group Physical Therapy Program for Knee OA (Group PT) yields equivalent or greater improvements in pain and functional outcomes compared with traditional individual PT, while requiring fewer clinician hours per patient to deliver. This manuscript describes the protocol for a hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation trial comparing two implementation packages to support delivery of Group PT. METHODS: In this 12-month embedded trial, a minimum of 16 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) will be randomized to receive one of two implementation support packages for their Group PT programs: a standard, low-touch support based on Replicating Effective Programs (REP) versus enhanced REP (enREP), which adds tailored, high-touch support if sites do not meet Group PT adoption and sustainment benchmarks at 6 and 9 months following launch. Implementation outcomes, including penetration (primary), adoption, and fidelity, will be assessed at 6 and 12 months (primary assessment time point). Additional analyses will include patient-level effectiveness outcomes (pain, function, satisfaction) and staffing and labor costs. A robust qualitative evaluation of site implementation context and experience, as well as site-led adaptations to the Group PT program, will be conducted. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this study is the first to evaluate the impact of tailored, high-touch implementation support on implementation outcomes when compared to standardized, low-touch support for delivering a PT-based intervention. The Group PT program has strong potential to become a standard offering for PT, improving function and pain-related outcomes for patients with knee OA. Results will provide information regarding the effectiveness and value of this implementation approach and a deeper understanding of how healthcare systems can support wide-scale adoption of Group PT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered on March 7, 2022 at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT05282927 ).

Multilevel Community Engagement to Inform a Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how patients, community-based perinatal support professionals, and health system clinicians and staff perceived facilitators and barriers to implementation of a randomized clinical trial (RCT) designed to optimize Black maternal heart health. METHODS: This article describes the formative work that we believed needed to occur before the start of the Change of H.E.A.R.T (Here for Equity, Advocacy, Reflection and Transformation) RCT. We used a qualitative, descriptive design and community-based, participatory approach, the latter of which allowed our team to intentionally focus on avoiding harm and equalizing power dynamics throughout the research process. Data were collected between November 2021 and January 2022 through six semistructured focus groups that included attending physicians and midwives (n=7), residents (n=4), nurses (n=6), support staff (n=7), community-based perinatal support professionals (n=6), and patients (n=8). RESULTS: Four primary themes emerged. The first three themes were present across all groups and included: 1) Trauma in the Community and Health System, 2) Lack of Trust, and 3) Desire to Be Heard and Valued. The fourth theme, Hope and Enthusiasm, was expressed predominantly by patients, community-based perinatal support professionals, residents, and support staff, and less so by the attending physician group. CONCLUSION: Participants articulated a number of key sentiments regarding facilitators and barriers to implementing Change of H.E.A.R.T. We noted variability in perceptions from different groups. This has important implications for health equity efforts in similarly underresourced health systems where Black birthing people experience the greatest morbidity and mortality. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05499507.

Association of Unmet Social Needs With Metformin Use Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between social needs and metformin use among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a prospective cohort study of adults with T2D (n = 722), we linked electronic health record (EHR) and Surescripts (Surescripts, LLC) prescription network data to abstract data on patient-reported social needs and to calculate metformin adherence based on expected refill frequency using a proportion of days covered methodology. RESULTS: After adjusting for demographics and clinical complexity, two or more social needs (-0.046; 95% CI -0.089, 0.003), being uninsured (-0.052; 95% CI -0.095, -0.009) and while adjusting for other needs, being without housing (-0.069; 95% CI -0.121, -0.018) and lack of access to medicine/health care (-0.058; 95% CI -0.115, -0.000) were associated with lower use. CONCLUSIONS: We found that overall social need burden and specific needs, particularly housing and health care access, were associated with clinically significant reductions in metformin adherence among patients with T2D.

Optimizing the Equitable Deployment of Virtual Care for Women: Protocol for a Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Examining Patient and Provider Perspectives Supplemented with Primary Qualitative Data.

Introduction: Women experience numerous barriers to patient-centered health care (e.g., lack of continuity). Such barriers are amplified for women from marginalized communities. Virtual care may improve equitable access. We are conducting a partner-engaged, qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) of patients' and providers' experiences with virtual health care delivery for women. Methods: We use a best-fit framework approach informed by the Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability framework and Public Health Critical Race Praxis. We will supplement published literature with qualitative interviews with women from underrepresented communities and their health care providers. We will engage patients and other contributors through multiple participatory methods. Results: Our search identified 5525 articles published from 2010 to 2022. Sixty were eligible, of which 42 focused on women and 24 on provider experiences. Data abstraction and analysis are ongoing. Discussion: This work offers four key innovations to advance health equity: (1) conceptual foundation rooted in an antiracist action-oriented praxis; (2) worked example of centering QES on marginalized communities; (3) supplementing QES with primary qualitative information with populations historically marginalized in the health care system; and (4) participatory approaches that foster longitudinal partnered engagement. Health Equity Implications: Our approach to exploring virtual health care for women demonstrates an antiracist praxis to inform knowledge generation. In doing so, we aim to generate findings that can guide health care systems in the equitable deployment of comprehensive virtual care for women.

Cardiovascular Risk Factor Disparities in Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer Compared With the General Population.

Background: It is unknown whether a history of childhood cancer modifies the established disparities in cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) observed in the general population. Objectives: We sought to determine if disparities in CVRFs by race/ethnicity are similar among childhood cancer survivors compared with the general population. Methods: The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) is a retrospective cohort with a longitudinal follow-up of 24,084 5-year survivors diagnosed between 1970 and 1999. Multivariable piecewise exponential regression estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, obesity, and ≥2 CVRFs by race/ethnicity. The CCSS sibling cohort and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cohort were used to compare the sociodemographic-adjusted IRRs for same-race/same-ethnicity disparities. Results: Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) (n = 1,092) and Hispanic (n = 1,405) survivors compared with non-Hispanic White (NHW) (n = 13,960) survivors reported a higher cumulative incidence of diabetes (8.4%, 9.7%, and 5.1%, respectively); obesity (47.2%, 48.9%, and 30.2%, respectively); multiple CVRFs (17.7%, 16.6%, and 12.3%, respectively); and, for NHB survivors, hypertension (19.5%, 13.6%, and 14.3%, respectively) by 40 years of age (P < 0.001). Controlling for sociodemographic and treatment factors compared with NHW survivors, IRRs for NHB were increased for hypertension (IRR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.1-1.8), obesity (IRR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.4-2.1), and multiple CVRFs (IRR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.2-2.1). IRRs for Hispanic survivors were increased for diabetes (IRR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.2-2.6) and obesity (IRR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.2-1.7). The pattern of IRRs for CVRF differences was similar among CCSS sibling and National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cohorts. Conclusions: The higher burden of CVRFs among NHB and Hispanic survivors compared with NHW survivors was similar to the general population. The promotion of cardiovascular health equity is critical in this high-risk population.