The impact of a small-group mammography video discussion on promoting screening uptake among nonadherent Chinese American immigrant women: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of an in-person, small-group mammography video discussion (SMVD) intervention on mammography uptake among nonadherent Chinese American immigrant women. METHODS: Women (N = 956) were randomized into either an SMVD group, where Chinese-speaking community health workers (CHWs) used an effective, culturally appropriate video to discuss mammography, or a video-only group, which viewed the cultural video sent by mail. Outcomes were mammography uptake at 6 months and 21 months postintervention. RESULTS: Women in both groups increased mammography uptake, and an outcome analysis revealed no group differences (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], .68-2.06). Overall, 61.2% of the SMVD group and 55.3% of the video-only group had at least one mammogram during the 21-month follow-up period. When considering attendance to the SMVD, SMVD attendees had higher mammography uptake than the video-only group (AOR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.19-1.92), and SMVD nonattendees had lower mammography uptake than the video-only group (AOR, .33; 95% CI, .22-.50). CONCLUSIONS: Both intervention strategies were associated with increased mammography uptake. The authors observed that the increase in use was greater among women who participated in the SMVD session compared with those who viewed the cultural video only. Future research may explore a virtual SMVD intervention for higher session attendance and increased mammography uptake (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01292200).

A multilevel intervention to promote HPV vaccination among young adults in Texas: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) infections can cause cancers of the cervix, vagina, vulva, penis, anus, and oropharynx. The most recently approved HPV vaccine, Gardasil-9, protects against HPV infection and can prevent HPV-associated invasive cancers. However, Gardasil-9 is one of the most underused vaccines in the US today. Young adults are at risk for HPV infection, but many are not vaccinated. This study uses a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test an innovative multilevel intervention to increase HPV vaccination rates among young adults. In this paper, we describe the research protocol. METHODS: The study uses a two by three factorial design. A total of 1200 young adults in Texas, age 18-26 years, who have not been previously fully vaccinated against HPV will be randomly assigned to one of six conditions to receive: (1) standard CDC information about HPV vaccination (control); (2) video narratives about HPV vaccination; (3) written narratives about HPV vaccination; or (4-6) enhanced access to HPV vaccine combined with (4) standard CDC information, (5) video narratives, or (6) written narratives. The two primary outcomes are the rate of HPV vaccination initiation by 3-month follow-up and rate of HPV vaccination completion by 9-month follow-ups. We will determine the impact of the individual level intervention (i.e., persuasive narratives through video or written format), the systemic level intervention (i.e., enhanced access to HPV vaccines), and the combination of both levels, on HPV vaccination initiation and completion. We will also use purposive sampling to select participants to take part in semi-structured interviews/focus groups to better understand the mechanisms of the intervention. DISCUSSION: Recruitment and data collection began in March 2022. We expect to complete data collection by March 2026. We expect that narratives, enhanced access, and the combination of both will improve HPV vaccination initiation and completion rates among young adults. If proven successful, these individual- and system-level interventions can be easily disseminated in regions with low HPV vaccination rates to improve HPV vaccination, and ultimately decrease HPV-related cancer burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05057312.

Information Seeking and Risk Reduction Intentions in Response to Environmental Threat Messages: The Role of Message Processing.

Communicating complex information about environmental health risks in a single message is impossible. Thus, message designers hope that risk messages encourage people to think more about the message and risks, look for more information, and ultimately make behavior changes. The presentation of information about environmental risks using threat appeals is a common message design strategy thought to increase message engagement and influence attitudes, information seeking, and risk reduction behaviors. We compared lower threat messages, which did not include explicit statements about susceptibility and severity of a risk, to higher threat messages, which did. We combined predictions from the extended parallel process model with dual-process theories of persuasion to examine whether people respond to these types of messages differently. In an online experiment, participants (N = 892) were randomly assigned to a message condition (higher or lower threat) and topic condition (arsenic, bisphenol A, or volatile organic compounds). Overall, participants exposed to higher threat messages (regardless of risk topic) reported experiencing higher levels of fear. Higher levels of fear were associated with more positive thoughts about the message (in alignment with the message advocacy) and fewer negative thoughts about the message (against the message advocacy), both of which influenced message attitudes. Finally, message attitudes were associated with increased information seeking and intentions to engage in risk reduction behaviors.

The Influence of Family Communication Patterns on the Processing of Messages to Increase Family Health History Seeking Intentions.

The current study extends family communication patterns (FCP) research to assess how family communication schemata (conversation and conformity orientation dimensions) influence systematic processing of health appeals intended to persuade individuals to seek family health history information, emphasizing an updated conceptualization of family conformity (i.e., the expanded conformity orientation scale). Our results suggest that conversation orientation and the conformity dimension of parental control are the primary drivers of systematic processing of family health history messages. Systematic processing, in turn, was significantly associated with more positive attitudes and greater intentions to seek health information from family members. Our results suggest family communication patterns may impact individual engagement with family health history campaign messages, thus campaign designers may want to consider how best to tailor messages to match family communication characteristics.

Cultural Appropriateness in Health Communication: A Review and A Revised Framework.

A revised framework for cultural appropriateness is offered on the basis of a systematic review of operationalizations in 44 cancer screening interventions for Asian Americans. Studies commonly conveyed the epidemiological bases of the intervention (97.7%) and used the language of the population (95.5%). Less commonly reported were strategies central to health communication: cultural features of the intervention messages (77.3%) and the cultural beliefs and values that the intervention focused on (43.2%). Few used cultural tailoring (4.5%) and none aimed to address acculturation or cultural identity. The theoretical framework most frequently used was the health belief model (27.3%) which does not explain the role of culture. More studies focused on cultural barriers (20.5%) than cultural strengths (9.1%). Our revised framework comprises six cultural appropriateness strategies of cultural identity, linguistic, perceptual features, content, constituent-involving, and socioeconomic context-adaptive. It prioritizes cultural identity to recognize the dynamics within racial ethnic groups and to inform adaptive efforts for cultural appropriateness. It emphasizes examining cultural strengths that can facilitate change, as well as reducing cultural barriers. Future research and action should address the disparities in extant health disparities research in which theory and methods are underdeveloped and underutilized for Asian Americans.

Tobacco quitline staffs' knowledge and attitudes about connecting quitline callers to lung cancer screening educational materials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of training quitline staff in lung cancer screening (LCS) on knowledge and attitudes towards connecting quitline callers to LCS educational materials. METHODS: We conducted a pre-post evaluation within a larger implementation project in the U.S. to support LCS among quitline callers. From July 2020 to June 2021, staff from four quitline service providers completed surveys before and after training on LCS knowledge. After training, staff completed the acceptability of intervention measure, intervention appropriateness measure, and feasibility of the intervention measure. RESULTS: A total of 245 staff completed the initial demographic survey (analytic sample), 130 completed the pre-training survey, and 225 completed the post-training survey. Staff were on average 47.4 years old and 76.7% were female. LCS knowledge improved after the training (n = 120, mean difference = +26.5%, 95% CI 21.6, 31.4, p < 0.001). Overall, staff felt that connecting quitline callers to LCS education materials was acceptable (M = 4.0, SD = 0.8), appropriate (M = 4.1, SD = 0.7), and feasible (M = 4.0, SD = 0.7). CONCLUSIONS: Receiving training about LCS eligibility and the benefits and harms of screening improved LCS knowledge among quitline staff. Quitline staff found that connecting callers with LCS educational materials is acceptable, appropriate, and feasible, and aligned with their primary mission.

The TELEhealth Shared decision-making COaching and navigation in Primary carE (TELESCOPE) intervention: a study protocol for delivering shared decision-making for lung cancer screening by patient navigators.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality but has potential harms for patients. A shared decision-making (SDM) conversation about LCS is required by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for LCS reimbursement. To overcome barriers to SDM in primary care, this protocol describes a telehealth decision coaching and navigation intervention for LCS in primary care clinics delivered by patient navigators. The objective of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention and its implementation potential, compared with an enhanced usual care (EUC) arm. METHODS: Patients (n = 420) of primary care clinicians (n = 120) are being recruited to a cluster randomized controlled trial. Clinicians are randomly assigned to 1) TELESCOPE intervention: prior to an upcoming non-acute clinic visit, patients participate in a telehealth decision coaching and navigation session about LCS delivered by trained patient navigators and nurse navigators place a low-dose CT scan (LDCT) order for each TELESCOPE patient wanting LCS, or 2) EUC: patients receive enhanced usual care from a clinician. Usual care is enhanced by providing clinicians in both arms with access to a Continuing Medical Education (CME) webinar about LCS and an LCS discussion guide. Patients complete surveys at baseline and 1-week after the scheduled clinic visit to assess quality of the SDM process. Re-navigation is attempted with TELESCOPE patients who have not completed the LDCT within 3 months. One month before being due for an annual screening, TELESCOPE patients whose initial LCS showed low-risk findings are randomly assigned to receive a telehealth decision coaching booster session with a navigator or no booster. Electronic health records are abstracted at 6, 12 and 18 months after the initial decision coaching session (TELESCOPE) or clinic visit (EUC) to assess initial and annual LCS uptake, imaging results, follow-up testing for abnormal findings, cancer diagnoses, treatment, and tobacco treatment referrals. This study will evaluate factors that facilitate or interfere with program implementation using mixed methods. DISCUSSION: We will assess whether a decision coaching and patient navigation intervention can feasibly and effectively support high-quality SDM for LCS and guideline-concordant LCS uptake for patients in busy primary care practices serving diverse patient populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05491213) on August 4, 2022. PROTOCOL VERSION: Version 1, April 10, 2024.

The TELEhealth Shared decision-making Coaching and Navigation in Primary carE (TELESCOPE) intervention: a study protocol for delivering shared decision-making for lung cancer screening by patient navigators.

Background: Lung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality but has potential harms for patients. A shared decision-making (SDM) conversation about LCS is required by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for LCS reimbursement. To overcome barriers to SDM in primary care, this protocol describes a telehealth decision coaching intervention for LCS in primary care clinics delivered by patient navigators. The objective of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention and its implementation potential, compared with an enhanced usual care (EUC) arm. Methods: Patients (n = 420) of primary care clinicians (n = 120) are being recruited to a cluster randomized controlled trial. Clinicians are randomly assigned to 1) TELESCOPE intervention: prior to an upcoming non-acute clinic visit, patients participate in a telehealth decision coaching session about LCS delivered by trained patient navigators and nurse navigators place a low-dose CT scan (LDCT) order for each TELESCOPE patient wanting LCS, or 2) EUC: patients receive enhanced usual care from a clinician. Usual care is enhanced by providing clinicians in both arms with access to a Continuing Medical Education (CME) webinar about LCS and an LCS discussion guide. Patients complete surveys at baseline and 1-week after the scheduled clinic visit to assess quality of the SDM process. Re-navigation is attempted with TELESCOPE patients who have not completed the LDCT within 3 months. One month before being due for an annual screening, TELESCOPE patients whose initial LCS showed low-risk findings are randomly assigned to receive a telehealth decision coaching booster session with a navigator or no booster. Electronic health records are abstracted at 6, 12 and 18 months after the initial decision coaching session (TELESCOPE) or clinic visit (EUC) to assess initial and annual LCS uptake, imaging results, follow-up testing for abnormal findings, cancer diagnoses, treatment, and tobacco treatment referrals. This study will evaluate factors that facilitate or interfere with program implementation using mixed methods. Discussion: We will assess whether a decision coaching and patient navigation intervention can feasibly support high-quality SDM for LCS and guideline-concordant LCS uptake for patients in busy primary care practices serving diverse patient populations. Trial Registration: This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05491213) on August 4, 2022.

Cultural influences on shared decision-making among Asian Americans: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize how Asian Americans negotiate involvement in shared decision-making (SDM) with their providers, the cultural influences on SDM, and perceived barriers and facilitators to SDM. METHODS: This is a systematic review of qualitative studies. We searched six electronic databases and sources of gray literature until March 2021. Two reviewers independently screened studies, performed quality appraisal, and data extraction. Meta-synthesis was performed to summarize themes using a three-step approach. RESULTS: Twenty studies with 675 participants were included. We abstracted 275 initial codes and grouped these into 19 subthemes and 4 major themes: (1) negotiating power and differing expectations in SDM; (2) cultural influences on SDM; (3) importance of social support in SDM; and (4) supportive factors for facilitating SDM. CONCLUSIONS: Asian Americans have important perspectives, needs, and preferences regarding SDM that impacts how they engage with the provider on medical decisions and their perception of the quality of their care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Asian American patients valued good communication and sufficient time with their provider, and that it is important for health professionals to understand patients' desired level of involvement in the SDM process and in the final decision, and who should be involved in SDM beyond the patient. OTHER: This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021241665).

Impact of the shared decision-making process on lung cancer screening decisions.

BACKGROUND: Professional organizations recommend the use of shared decision-making (SDM) in supporting patients' decisions about lung cancer screening (LCS). The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the SDM process on patient knowledge about LCS, decisional conflict, intentions to adhere to screening recommendations, and its role in how the patient made the final decision. METHODS: This study surveyed patients screened for lung cancer within 12 months of the survey, recruited from two academic tertiary care centers in the South Central Region of the U.S. (May to July 2018). RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-four patients completed the survey (87.9% White, 52% male, and mean age of 64.81). Higher SDM process scores (which indicates a better SDM process reported by patients) were significantly associated with greater knowledge of LCS (b = 0.17 p < 0.01). Higher SDM process scores were associated with less decisional conflict about their screening choice (b = 0.45, p < 0.001), greater intentions to make the same decision again (OR = 1.42, 95% CI = [1.06-1.89]), and greater intentions to undergo LCS again (OR = 1.32, 95% CI = [1.08-1.62]). The SDM process score was not associated with patients' report of whether or not they shared the final decision with the healthcare provider (OR = 1.07, 95% CI = [0.85-1.35]). CONCLUSION(S): This study found that a better SDM process was associated with better affective-cognitive outcomes among patients screened for lung cancer.

Prevalence of Lung Cancer Screening Among Eligible Adults in 4 US States in 2021.

This cross-sectional study estimates the prevalence of lung cancer screening among eligible adults in 2021 and examines factors associated with screening.