Screening for Prediabetes and Diabetes in a National Network of Federally Qualified Health Centers: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: In 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended screening for prediabetes and diabetes among adults aged 35-70 years with overweight or obesity. Studying dysglycemia screening in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) that serve vulnerable patient populations is needed to understand health equity implications of this recommendation. OBJECTIVE: To investigate screening practices among FQHC patients who would be eligible according to the 2021 USPSTF recommendation. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study analyzing electronic health records from a national network of 282 FQHC sites. PARTICIPANTS: We included 183,329 patients without prior evidence of prediabetes or diabetes, who had ≥ 1 office visit from 2018-2020. MAIN MEASURES: Screening eligibility was based on age and measured body mass index (BMI). The primary outcome, screening completion, was ascertained using hemoglobin A1c or fasting plasma glucose results from 2018-2020. KEY RESULTS: Among 89,543 patients who would be eligible according to the 2021 USPSTF recommendation, 53,263 (59.5%) were screened. Those who completed screening had higher BMI values than patients who did not (33.0 ± 6.7 kg/m2 vs. 31.9 ± 6.2 kg/m2, p < 0.001). Adults aged 50-64 years had greater odds of screening completion relative to younger patients (OR 1.13, 95% CI: 1.10-1.17). Patients from racial and ethnic minority groups, as well as those without health insurance, were more likely to complete screening than White patients and insured patients, respectively. Clinical risk factors for diabetes were also associated with dysglycemia screening. Among patients who completed screening, 23,588 (44.3%) had values consistent with prediabetes or diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of FQHC patients who would be eligible according to the 2021 USPSTF recommendation were screened. Screening completion was higher among middle-aged patients, those with greater BMI values, as well as vulnerable groups with a high risk of developing diabetes. Future research should examine adoption of the 2021 USPSTF screening recommendation and its impact on health equity.

Current communication practices for biomarker testing in non-small cell lung cancer: Exploring patient and clinician perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: We qualitatively explored patient and clinician experiences with biomarker testing in one academic health system to identify current communication practices and unmet testing information needs. METHODS: We conducted 1:1 in-depth interviews with 15 clinicians (i.e., nurses, oncologists, pathologists) and 12 patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer between January and May 2022. Participants described experiences with biomarker testing as well as associated communication practices and needs. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Analysis was informed by the Framework Method. RESULTS: Patients described challenges retaining information early in their patient journey. While patients were generally aware of biomarkers and their effect on treatment options, they expressed limited knowledge of expected time delays between testing and receiving results. Additionally, many did not know their testing results. Clinicians and patients both noted no standard education material on biomarker testing is currently available. They suggested such materials could support patient knowledge and decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Communication between patients and clinicians about biomarker testing is largely delivered through verbal counseling at a time when patients may be cognitively compromised. All participants supported the idea of delivering standard, tangible education materials on biomarker testing to patients. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Education materials may enhance counseling efforts and patient knowledge.

Association of Health Literacy and Numeracy With Lupus Knowledge and the Creation of the Lupus Knowledge Assessment Test.

OBJECTIVE: Limited health literacy and numeracy are associated with worse patient-reported outcomes and higher disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), but which factors may mediate this association is unknown. We sought to determine the association of health literacy and numeracy with SLE knowledge. METHODS: Patients with SLE were recruited from an academic center clinic. Participants completed validated assessments of health literacy (Newest Vital Sign [NVS]; n = 96) and numeracy (Numeracy Understanding in Medicine Instrument, Short Version [S-NUMI]; n = 85). They also completed the Lupus Knowledge Assessment Test (LKAT), which consists of 4 questions assessing SLE knowledge that were determined through consensus expert opinion for their wide applicability and importance related to self-management of the disease. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression modeling were used to analyze the results. RESULTS: In our SLE cohort (n = 125), 33% (32/96) had limited health literacy and 76% (65/85) had limited numeracy. The majority correctly identified that hydroxychloroquine prevented SLE flares (91%); however, only 23% of participants correctly answered a numeracy question assessing which urine protein to creatinine (UPC) ratio was > 1000 mg/g. The mean LKAT score was 2.7 out of 4.0. Limited health literacy, but not numeracy, was associated with lower knowledge about SLE as measured by the LKAT, even after adjusting for education. CONCLUSION: Patients with SLE with limited health literacy had lower knowledge about SLE. The LKAT could be further refined and/or used as a screening tool to identify patients with knowledge gaps. Further work is needed to improve patients' understanding of proteinuria and investigate whether literacy-sensitive education can improve care.

Differences in barriers to mammography between rural and urban women.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined differences between rural and urban women in mammography barriers, knowledge, and experiences. Exploring differences can help inform tailored interventions. METHODS: Women, aged ≥40, who had not been screened in the past 2 years were recruited from eight federally qualified health centers across Louisiana. They were given a structured interview assessing mammography knowledge, beliefs, barriers, experiences, and literacy. RESULTS: Of the 1189 patients who participated, 65.0% were African American, 61.6% were rural, and 44.0% had low literacy. Contrary to guidelines, most believed mammography should be done annually (74.3%) before age 40 (70.5%). Compared to urban women, rural participants were more likely to believe mammography will find small breast lumps early (34.4% vs. 6.5%, p<0.0001) and strongly disagree that mammography is embarrassing (14.6% vs. 8.4%, p=0.0002) or that they are afraid of finding something wrong (21.2% vs.12.3%, p=0.007). Rural women were more likely to report a physician recommendation for mammography (84.3% vs. 76.5%, p=0.006), but they were less likely to have received education (57.2% vs. 63.6%, p=0.06) or to have ever had a mammogram (74.8% vs. 78.1%, p=0.007). In multivariate analyses controlling for race, literacy, and age, all rural/urban differences remained significant, except for receipt of a mammogram. CONCLUSIONS: Most participants were unclear about when they should begin mammography. Rural participants reported stronger positive beliefs, higher self-efficacy, fewer barriers, and having a physician recommendation for mammography but were less likely to receive education or screening.