Regular aspirin use among a sample of American Indians/Alaskan Natives in the Upper Midwest region of the United States.

Despite high prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and CVD risk factors among American Indian or Alaska Native adults (AI/AN), there is little information on aspirin use in this population. This survey-based study seeks to understand prevalence of aspirin use in a sample of AI/AN adults in the Upper Midwestern United States. In-person and telephone based surveys were conducted querying self-reported CVD and CVD risk factors, aspirin use, and aspirin related discussion with clinicians. A total of 237 AI/AN participants were included: mean age (SD) was 60.8 (8.4) years; 143 (60 %) were women; 59 (25 %) reported CVD history. CVD risk factors were common particularly smoking (37 %) and diabetes (37 %). Aspirin use was much higher among those with CVD (secondary prevention, 76 %) than those without (primary prevention, 33 %). Primary prevention aspirin use was significantly associated with age and all CVD risk factors in unadjusted analyses. After adjustment for demographics and CVD risk factors, only age (aRR 1.13 per 5 years, 95 % CI 1.02, 1.25) and diabetes (aRR 2.44, 95 % CI 1.52, 3.92) remained significantly associated with aspirin. Regardless of CVD status, a higher proportion of those taking aspirin reported a conversation about aspirin with their doctor compared to those not taking aspirin. Among participants with no CVD, those who had such a conversation were 2.6 times more likely to use aspirin than those who did not have a conversation (aRR 2.64, 95 % CI 1.58, 4.44). The findings of this study emphasize the importance of the patient-provider relationship for preventive therapy.

Incorporating a Whole-Person Perspective in Consumer-Generated Data: Social Determinants, Resilience, and Hidden Patterns.

Given the complex health and social needs of older adults, the rapid growth of the aging population, and the increasing use of information technology in healthcare, there is a critical need for informatics solutions that advance gerontological nursing care and knowledge discovery. This article illustrates the value of standardized data for healthcare quality improvement throughout the life cycle of data capture and reuse. One such informatics solution is the MyStrengths+MyHealth app, which incorporates a whole-person perspective through the Simplified Omaha System Terms assessment, including the social and behavioral determinants of health, as well as resilience. The data describe whole-person health of older adults from MyStrengths+MyHealth for use in clinical encounters and as raw data for research. There is potential to use such standardized data to improve gerontological nursing care at the bedside and for population health management and research.

Aspirin Use and Misuse for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases.

INTRODUCTION: Daily aspirin use for primary cardiovascular disease prevention is common among adults. Numerous clinical trials observe reduced cardiovascular disease with regular low-dose aspirin. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in 2016 published guidelines for aspirin use, but controversy exists about the side effects, and overuse or underuse may be common despite the guidelines. Using the Task Force recommendations, this paper describes the prevalence of appropriate aspirin use and physician advice in a population sample. METHODS: A random sample of men and women (aged 50-69 years) living in the Upper Midwest in 2017-2018 were surveyed, collecting demographic data, health history, and aspirin use. Appropriate primary prevention with aspirin was defined as having ≥10% cardiovascular disease risk (hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, smoking) with daily or every other day aspirin use. Those with prevalent cardiovascular disease were labeled as secondary prevention. RESULTS: A total of 1,352 adults were surveyed (697 women, 655 men). The criteria for secondary prevention were fulfilled in 188 participants, and these were eliminated from the analysis. In the remaining group, aspirin was indicated in 32.9% (383 of 1,164). Among those, 46.0% (176 of 383) were appropriate users, and 54.0% (207 of 383) were nonusers despite indications. Overuse, where aspirin is not indicated, was common at 26.9% (210 of 781). Discussion with a physician, although reported in 29% of subjects, was associated with some improvement in the appropriate use but also with overuse and underuse. CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin use for primary cardiovascular disease prevention is common. However, many adults are medicating without indication (overuse) or are not using aspirin despite guidelines (underuse).

The Effects of a Multicomponent Colorectal Cancer Screening Intervention on Knowledge, Recommendation, and Screening among Underserved Populations.

This trial tested a multicomponent intervention to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among underserved patients. Participants were randomized to: (1) physician + patient intervention, (2) physician-only intervention, or (3) usual care (UC). Study outcomes included patient knowledge, physician recommendation of CRC screening, and screening completion via colonoscopy or stool tests. Among 538 participants, those exposed to the physician + patient intervention had significantly increased knowledge over patients in physician-only (p=.0008) or UC arms (p=.0003). However, there were no statistically significant differences in completion of CRC screening, with 10%, 20%, and 16% of UC, physician-only, and physician + patient participants screened, respectively. In UC, all completed screenings were colonoscopy, whereas in the physician-only and physician + patient arms, 39% and 46% of completed tests were via stool test, respectively. The multicomponent intervention did not increase overall CRC screening, yet results underscore the need to provide patients options for completing CRC screening.

Using the TRANSLATE Framework to Support Practice Transformation: Perspectives of a Practice Facilitator.

BACKGROUND: In 2008, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) awarded Statewide Health Improvement Partnership (SHIP) funding to community health boards (CHBs), directing them to partner with schools, worksites, communities, and health care to address obesity and tobacco use/exposure. METHODS: Each CHB selected one of two health care strategies: implement obesity and healthy lifestyle guidelines or connect clinics to community resources. The CHB in rural west-central Minnesota chose to champion clinical guideline implementation, assigning one of its own county-level public health nurses the role of practice facilitator (PF). This decision set the stage for a novel community partnership between public health, clinical guideline developers, and local providers of relevant clinical services. LESSONS LEARNED: This community perspective describes how the PF organized support for clinical guideline implementation using the TRANSLATE framework, and explores the capacity of the TRANSLATE framework to accommodate particularities of clinical partners that is necessary in working to transform evidence-based knowledge into real-world practice.

Comparing the Performance of the S-TOFHLA and NVS Among and Between English and Spanish Speakers.

Given the growing body of evidence demonstrating the significant implications of health literacy on a myriad of outcomes, researchers continue to incorporate health literacy metrics in studies. With this proliferation in measurement of health literacy in research, it has become increasingly important to understand how various health literacy tools perform in specific populations. Our objective was to compare the performance of two widely used tests, the Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (S-TOFHLA) and the Newest Vital Sign (NVS) among and between a sample of English and Spanish-speaking patients. Adults (N = 402) ages 50-75 years participating in a trial to promote colorectal cancer screening completed in-person interviews which included both measures of health literacy. In the full sample, the tests were moderately correlated (r = 0.69, p < .0001); however, there was a stronger correlation among those completing the test in Spanish (r = 0.83) as compared with English (r = 0.58, p < .0001). English speakers more often were categorized as having adequate literacy by the S-TOFHLA as compared with the NVS, whereas Spanish speakers scored consistently low on both instruments. These findings indicate that the categorization of participants into levels of literacy is likely to vary, depending on whether the NVS or S-TOFHLA is used for assessment, a factor which researchers should be aware of when selecting literacy assessments.

Stand against cancer: evaluating a breast and cervical cancer screening program for uninsured patients.

BACKGROUND: Stand Against Cancer (SAC) is a long-running, community-based, organization-led program that addresses breast and cervical cancer disparities. Managed by Access Community Health Network (ACCESS), ongoing program evaluation reports on program performance over 5 years and public health implications. OBJECTIVES: To reduce disparities by making free cancer screening readily accessible to uninsured women and by connecting women to nurse case management to resolve abnormal screening results. Evaluation supports program management by assessing operations and outcomes. METHODS: Health center staff completes patient applications that start the clock to achieve a resolution for all women who screen. All women with abnormal screens are referred to nurse case management and entered into a database for tracking. Program evaluation tracks the extent to which the predominantly minority women successfully reach resolution points, specifically the return of screening results and diagnostic resolution of abnormal results, including initiation of treatment. RESULTS: A 5-year average of 10,400 women received SAC-supported screening at ACCESS. Through nurse case management, 90% of patients with abnormal screening results received a diagnosis. Women increasingly return and screen in subsequent years, contributing to a lower rate of late-stage cancers. Uninsured patients receiving SAC screening made additional nonscreening visits. Evaluation determined that SAC participant outcomes approximate or exceed a comparable national cohort and that program outcomes demonstrate effectiveness, equity, and optimality. CONCLUSIONS: Annual SAC evaluation illustrates that removing access barriers and providing nurse case management support to patients with abnormal results produced non-dispasrate outcomes for uninsured women.

The Effectiveness of a Physician-Only and Physician-Patient Intervention on Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Providers and African American and Latino Patients.

BACKGROUND: Physician recommendation of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is a critical facilitator of screening completion. Providing patients a choice of screening options may increase CRC screening completion, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities. OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to assess the effectiveness of physician-only and physician-patient interventions on increasing rates of CRC screening discussions as compared to usual care. DESIGN: This study was quasi-experimental. Clinics were allocated to intervention or usual care; patients in intervention clinics were randomized to receipt of patient intervention. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 50 to 75 years, due for CRC screening, receiving care at either a federally qualified health care center or an academic health center participated in the study. INTERVENTION: Intervention physicians received continuous quality improvement and communication skills training. Intervention patients watched an educational video immediately before their appointment. MAIN MEASURES: Rates of patient-reported 1) CRC screening discussions, and 2) discussions of more than one screening test. KEY RESULTS: The physician-patient intervention (n = 167) resulted in higher rates of CRC screening discussions compared to both physician-only intervention (n = 183; 61.1 % vs.50.3 %, p = 0.008) and usual care (n = 153; 61.1 % vs. 34.0 % p = 0.03). More discussions of specific CRC screening tests and discussions of more than one test occurred in the intervention arms than in usual care (44.6 % vs. 22.9 %,p = 0.03) and (5.1 % vs. 2.0 %, p = 0.036), respectively, but discussion of more than one test was uncommon. Across all arms, 143 patients (28.4 %) reported discussion of colonoscopy only; 21 (4.2 %) reported discussion of both colonoscopy and stool tests. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care and a physician-only intervention, a physician-patient intervention increased rates of CRC screening discussions, yet discussions overwhelmingly focused solely on colonoscopy. In underserved patient populations where access to colonoscopy may be limited, interventions encouraging discussions of both stool tests and colonoscopy may be needed.

Culturally tailoring patient education and communication skills training to empower African-Americans with diabetes.

New translational strategies are needed to improve diabetes outcomes among low-income African-Americans. Our goal was to develop/pilot test a patient intervention combining culturally tailored diabetes education with shared decision-making training. This was an observational cohort study. Surveys and clinical data were collected at baseline, program completion, and 3 and 6 months. There were 21 participants; the mean age was 61 years. Eighty-six percent of participants attended >70 % of classes. There were improvements in diabetes self-efficacy, self-care behaviors (i.e., following a "healthful eating plan" (mean score at baseline 3.4 vs. 5.2 at program's end; p = 0.002), self glucose monitoring (mean score at baseline 4.3 vs. 6.2 at program's end; p = 0.04), and foot care (mean score at baseline 4.1 vs. 6.0 at program's end; p = 0.001)), hemoglobin A1c (8.24 at baseline vs. 7.33 at 3-month follow-up, p = 0.02), and HDL cholesterol (51.2 at baseline vs. 61.8 at 6-month follow-up, p = 0.01). Combining tailored education with shared decision-making may be a promising strategy for empowering low-income African-Americans and improving health outcomes.