Removal of medicaid restrictions were associated with increased hepatitis C virus treatment rates, but disparities persist.

Despite the release of a growing number of direct-acting antivirals and evolving policy landscape, many of those diagnosed with hepatitis C virus (HCV) have not received treatment. Those from vulnerable populations are at particular risk of being unable to access treatment, threatening World Health Organization (WHO) HCV elimination goals. The aim of this study was to understand the association between direct-acting antivirals approvals, HCV-related policy changes and access to HCV virus treatment in Indiana, and to explore access to treatment by race, birth cohort and insurance type. We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults with HCV from 05/2011-03/2021, using statewide electronic health data. Nine policy and treatment changes were defined a priori. A Lowess curve evaluated treatment trends over time. Monthly screening and treatment rates were examined. Multivariable logistic regression explored predictors of treatment. The population (N = 10,336) was 13.4% Black, 51.8% was born after 1965 and 44.7% was Medicaid recipients. Inflections in the Lowess curve defined four periods: (1) Interferon + DAA, (2) early direct-acting antivirals, (3) Medicaid expansion/optimization and (4) Medicaid restrictions (fibrosis/prescriber) removed. The largest increase in monthly treatment rates was during period 4, when Medicaid prescriber and fibrosis restrictions were removed (2.4 persons per month [PPM] in period 1 to 72.3 PPM in period 4, p < 0.001; 78.0% change in slope). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed being born after 1965 (vs. before 1945; OR 0.69; 95% 0.49-0.98) and having Medicaid (vs. private insurance; OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.42-0.53), but not race was associated with lower odds of being treated. In conclusion, DAAs had limited impact on HCV treatment rates until Medicaid restrictions were removed. Additional policies may be needed to address HCV treatment-related age and insurance disparities.

Financial hardship is associated with lower uptake of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings.

PURPOSE: Cancer screening uptake differs between groups in ways that cannot be explained by socioeconomic status alone. This study examined associations between material, psychosocial, and behavioral aspects of financial hardship and cancer screening behaviors. METHODS: Surveys were mailed to 7,979 people ages 18-75 who were seen in the statewide health system in Indiana. Participants reported SES, feelings about finances, and whether they had to forgo medical care due to cost. This was compared to uptake of mammogram, colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, and Pap testing in best-fit multivariable logistic regression analyses controlling for demographic and healthcare characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 970 surveys were returned; the majority of respondents were female (54%), non-Hispanic White (75%), and over 50 years old (76%). 15% reported forgoing medical care due to cost; this barrier was higher among Black than White participants (24% vs. 13%; p = 0.001). In a best fit regression model for colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, those who reported they had to forgo medical care due to cost had lower odds of screening (aOR 0.41; 95% CI 0.22-0.74). Forgoing medical care due to cost was not significantly associated with Pap testing in bivariate analyses. For mammogram, forgoing medical care due to cost was significant in bivariate analyses (OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.22-0.88), but was not significant in the multivariable model. CONCLUSION: Associations between financial hardship and cancer screening suggest the need to reduce barriers to cancer screening even among patients who have access to healthcare. Future research should explore barriers related to both healthcare and personal costs.

Economic Evaluation of Web- versus Telephone-based Interventions to Simultaneously Increase Colorectal and Breast Cancer Screening Among Women.

Screening for colorectal and breast cancer is considered cost effective, but limited evidence exists on cost-effectiveness of screening promotion interventions that simultaneously target both cancers. Increasing Colorectal and Breast Cancer Screening (Project COBRA), a randomized controlled trial conducted in the community, examined the cost-effectiveness of an innovative tailored web-based intervention compared with tailored telephone counseling and usual care. Screening status at 6 months was obtained by participant surveys plus medical record reviews. Cost was prospectively measured from the patient and provider perspectives using time logs and project invoices. Relative efficiency of the interventions was quantified by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Nonparametric bootstrapping and net benefit regression analysis were used to assess statistical uncertainty of the results. The average cost per participant to implement the Phone counseling, Web-based, and Web + Phone counseling interventions were $277, $314, and $337, respectively. Comparing Phone counseling with usual care resulted in an additional cost of $300 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $283-$320) per cancer screening test and $421 (95% CI: $400-$441) per additional person screened in the target population. Phone counseling alone was more cost-effective than the Web + Phone intervention. Web-based intervention alone was more costly but less effective than the Phone counseling. When simultaneously promoting screening for both colorectal and breast cancer the Web-based intervention was less cost-effective compared with Phone and Web + Phone strategies. The results suggest that targeting multiple cancer screening may improve the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening interventions. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: This study informs researchers, decision makers, healthcare providers, and payers about the improved cost-effectiveness of targeting multiple cancer screenings for cancer early detection programs.

Economic Evaluation of Tailored Web versus Tailored Telephone-Based Interventions to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening among Women.

Screening for colorectal cancer is cost-effective, but many U.S. women are nonadherent, and the cost-effectiveness of web-based tailored screening interventions is unknown. A randomized controlled trial, COBRA (Increasing Colorectal and Breast Cancer Screening), was the source of information for the economic evaluation. COBRA compared screening among a Usual Care group to: (i) tailored Phone Counseling intervention; (ii) tailored Web intervention; and (iii) tailored Web + Phone intervention groups. A sample of 1,196 women aged 50 to 75 who were nonadherent to colorectal cancer screening were recruited from Indiana primary care clinics during 2013 to 2015. Screening status was obtained through medical records at recruitment with verbal confirmation at consent, and at 6-month follow-up via medical record audit and participant self-report. A "best sample" analysis and microcosting from the patient and provider perspectives were applied to estimate the costs and effects of the interventions. Statistical uncertainty was analyzed with nonparametric bootstrapping and net benefit regression analysis. The per participant cost of implementing the Phone Counseling, Web-based, and Web + Phone Counseling interventions was $277, $314, and $336, respectively. The incremental cost per person screened for the Phone Counseling compared with no intervention was $995, while the additional cost of Web and the Web + Phone compared with Phone Counseling did not yield additonal persons screened. Tailored Phone Counseling significantly increased colorectal cancer screening rates compared with Usual Care. Tailored Web interventions did not improve the screening rate compared with the lower cost Phone Counseling intervention.

Rural and Urban Differences in the Adoption of New Health Information and Medical Technologies.

BACKGROUND: This statewide survey sought to understand the adoption level of new health information and medical technologies, and whether these patterns differed between urban and rural populations. METHODS: A random sample of 7,979 people aged 18-75 years, stratified by rural status and race, who lived in 1 of 34 Indiana counties with high cancer mortality rates and were seen at least once in the past year in a statewide health system were surveyed. RESULTS: Completed surveys were returned by 970 participants. Rural patients were less likely than urban to use electronic health record messaging systems (28.3% vs 34.5%, P = .045) or any communication technology (43.0% vs 50.8%, P = .017). Rural patients were less likely to look for personal health information for someone else's medical record (11.0% vs 16.3%, P = .022), look-up test results (29.5% vs 38.3%, P = .005), or use any form of electronic medical record (EMR) access (57.5% vs 67.1%, P = .003). Rural differences in any use of communication technology or EMRs were no longer significant in adjusted models, while education and income were significantly associated. There was a trend in the higher use of low-dose computed tomography (CT) scan among rural patients (19.1% vs 14.4%, P = .057). No significant difference was present between rural and urban patients in the use of the human papilloma virus test (27.1% vs 26.6%, P = .880). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in health information technology use between rural and urban populations may be moderated by social determinants. Lower adoption of new health information technologies (HITs) than medical technologies among rural, compared to urban, individuals may be due to lower levels of evidence supporting HITs.

Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Cancer-Related Knowledge, Beliefs, and Behaviors in Indiana.

BACKGROUND: This statewide survey examined differences in cancer-related knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors between racial and socioeconomic groups in select counties in Indiana. METHODS: A stratified random sample of 7,979 people aged 18-75 who lived in one of 34 Indiana counties with higher cancer mortality rates than the state average, and were seen at least once in the past year in a statewide health system were mailed surveys. RESULTS: Completed surveys were returned by 970 participants, yielding a 12% response rate. Black respondents were less likely to perceive they were at risk for cancer and less worried about getting cancer. Individuals most likely to perceive that they were unlikely to get cancer were more often black, with low incomes (less than $20,000) or high incomes ($50,000 or more), or less than a high school degree. Black women were greater than six times more likely to be adherent to cervical cancer screening. Higher income was associated with receiving a sigmoidoscopy in the last 5 years and a lung scan in the past year. Those with the highest incomes were more likely to engage in physical activity. Both income and education were inversely related to smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomic and racial disparities were observed in health behaviors and receipt of cancer screening. Black individuals had less worry about cancer. IMPACT: Understanding populations for whom cancer disparities exist and geographic areas where the cancer burden is disproportionately high is essential to decision-making about research priorities and the use of public health resources.

Randomized trial of DVD, telephone, and usual care for increasing mammography adherence.

The purpose of this study was to test an intervention to increase mammography screening in women 51-75 years of age who had not received a mammogram in the last 15 months. A total of 1681 women were randomized to (1) a mailed tailored interactive DVD, (2) a computer-tailored telephone counseling, or (3) usual care. Women with income below US$75,000 who were in the interactive DVD group had significantly more mammograms than women in usual care. Women with income above US$75,000 had significantly fewer mammograms than women with income less than US$75,000 regardless of group. Further investigation is needed to understand why women with income above US$75,000 did not show the same benefit of the intervention.

Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer screening is effective but underused. Guidelines for which tests are recommended and at what intervals depend on specific risks. We developed a tablet-based Cancer Risk Intake System (CRIS) that asks questions about risk prior to appointments and generates tailored printouts for patients and physicians summarizing and matching risk factors with guideline-based recommendations. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial among patients who: (i) used CRIS and they and their physicians received tailored printouts; (ii) used CRIS to answer questions but received standard information about cancer screening while their physicians received a standard electronic chart prompt indicating they were age-eligible but not currently adherent for colorectal cancer screening; or (iii) comprised a no-contact group that neither used CRIS nor received any information while their physicians received the standard prompt. Participation in testing was assessed via electronic medical record at 12 months. RESULTS: Participation in any colorectal cancer testing was three times higher for those who used the CRIS and received any printed materials, compared with no-contact controls (47% vs. 16%; P < 0.0001). Among CRIS users ages 50 and older, participation in any testing was higher in the tailored group (53% vs. 44%, P = 0.023). CONCLUSION: Use of CRIS and receipt of any information facilitated participation in testing. There was more testing participation in the CRIS-tailored than nontailored group. IMPACT: Asking patients questions about their specific risk factors and giving them and their providers information just prior to an appointment may increase participation in colorectal cancer testing. Tailoring the information has some added benefit.

Secrets of successful short grant applications.

The National Institutes of Health has implemented new grant application guidelines that include a substantial reduction in the number of pages allowed for project descriptions. Shorter proposals will potentially decrease reviewer burden, but investigators may find the new page limits challenging. Writing more concisely while still presenting a persuasive argument requires honing certain skills with regard to preparation, construction, and editing of proposals. This article provides strategies from the Western Journal of Nursing Research editorial board for preparing competitive shorter research proposals. Two key strategies for success are fully conceptualizing the study prior to writing and obtaining assistance from experienced colleagues during the editing process.

Publishing pilot intervention work.

Pilot intervention studies can be viewed as rehearsals for subsequent full-scale trials. They can help investigators fine-tune later larger studies as well as explore issues related to project management and budget. Pilot studies permit testing of sampling strategies, participant recruitment, intervention content, delivery methods, data collection, and analysis. They also allow researchers to experience the more practical aspects of implementing a study, such as determining the number of study staff members needed to handle recruitment and data collection or identifying special equipment needs. Because pilot study findings may be generalizable, publication is encouraged as long as the preliminary nature of the work is clearly indicated in both the abstract and the article. The present article provides an overview of the types of information that can be gleaned from pilot intervention studies that are suitable for publication.

A randomized trial of two print interventions to increase colon cancer screening among first-degree relatives.

OBJECTIVE: First-degree relatives (FDRs) of people diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) have a two- to threefold increased risk of developing the same disease. Tailored print interventions based on behavior change theories have demonstrated considerable promise in facilitating health-promoting behaviors. This study compared the impact of two mailed print interventions on CRC screening outcomes among FDRs. METHODS: This randomized trial compared effects of two mailed print interventions--one tailored and one nontailored--on participation in CRC screening among FDRs of CRC survivors. Data collected via phone interviews from 140 FDRs at baseline, 1 week post-intervention, and 3 months post-intervention. RESULTS: At 3 months, both the tailored and nontailored interventions yielded modest but statistically insignificant increases in adherence to any CRC screening test (14% vs. 21%, respectively; p=0.30). While there were no main effects for tailored versus nontailored interventions, there were significant interactions that showed that the tailored print intervention had significantly greater effects on forward stage movement for CRC screening depending on stage of adoption at baseline, race, and objective CRC risk. Receipt of the tailored intervention was 2.5 times more likely to move baseline precontemplators and contemplators forward in stage of adoption for colonoscopy (95% CI: 1.10-5.68) and was three times more likely to move Caucasians forward in stage of adoption for FOBT (95% CI: 1.00-9.07). In addition, the tailored intervention was 7.7 times more likely to move people at average risk forward in stage of adoption for colonoscopy (95% CI: 1.25-47.75). CONCLUSION: The tailored print intervention was more effective at moving Caucasians, those in precontemplation and contemplation at baseline, and those at average risk forward in their stage of adoption for CRC screening. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Both tailored and nontailored print interventions showed moderate effects for increasing CRC screening participation. Tailored print interventions may be more effective for certain subgroups.

Comorbidities play a larger role in predicting health-related quality of life compared to having an ostomy.

BACKGROUND: Previous research suggests an ostomy worsens health-related quality of life (HR-QOL), but comorbidities also can affect HR-QOL. METHODS: Eligible patients had abdominal operation with ostomy (cases) or similar procedure without ostomy (controls). Patients were recruited for this case-control study from 3 Veterans Affairs hospital medical and pharmacy records. Comorbidities were assessed with Charlson-Deyo Comorbidity Index. Multinomial logistic regression evaluated the impact of comorbidities and having an ostomy on HR-QOL, measured using the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 for Veterans. RESULTS: A total of 237 ostomates (cases) and 268 controls were studied. Average age was 69 years; 64% of cases had colostomy, 36% ileostomy. Twenty-nine percent of patients had a high level of comorbidities. Cases and controls were similar except for reasons for undergoing surgery. High comorbidity was a significant predictor of low HR-QOL in 6 domains of the Short Form 36 for Veterans; having an ostomy was a significant predictor in 4. CONCLUSIONS: High comorbidity significantly influences low HR-QOL and impacted more domains than having an ostomy.

Demographic, clinical, and quality of life variables related to embarrassment in veterans living with an intestinal stoma.

OBJECTIVE: The study aims were to identify demographic, clinical, and quality of life variables related to embarrassment for people living with ostomies and to determine the experiences and/or feelings of veterans who were embarrassed by their ostomy. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional, correlational study. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: A convenience sample of veterans (n = 239) living with ostomies from 3 VA medical centers was studied. The veterans were primarily Caucasian (84%), male (92%), and older (M = 69). INSTRUMENTS: The modified City of Hope Quality of Life-Ostomy questionnaire was used. Additionally, an open-ended question related to living with an ostomy was asked. METHODS: The questionnaire packets were mailed to participants and self-administered. RESULTS: Approximately half of the participants (48%) rated their embarrassment as low, but 26% reported high embarrassment. Participants with high embarrassment were compared to those with low embarrassment on demographic, clinical, and quality of life variables. High embarrassment was associated with poorer total quality of life (P < .001) and poorer quality of life on the physical (P < .001), psychological (P < .001), social (P < .001), and spiritual (P < .001) subscales. Younger (P < .001) and unpartnered veterans (P < .001) were more likely to be highly embarrassed. Veterans with high embarrassment had higher anxiety (P < .001) and depression (P < .001), more difficulty with intimacy (P < .001), and felt more isolated (P < .001). Spiritual domain variables like hopefulness were associated with low embarrassment (P < .001). Sources of embarrassment included leakage, odor, and noise. CONCLUSIONS: Embarrassment may negatively impact a person's quality of life; therefore, the variables associated with high embarrassment should be recognized and addressed.

Impact of the Cancer Risk Intake System on patient-clinician discussions of tamoxifen, genetic counseling, and colonoscopy.

The Cancer Risk Intake System (CRIS), a computerized program that "matches" objective cancer risks to appropriate risk management recommendations, was designed to facilitate patient-clinician discussion. We evaluated CRIS in primary care settings via a single-group, self-report, pretest-posttest design. Participants completed baseline telephone surveys, used CRIS during clinic visits, and completed follow-up surveys 1 to 2 months postvisit. Compared with proportions reporting having had discussions at baseline, significantly greater proportions of participants reported having discussed tamoxifen, genetic counseling, and colonoscopy, as appropriate, after using CRIS. Most (79%) reported CRIS had "caused" their discussion. CRIS is an easily used, disseminable program that showed promising results in primary care settings.

Patients' interest in discussing cancer risk and risk management with primary care physicians.

Little is known about patients' preferences for discussing cancer risks and risk management with primary care physicians. We sought to determine whether patients want to discuss such topics and what factors are associated with this interest. Participants (375 patients ages 40-85, of diverse race and education level) completed a telephone survey prior to scheduled physician visits. Survey included items on perceived health, perceived cancer risk, education level, and whether participants would like to discuss with a physician their breast, ovarian or colon cancer risk, tamoxifen, cancer genetic counseling, and colon cancer screening. Greater proportions were interested in discussing risks for each cancer, compared with those who were not (P < 0.0001). More participants were interested in discussing mammograms (80%) and cancer genetic counseling (60%) than tamoxifen (49%) or colon cancer screening modalities (43-53%). For many topics, poorer perceived health was associated with greater interest in future discussion; higher education level was associated with less interest.

Colorectal cancer screening: an overview of current trends.

Colorectal cancer can be cured and, in some cases, even prevented if detected early through screening. Studies have demonstrated that regular screening for colorectal cancer with fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy can reduce mortality from this disease. Unfortunately, rates of participation in these screening tests are unacceptably low among the U.S. population. Nurses have a significant role to play in assisting individuals to incorporate regular colorectal cancer screening into their health maintenance routines.