Ongoing tobacco use in women who experience homelessness and unstable housing: A prospective study to inform tobacco cessation interventions and policies.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is common in people who experience homelessness. However, despite biological differences in use by sex and lower quit rates in women, research in homeless and unstably housed (HUH) women is sparse. We identified correlates of use specific to this population, with the goal of informing tobacco cessation programs tailored for HUH women. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study among HUH women recruited from San Francisco homeless shelters, street encampments, free meal programs and low-income hotels. Between June 2016 and January 2019, study participants completed six monthly interviews to examine factors associated with tobacco use, defined as urinary cotinine >10 pg/mL or self-reported prior 30-day use. RESULTS: Among 245 participants, 40% were Black, the median age was 53, 75% currently used tobacco and 89% had ≥one 24-hour quit attempt in the prior year. Tobacco use was more common in women with PTSD (66% vs. 48%) and depression (54% vs. 35%) compared to women without these conditions. Adjusted odds of tobacco use decreased significantly with increasing age (OR/5 yrs: 0.81; 95% CI:0.68, 0.96) and increased with an increasing number of additional substances used (OR: 2.52; 95% CI: 1.88, 3.39). CONCLUSION: Outside of a treatment setting and within a community-recruited sample population composed of HUH women, the number of additional substances used is a primary correlate of ongoing tobacco use. Tailored cessation interventions that prioritize the issue of multiple substance use, and public health policies that allocate funding to address it, may increase tobacco cessation in this population.

Effective communication in the era of precision medicine: A pilot intervention with low health literacy patients to improve genetic counseling communication.

Effective communication, where all parties share a common understanding, is necessary to realize the promise of Genomic Medicine. It is especially salient given the imperative to increase the participation of diverse populations in genomics research and to expand the reach of clinical genomics. We have previously shown that cancer genetic counseling is suboptimal for patients with limited health literacy. To address this finding, we implemented a pilot study to improve verbal communication between genetic counselors and their patients of limited health literacy that consisted of: i) curriculum development and delivery of a Genetic Counselors (GC) communication workshop; ii) two-month post-workshop interviews with GC participants (n = 9); iii) observations/audio recordings of counseling sessions involving 24 patients and two GC workshop participants; iv) post-counseling interviews with patients (n = 9). The 4.5-h workshop presented evidenced-based principles and strategies for effective communication with limited health literacy patients (e.g. use of plain language and teach-back), and offered specific techniques and exercises to practice adoption of such practices in the genetic counseling context. GCs expressed appreciation for the opportunity to refine their skills; however, they reported that some strategies were challenging given their professional training and communication habits. For example, GCs were concerned that use of plain language could undermine efforts to obtain informed consent and provide scientifically accurate information. Observations and patient interviews after the workshop revealed that GCs were able to employ the communication strategies with positive effects, with patients indicating sufficient understanding of the genetic test and its implications as well as satisfaction with the counselors' communication. While derived from research on communication with those of limited health literacy, the communication approaches taught in the GC workshop could benefit most patients, given the high rates of low health literacy in many countries, and the many factors beyond health literacy that can contribute to reduced comprehension in health care environments.

Complex care and contradictions of choice in the safety net.

This article explores the complicated and often-contradictory notions of choice at play in complex care management (CCM) programmes in the US healthcare safety net. Drawing from longitudinal data collected over two years of ethnographic fieldwork at urban safety-net clinics, our study examines the CCM goal of transforming frequent emergency department (ED) utilisers into 'active' patients who will reduce their service utilisation and thereby contribute to a more rational, cost-effective healthcare system. By considering our data alongside philosopher Annemarie Mol's (2008) conceptualisation of the competing logics of choice and care, we argue that these premises often undermine CCM teams' efforts to support patients and provide the care they need - not only to prevent medical crises, but to overcome socio-economic barriers as well. We assert that while safety-net CCM programmes are held accountable for the degree to which their patients successfully transform into self-managing, cost-effective actors, much of the care CCM staff provide in fact involves attempts to intervene on structural obstacles that impinge on patient choice. CCM programmes thus struggle between an economic imperative to get patients to make better health choices and a moral imperative to provide care in the face of systemic societal neglect. (A virtual abstract of this paper can be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_979cmCmR9rLrKuD7z0ycA).

Defining trauma in complex care management: Safety-net providers' perspectives on structural vulnerability and time.

In this paper, we delineate how staff of two complex care management (CCM) programs in urban safety net hospitals in the United States understand trauma. We seek to (1) describe how staff in CCM programs talk about trauma in their patients' lives; (2) discuss how trauma concepts allow staff to understand patients' symptoms, health-related behaviors, and responses to care as results of structural conditions; and (3) delineate the mismatch between long-term needs of patients with histories of trauma and the short-term interventions that CCM programs provide. Observation and interview data gathered between February 2015 and August 2016 indicate that CCM providers define trauma expansively to include individual experiences of violence such as childhood abuse and neglect or recent assault, traumatization in the course of accessing health care and structural violence. Though CCM staff implement elements of trauma-informed care, the short-term design of CCM programs puts pressure on the staff to titrate their efforts, moving patients towards graduation or discharge. Trauma concepts enable clinicians to name structural violence in clinically legitimate language. As such, trauma-informed care and structural competency approaches can complement each other.

Patient engagement at the margins: Health care providers' assessments of engagement and the structural determinants of health in the safety-net.

Increasing "patient engagement" has become a priority for health care organizations and policy-makers seeking to reduce cost and improve the quality of care. While concepts of patient engagement have proliferated rapidly across health care settings, little is known about how health care providers make use of these concepts in clinical practice. This paper uses 20 months of ethnographic and interview research carried out from 2015 to 2016 to explore how health care providers working at two public, urban, safety-net hospitals in the United States define, discuss, and assess patient engagement. We investigate how health care providers describe engagement for high cost patients-the "super-utilizers" of the health care system-who often face complex challenges related to socioeconomic marginalization including poverty, housing insecurity, exposure to violence and trauma, cognitive and mental health issues, and substance use. The health care providers in our study faced institutional pressure to assess patient engagement and to direct care towards engaged patients. However, providers considered such assessments to be highly challenging and oftentimes inaccurate, particularly because they understood low patient engagement to be the result of difficult socioeconomic conditions. Providers tried to navigate the demand to assess patient engagement in care by looking for explicit positive and negative indicators of engagement, while also being sensitive to more subtle and intuitive signs of engagement for marginalized patients.