Maximizing the impact of reach out and read literacy promotion:anticipatory guidance and modeling.

BACKGROUND: Reach Out and Read (ROR) is a multi-component pediatric literacy promotion intervention. However, few studies link ROR components to outcomes. We examine associations between receipt of (1) multiple ROR components and (2) clinician modeling, a potential best practice, with enhanced home literacy environments (EHLEs) among Latino families. METHODS: We conducted secondary analyses of cross-sectional enrollment data from a randomized clinical trial at three urban community health centers between November 2020 and June 2023. Latino parents with infants 6-<9 months old were surveyed about ROR component receipt (children's book, anticipatory guidance, modeling) and EHLE (StimQ2- Infant Read Scale). We used mixed models with clinician as a random effect, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: 440 Latino parent-infant dyads were included. With no components as the reference category, receipt of 1 component was not associated with EHLE. Receipt of 2 components (standardized beta = 0.27; 95%CI: 0.12-0.42) and 3 components (standardized beta = 0.33; 95% CI: 0.19-0.47) were associated with EHLE. In separate analyses, modeling was associated with EHLE (standardized beta = 0.16; 95%CI: 0.06-0.26). CONCLUSION: Findings support modeling as a core ROR component. Programs seeking to enhance equity by promoting EHLE should utilize such strategies as anticipatory guidance and clinician modeling in addition to book distribution. IMPACT: Reach Out and Read, a multi-component literacy promotion intervention, leverages primary care to promote equity in children's early language experiences. However, few studies link Reach Out and Read components to outcomes. Among Latino parent-infant dyads, we found that implementation of two and three components, compared to none, was associated with enhanced home literacy environments, following a dose response pattern. Parent report of clinician modeling was associated with enhanced home literacy environments. Literacy promotion programs seeking to enhance equity by promoting enhanced home literacy environments should utilize strategies in addition to book distribution, including anticipatory guidance and modeling, to maximize impact.

Demographic and Psychosocial Characteristics Associated With Use of a Prostate Cancer Survivorship Website: Implications From a Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Many prostate cancer (PC) survivors experience disease and treatment-related symptomatology in both the physical and psychosocial domains. Although the benefits and barriers to using web-based resources for cancer patients are well-documented, less research has focused on the personal characteristics important for efficient tailoring and targeting of information that are associated with usage. OBJECTIVE: We used the Cognitive-Social Health Information Processing (C-SHIP) framework to guide our exploration of personal characteristics associated with use of PROGRESS, an informational PC survivorship website that addresses physical, emotional, interpersonal, and practical concerns relevant for PC survivors. METHODS: PC survivors (N=217) were randomized to the intervention arm (PROGRESS) of a randomized controlled trial. Of those randomized to the intervention arm, 84 used PROGRESS, and 133 did not use PROGRESS. Multivariable analyses evaluated demographic and psychosocial characteristics (eg, style of coping, health literacy, self-efficacy, affective states of depression, anxiety, and fatigue) associated with website use. RESULTS: A larger proportion of non-Hispanic White (68/160, 42.5%), compared with non-Hispanic Black (9/40, 23%), participants used PROGRESS (P<.001). Further, PROGRESS users were older in age (P<.001), had a monitoring style of coping (P=.01), and were less depressed (P=.004), anxious (P=.02), and fatigued (P<.001) than nonusers. Education, income, health literacy, blunting style of coping, self-efficacy, and treatment type (radiation therapy or surgery) were not significantly related to use. On multivariable analyses, race (OR 0.28, P<.001), age (OR 1.05, P<.001), monitoring style of coping (OR 1.27, P=.02), and overall mood (OR 0.98, P<.001) remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of monitoring and low levels of negative affect were associated with website use. Additionally, users were older, non-Hispanic White survivors. To ensure that important survivorship-relevant information reaches users, future efforts need to focus on enhancing patient engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02224482; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02224482.

Improved cancer coping from a web-based intervention for prostate cancer survivors: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Prostate cancer (PCa) survivors report poor physical functioning alongside negative psychological outcomes as they cope with treatment side effects and practical concerns after treatment completion. This study evaluated PROGRESS, a web-based intervention designed to improve adaptive coping among PCa survivors. METHODS: Localized PCa patients (N = 431) within one year of treatment completion were randomized to receive educational booklets or PROGRESS + educational booklets. Surveys completed at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-months assessed patient characteristics; functional quality of life and coping (primary outcomes); and psychosocial outcomes (e.g., self-efficacy, marital communication; secondary outcomes). Intent-to-treat and as-treated analyses were completed to assess change in outcomes from baseline to 6 months using linear mixed effects regression models. RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat analyses, participants randomized to the intervention group had improved diversion coping (i.e., healthy redirection of worrying thoughts about their cancer), but more difficulties in marital communication (ps < 0.05). However, PROGRESS usage was low among those randomized to the intervention group (38.7%). The as-treated analyses found PROGRESS users reported fewer practical concerns but had worse positive coping compared to PROGRESS non-users (ps < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest PROGRESS may improve certain aspects of adaptive coping among PCa survivors that use the website, but does not adequately address the remaining coping and psychosocial domains. Additional research is needed to better understand the gaps in intervention delivery contributing to low engagement and poor improvement across all domains of functional quality of life and adaptive coping.

Correlates of Information Seeking Behaviors and Experiences Among Adult Cancer Survivors in the USA.

Understanding information seeking behaviors and experiences is essential for designing educational and supportive interventions to promote survivor's self-management post treatment. This study examined health and cancer information seeking, use of internet to find cancer information, and information seeking experiences among breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors. Nationally representative data collected in 2017-2018 from 2 cycles of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 5, cycles 1 and 2 were merged with combined replicate weights using the jackknife replication method (n = 373). Regression analysis for three information seeking behaviors (i.e., health information, cancer information, and internet for cancer information) were modeled, including sociodemographic and clinical factors as predictors. In addition, separate regression analysis predicted three experiences of information seeking (effort, quality, and hard to understand) with sociodemographic and clinical factors. A majority of survivors (84.7%) sought health information. Factors significantly associated with seeking health information were gender (p = 0.024), education (p = 0.0021), and income (p = 0.018). Only 38% of survivors used the internet to seek cancer-related information. The only factor significantly associated with using the internet to seek cancer-related information was time since diagnosis (p = 0.0002). The factor significantly associated with difficulty understanding information was annual household income (p = 0.026). This study fills an important gap by identifying sociodemographic and cancer-related factors associated with information seeking behaviors and experiences. These findings highlight a need to tailor information for low socioeconomic status survivors to account for the lack of skills, resources, and motivation to seek information about health and cancer related topics independently.

Development and usability testing of the e-EXCELS tool to guide cancer survivorship follow-up care.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe a user-centered (e.g., cancer survivors and clinicians) development process of an eHealth tool designed to facilitate self-management of cancer survivorship follow-up care. METHODS: Guided by Cognitive-Social Health Information Processing (C-SHIP) model and informed by core self-management skills, we engaged in a user-centered design process. In phase I, we conducted in-depth interviews with survivors of breast (n = 33), prostate (n = 4), and colorectal (n = 6) cancers, and (n = 9) primary care providers to develop content and design of the web tool. Phase II utilized iterative user testing interviews (n = 9) to test the web-based tool prototype. Data from both phases were independently coded using a template/content analytic approach. RESULTS: The top 5 functions identified in phase I for the web-based platform included: (a) educational materials to learn and prepare for health encounters (80%); (b) questions for health providers (74%); (c) ability to track contact information of providers (67%); (d) provide general information (64%); and, (e) support information (62%). Users of the prototype reported patient burden, tool fatigue, introduction timing of the tool, relevance, and security/privacy as concerns in phase II. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the value of using a theoretically informed and user-centered design process to develop relevant and patient-centered eHealth resources to support cancer survivorship. A larger study is needed to establish the efficacy of this eHealth tool as an intervention to improve adherence to follow-up care guidelines.

Rationale and design of extended cancer education for longer term survivors (EXCELS): a randomized control trial of 'high touch' vs. 'high tech' cancer survivorship self-management tools in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors are at increased risk for late and long-term effects post-treatment. The post-treatment phase of care is often poorly coordinated and survivors navigate follow-up care with minimal information or guidance from their healthcare team. This manuscript describes the Extended Cancer Education for Longer-term Survivors (EXCELS) in Primary Care protocol. EXCELS is a randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of patient-level self-management educational strategies on adherence to preventative health service use and cancer survivorship follow-up guidelines. METHODS: The EXCELS trial compares four conditions: (1) EXCELS-website (e.g., a mobile-optimized technology platform); (2) EXCELS-health coaching; (3) EXCELS-website and health coaching; and (4) a print booklet. Approximately 480 breast, colorectal, and prostate survivors will be recruited through the New Jersey Primary Care Research Network (NJPCRN) and New Jersey State Cancer Registry (NJSCR). Eligible survivors (diagnosed stages 1-3) must have completed active treatment, access to a phone and a computer, smartphone or tablet with internet access, and be able to speak and read English. Patient assessments occur at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months. The primary outcomes are increased engagement in preventive health services and monitoring for cancer recurrence and treatment-related late effects. DISCUSSION: The EXCELS trial is the first to test cancer survivorship educational self-management interventions for cancer survivors in a primary care context. Findings from this trial will inform successful implementation and engagement strategies for longer-term, post-treatment cancer survivors managed in primary care settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered August 1, 2017 at ClinicalTrials.gov , trial # NCT03233555.

Understanding primary care-oncology relationships within a changing healthcare environment.

BACKGROUND: Management of care transitions from primary care into and out of oncology is critical for optimal care of cancer patients and cancer survivors. There is limited understanding of existing primary care-oncology relationships within the context of the changing health care environment. METHODS: Through a comparative case study of 14 innovative primary care practices throughout the United States (U.S.), we examined relationships between primary care and oncology settings to identify attributes contributing to strengthened relationships in diverse settings. Field researchers observed practices for 10-12 days, recording fieldnotes and conducting interviews. We created a reduced dataset of all text related to primary care-oncology relationships, and collaboratively identified patterns to characterize these relationships through an inductive "immersion/crystallization" analysis process. RESULTS: Nine of the 14 practices discussed having either formal or informal primary care-oncology relationships. Nearly all formal primary care-oncology relationships were embedded within healthcare systems. The majority of private, independent practices had more informal relationships between individual primary care physicians and specific oncologists. Practices with formal relationships noted health system infrastructure that facilitates transfer of patient information and timely referrals. Practices with informal relationships described shared commitment, trust, and rapport with specific oncologists. Regardless of relationship type, challenges reported by primary care settings included lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities during cancer treatment and beyond. CONCLUSIONS: With the rapid transformation of U.S. healthcare towards system ownership of primary care practices, efforts are needed to integrate strengths of informal primary care-oncology relationships in addition to formal system driven relationships.

Follow-up Care Education and Information: Identifying Cancer Survivors in Need of More Guidance.

Cancer survivors engage in cancer screenings and protective health behaviors at suboptimal rates despite their increased risk for future illness. Survivorship care plans and other educational strategies to prepare cancer survivors to adopt engaged roles in managing long-term follow-up care and health risks are needed. In a sample of cancer survivors, we identified patient characteristics and psychosocial predictors associated with increased follow-up care informational needs. Cross-sectional surveys were administered to early-stage breast and prostate survivors (N = 278; 68 % breast) at least 2 years post treatment from four community hospital programs in New Jersey between May 2012 and July 2013. Patient demographics, medical history, psychosocial characteristics (i.e., worries about the future, fear of disease recurrence, and patient activation), and perceptions of oncology and primary care were assessed. African-American survivors (AOR = 2.69, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.27-5.68) and survivors with higher comorbidity (AOR =1.16, CI 1.01-1.33) were more likely to want additional information to guide follow-up care. Adjusting for race and comorbidities, survivors who wanted more information to guide their follow-up care reported greater worries about the future (p < 0.05) and fears about disease recurrence (p < 0.05) compared to those who did not want additional information. Results emphasize the need to develop cancer survivorship educational strategies that are both responsive to the needs of specific populations (e.g., African-American survivors and patients with multiple comorbidities) and the psychosocial profiles that motivate requests for more extensive follow-up guidance.

Stress and Infant Media Exposure During COVID-19: A Study Among Latino Families.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately harmed Latino families; however, its effects on their stress and media routines remain understudied. We examined economic and parenting stress patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic and estimated associations between these forms of stress and nonadherence to American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) infant media exposure recommendations among Latino families. We also explored how nonadherence with AAP recommendations varied with COVID-19 cases. METHODS: We analyzed baseline data from an ongoing clinical trial recruiting low-income Latino parent-infant dyads. Nonadherence with AAP media exposure recommendations (ScreenQ) and economic and parent stress were measured using parent reports. Additional variables included epidemiological data on COVID-19 cases. Linear models examined associations between the pandemic and both stress variables as well as between stress and ScreenQ. Using locally weighted scatterplot smoothing curve fitting, the rise and fall of NJ COVID-19 cases were overlayed with ScreenQ scores over time to visualize and explore trends. RESULTS: All parents identified as Latino (62.6% unemployed, 91.5% limited English proficiency). Mean infant age was 8.2 months. Parent stress increased over time during the COVID-19 pandemic (r = 0.13, p = 0.0369). After covariate adjustment, economic and parent stress were associated with increased nonadherence with AAP recommendations (standardized beta = 0.16, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03-0.29; standardized beta = 0.18, 95% CI, 0.04-0.31, respectively). Nonadherence to media exposure recommendations seemed to track with rises in the number of COVID-19 cases with a lag of 7 days. CONCLUSION: Parent and economic stress were associated with nonadherence to infant media exposure recommendations among Latino families. These findings highlight the need for practitioners to support families from under-resourced communities and to promote healthy media routines.

Identifying priority areas to support primary care engagement in breast cancer survivorship care: A Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Existing approaches in cancer survivorship care delivery have proven to be insufficient to engage primary care. This study aimed to identify stakeholder-informed priorities to improve primary care engagement in breast cancer survivorship care. METHODS: Experts in U.S. cancer survivorship care delivery were invited to participate in a 4-round online Delphi panel to identify and evaluate priorities for defining and fostering primary care's engagement in breast cancer survivorship. Panelists were asked to identify and then assess (ratings of 1-9) the importance and feasibility of priority items to support primary care engagement in survivorship. Panelists were asked to review the group results and reevaluate the importance and feasibility of each item, aiming to reach consensus. RESULTS: Respondent panelists (n = 23, response rate 57.5%) identified 31 priority items to support survivorship care. Panelists consistently rated three items most important (scored 9) but with uncertain feasibility (scored 5-6). These items emphasized the need to foster connections and improve communication between primary care and oncology. Panelists reached consensus on four items evaluated as important and feasible: (1) educating patients on survivorship, (2) enabling screening reminders and monitoring alerts in the electronic medical record, (3) identifying patient resources for clinicians to recommend, and (4) distributing accessible reference guides of common breast cancer drugs. CONCLUSION: Role clarity and communication between oncology and primary care were rated as most important; however, uncertainty about feasibility remains. These findings indicate that cross-disciplinary capacity building to address feasibility issues may be needed to make the most important priority items actionable in primary care.

A Mixed-Methods Investigation Examining Site-Level Variation in Reach Out and Read Implementation.

OBJECTIVE: Reach Out and Read (ROR) is an evidence-based early childhood intervention that has been implemented at scale, yet description of ROR implementation is inconsistent. This study engages implementation science to examine ROR delivery and site-level variation. METHODS: As part of an ongoing clinical trial, we conducted a mixed-methods study in 3 community health centers (CHCs) that serve low-income Latino families. We integrated quantitative parent survey data, qualitative data from monthly key informant interviews with ROR site leaders over 1 year, and in-depth interviews with 18 additional clinicians. At enrollment, parents reported whether they received a children's book, guidance on reading, and modeling from clinicians. We analyzed quantitative data using descriptive statistics, and qualitative data iteratively engaging emergent and a priori codes drawn from the Template for Intervention Description and Replication Checklist. RESULTS: Three hundred Latino parents (mean age: 31; 75% ≤HS education) completed surveys. The mean child age was 8 months. Overall, most parents reported receiving a book (84%) and guidance (73%), but fewer experienced modeling (23%). Components parents received varied across CHCs. Two themes emerged to explain the variation observed: 1) differences in the perceived purpose of shared reading and book delivery aligned with variation in implementation, and 2) site-level barriers affected what components were implemented. CONCLUSION: Because of substantive variation in ROR implementation across sites, systematic descriptions using established frameworks and corresponding measurement to characterize ROR implementation may enhance our understanding of mechanisms underlying ROR's effects, which clinicians and policymakers can use to maximize ROR's impact.

Adapting and implementing breast cancer follow-up in primary care: protocol for a mixed methods hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation cluster randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Advances in detection and treatment for breast cancer have led to an increase in the number of individuals managing significant late and long-term treatment effects. Primary care has a role in caring for patients with a history of cancer, yet there is little guidance on how to effectively implement survivorship care evidence into primary care delivery. METHODS: This protocol describes a multi-phase, mixed methods, stakeholder-driven research process that prioritizes actionable, evidence-based primary care improvements to enhance breast cancer survivorship care by integrating implementation and primary care transformation frameworks: the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) framework and the Practice Change Model (PCM). Informed by depth interviews and a four round Delphi panel with diverse stakeholders from primary care and oncology, we will implement and evaluate an iterative clinical intervention in a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation cluster randomized design in twenty-six primary care practices. Multi-component implementation strategies will include facilitation, audit and feedback, and learning collaboratives. Ongoing data collection and analysis will be performed to optimize adoption of the intervention. The primary clinical outcome to test effectiveness is comprehensive breast cancer follow-up care. Implementation will be assessed using mixed methods to explore how organizational and contextual variables affect adoption, implementation, and early sustainability for provision of follow-up care, symptom, and risk management activities at six- and 12-months post implementation. DISCUSSION: Study findings are poised to inform development of scalable, high impact intervention processes to enhance long-term follow-up care for patients with a history of breast cancer in primary care. If successful, next steps would include working with a national primary care practice-based research network to implement a national dissemination study. Actionable activities and processes identified could also be applied to development of organizational and care delivery interventions for follow-up care for other cancer sites. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on June 2, 2022: NCT05400941.

Social and medical risk factors associated with supportive needs in the first year following localized prostate cancer treatment.

PURPOSE: Individuals who completed treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) often report poor coping and practical concerns when adapting to new roles in their lives-and strong patient-provider communication is critical for this period. However, there is limited research identifying factors associated with supportive needs after the completion of PCa treatment. This study aimed to identify the social and medical risk factors associated with supportive needs for adapting among individuals who completed treatment for localized PCa. METHODS: Using baseline data from a study evaluating a web-based support system for patients in the first year following treatment for localized PCa, self-efficacy for re-entry (e.g., maintaining relationships, symptom management), medical interactions, and practical concerns (e.g., insurance, exercise) were assessed. Multivariable regression analyses were completed to identify risk factors for low readiness. RESULTS: Participants (N = 431) with lower health literacy or income or with depressive symptoms had lower self-efficacy for re-entry, more negative interactions with medical providers, and more practical concerns (ps < .05). Lastly, non-Hispanic White participants reported greater readiness compared with all other races (ps < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple social and medical risk factors are associated with greater supportive needs when adapting to new roles after PCa treatment. Understanding the risk factors for supportive needs in this period is critical. Future research is needed to help providers identify and support individuals at risk for poorer coping and greater practical concerns after treatment completion. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Identifying individuals with greater supportive needs following treatment for localized PCa treatment will help ensure successful adaptation to new roles.

Feasibility and potential efficacy of commercial mHealth/eHealth tools for weight loss in African American breast cancer survivors: pilot randomized controlled trial.

Weight management after breast cancer (BC) treatment in African American (AA) women is crucial to reduce comorbid conditions and health disparities. We examined feasibility and potential efficacy of commercial eHealth/mHealth tools for weight management in AA BC survivors in New Jersey. Participants (N = 35) were randomized to an intervention (SparkPeople) plus activity tracker, Fitbit Charge (n = 18), or wait-list active control group (Fitbit only, n = 17). Anthropometric, behavioral, and quality of life (QOL) outcomes were collected at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Differences in outcomes were assessed using intent-to-treat analysis. Retention was 97.1%. Both groups lost weight, with no significant differences between groups. At month 6, mean weight change was: intervention: -1.71 kg (SD 2.33; p = .006), 33.3% lost ≥3% of baseline weight; control: -2.54 kg (SD 4.00, p = .002), 23.5% lost ≥3% weight. Intervention participants achieved significant improvements in waist circumference (-3.56 cm, SD 4.70, p = .005), QOL (p = .030), and use of strategies for healthy eating (p = .025) and decreasing calories (p < .001). Number of days logged food per week was associated with decreases in waist circumference at 6 months (ß -0.79, 95% CI, -1.49, -0.09, p = .030) and 12 months (ß -2.16, 95% CI, -4.17, -0.15, p = .038). Weight loss was maintained at 12 months. This is the first study to demonstrate potential efficacy of commercial eHealth/mHealth tools for weight loss in AA BC survivors, without additional counseling from the research team. If effective, they may be convenient weight loss tools that can be easily and widely disseminated. Clinical Trials registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02699983.

A mixed-methods analysis of the capacity of the Patient-Centered Medical Home to implement care coordination services for cancer survivors.

There are currently 15.5 million cancer survivors in USA who are increasingly relying on primary care providers for their care. Patient-Centered Medical Homes (PCMHs) have the potential to meet the unique needs of cancer survivors; but, few studies have examined PCMH attributes as potential resources for delivering survivorship care. This study assesses the current care coordination infrastructure in advanced PCMHs, known to be innovative, and explores their capacity to provide cancer survivorship care. We conducted comparative case studies of a purposive sample (n = 9) of PCMHs to examine current care coordination infrastructure and capacity through a mixed- methods analysis. Data included qualitative interviews, quantitative surveys, and fieldnotes collected during 10- to 12-day onsite observations at each practice. Case studies included practices in five states with diverse business models and settings. Eight of the nine practices had National Committee for Quality Assurance Level 3 PCMH recognition. No practices had implemented a systematic approach to cancer survivorship care. We found all practices had a range of electronic population health management tools, care coordinator roles in place for chronic conditions, and strategies or protocols for tracking and managing complex disease groups. We identified potential capacity, as well as barriers, to provide cancer survivorship care using existing care coordination infrastructure developed for other chronic conditions. This existing infrastructure suggests the potential to translate care coordination elements within primary care settings to accelerate the implementation of systematic survivorship care.

Cancer Survivorship Care in Advanced Primary Care Practices: A Qualitative Study of Challenges and Opportunities.

Importance: Despite a decade of effort by national stakeholders to bring cancer survivorship to the forefront of primary care, there is little evidence to suggest that primary care has begun to integrate comprehensive services to manage the care of long-term cancer survivors. Objective: To explain why primary care has not begun to integrate comprehensive cancer survivorship services. Design, Setting, and Participants: Comparative case study of 12 advanced primary care practices in the United States recruited from March 2015 to February 2017. Practices were selected from a national registry of 151 workforce innovators compiled for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Practices were recruited to include diversity in policy context and organizational structure. Researchers conducted 10 to 12 days of ethnographic data collection in each practice, including interviews with practice personnel and patient pathways with cancer survivors. Fieldnotes, transcripts, and practice documents were analyzed within and across cases to identify salient themes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Description of cancer survivorship care delivery in advanced patient-centered medical homes, including identification of barriers and promotional factors related to that care. Results: The 12 practices came from multiple states and policy contexts and had a mix of clinicians trained in family or internal medicine. All but 3 were recognized as National Committee on Quality Assurance level 3 patient-centered medical homes. None of the practices provided any type of comprehensive cancer survivorship services. Three interdependent explanatory factors emerged: the absence of a recognized, distinct clinical category of survivorship in primary care; a lack of actionable information to treat this patient population; and current information systems unable to support survivorship care. Conclusions and Relevance: To increase the potential for primary care transformation efforts to integrate survivorship services into routine care, survivorship must become a recognized clinical category with actionable care plans supported by a functional information system infrastructure.

Impact of Perceived Weight Stigma among Underserved Women on Doctor-Patient Relationships.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how perception of weight stigma among underserved women with obesity impacts doctor-patient relationships. METHODS: This study consisted of an interviewer-administered survey of 149 women with obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) immediately after their physician visit at four Federally Qualified Health Centers. Perceptions of weight stigma and physician empathy were measured using the Stigma Situations in Health Care instrument and Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure, respectively. Associations of CARE and Stigma scores with BMI and patient characteristics were analyzed using Mantel-Haenszel chi-square test and ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS: The mean CARE score was 42.1 (sd 8.4; range 11.0-50.0) and mean Stigma score was 4.6 (sd 7.6; range 0-43.0). Each increase in BMI category was associated with almost 2-fold increased odds of higher perception of Stigma (OR, 1.90, 95% CI 1.30-2.78, p=0.001). BMI was not associated with CARE. However, for each increase in stigma category, the odds of lower CARE score doubled (OR, 0.52, 95% CI 0.36-0.75, p=0.0005). CONCLUSION: While BMI was not associated with perception of physician empathy, higher frequency of weight stigmatizing situations was negatively associated with perception of physician empathy. Reducing weight stigma in primary care could improve doctor-patient relationships and quality of care in patients with obesity.

Breast and prostate cancer survivors' experiences of patient-centered cancer follow-up care from primary care physicians and oncologists.

PURPOSE: Patient-physician relationships impact health care seeking and preventive screening behaviors among patients. At the end of active treatment some cancer survivors report feeling disconnected from their care team. This study explores cancer survivors' experiences of patient-centered cancer follow-up care provided by primary care physicians (PCP) and oncologists (ONC). METHODS: Three hundred five early stage, breast and prostate cancer survivors at least 2 years post treatment were surveyed from four community hospital oncology programs in New Jersey. Participants reported receipt of patient-centered care measured by care coordination, comprehensiveness of care, and personal relationship with PCPs and ONCs. RESULTS: PCPs received higher ratings for coordination of care and comprehensive care than ONCs from all survivors (P < 0.01). However, prostate and breast cancer survivors rated strengths of their personal bonds with the physicians differently. While prostate cancer survivors rated PCPs significantly higher for all items (P < 0.028), breast cancer survivors rated ONCs significantly higher on four out of seven items including having been through a lot together, understanding what is important regarding health, knowing their medical history and taking their beliefs and wishes into account (P < 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: Prostate and breast cancer survivors report different experiences with their PCPs and oncologists around the comprehensiveness and coordination of their cancer follow-up care in addition to the strength of their relationships with their physicians. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: There are important differences in the experience of patient-centered care among cancer survivors that should be considered when planning care models and interventions for these different populations.

Perceptions of Primary Care Among Breast Cancer Survivors: The Effects of Weight Status.

BACKGROUND: Obese breast cancer survivors (BCSs) are impacted by diminished quality of life (QOL), multiple comorbid conditions, and poor disease outcomes. Despite national guidelines recommending a healthy weight to improve QOL and outcomes posttreatment, support and education are not routinely provided to BCSs in primary care. To fill this gap, we assessed perceptions of primary care received among BCSs by weight status. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys were administered to early-stage BCSs (N = 188) from 2 New Jersey cancer centers between May 2012 and July 2013. Sociodemographics, medical history, functional health status, perceived satisfaction with one's primary care provider (PCP), and PCP involvement in follow-up care were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 82% of overweight BCSs and 30% of obese BCSs reported not being told by their doctor that they were overweight or obese, despite these conditions being highly prevalent (35% and 35%, respectively). Obese BCSs were more likely than healthy weight BCSs to be African American, have a higher comorbidity score, poorer functional health, and greater satisfaction with their PCPs. CONCLUSION: The PCP-patient encounter may represent an opportunity for PCPs to correct misperceptions and promote weight reduction efforts among BCSs, thus improving QOL and disease outcomes.