Patient Communication Preferences for Prostate Cancer Screening Discussions: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer screening guidelines have changed as new evidence showing an equivocal mortality benefit led many organizations to relax recommendations for this screening and instead suggest shared decision making. Presently, it is unknown how successfully these conversations happen. Our objective was to understand men's communication preferences when they discuss prostate cancer screening. METHODS: In this scoping review, we searched 4 electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) and the gray literature. Additional studies were obtained from reference lists of included studies and relevant review articles. We included qualitative studies reporting patient perspectives relevant to the research question and published in English. Two independent researchers screened titles and abstracts based on these criteria, conducted a full-text review for final inclusion, evaluated the remaining articles for validity, extracted data, and used thematic analysis to build a thematic framework. A subgroup analysis was performed for Black men as many studies elicited their perspectives. RESULTS: Analyses were based on 29 studies. We identified 4 main themes that men described as critical for successful prostate cancer screening risk discussions with their primary care clinician: using everyday language, receiving a sufficient quantity of information, spending enough time, and having a trusting and respectful relationship. Three additional themes emerged that prohibited men from having any discussions at all: having already decided to pursue prostate cancer screening, being passive in medical encounters, and perceiving threat to one's well-being. Black men faced racism, which impacted medical interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings point to strategies to support men's communication preferences and address preconceptions surrounding prostate cancer screening. More studies are needed in certain underrepresented populations given the propensity for disparity in health outcomes.

cchsflow: an open science approach to transform and combine population health surveys.

SETTING: The Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) is one of the world's largest ongoing cross-sectional population health surveys, with over 130,000 respondents every two years or over 1.1 million respondents since its inception in 2001. While the survey remains relatively consistent over the years, there are differences between cycles that pose a challenge to analyze the survey over time. INTERVENTION: A program package called cchsflow was developed to transform and harmonize CCHS variables to consistent formats across multiple survey cycles. An open science approach was used to maintain transparency, reproducibility and collaboration. OUTCOMES: The cchsflow R package uses CCHS survey data between 2001 and 2014. Worksheets were created that identify variables, their names in previous cycles, their category structure, and their final variable names. These worksheets were then used to recode variables in each CCHS cycle into consistently named and labelled variables. Following, survey cycles can be combined. The package was then added as a GitHub repository to encourage collaboration with other researchers. IMPLICATION: The cchsflow package has been added to the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) and contains support for over 160 CCHS variables, generating a combined data set of over 1 million respondents. By implementing open science practices, cchsflow aims to minimize the amount of time needed to clean and prepare data for the many CCHS users across Canada.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: L'Enquête sur la santé dans les collectivités canadiennes (ESCC) est l'une des plus grandes enquêtes transversales sur la santé de la population, avec plus de 130 000 sondés tous les deux ans et plus de 1,1 million de sondés depuis son début en 2001. Tant que l'enquête reste relativement cohérent, il y a des différences entre des cycles qui posent une challenge majeure pour analyser l'enquête au fil du temps. INTERVENTION: Un paquet de programme appelé cchsflow a été développé pour transformer et harmoniser les variables CCHS aux formats cohérents à travers plusieurs cycles de sondage. Une approche de science ouverte était utilisée pour maintenir la transparence, la reproductibilité et la collaboration. RéSULTATS: Le paquet cchsflow R développé utilisait les données d'enquête de l'ESCC entre 2001 et 2014. Les feuilles de calcul ont été créées pour identifier des variables, leurs noms dans des cycles précédents, leurs structures de catégories et leurs noms de variables finales. Ces feuilles de calcul ont ensuite été utilisées pour recoder les variables dans chaque cycle de l'ESCC pour générer les ensembles de données harmonisés qui peuvent être combiner dans un ensemble de données constamment étiqueté pour l'analyse. Le paquet a ensuite été ajouté comme un entrepôt de GitHub pour encourager la collaboration avec les autres chercheurs. IMPLICATION: Le paquet cchsflow a été ajouté au Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) et contient un appui pour plus de 160 variables de l'ESCC, générant un ensemble de données de plus d'un million de sondés. En exécutant les pratiques de sciences ouvertes, cchsflow vise à minimiser le temps requis pour nettoyer et préparer les données pour les plusieurs utilisateurs du CCHS à travers le Canada.

Improving adherence to hand hygiene among health care workers.

Increased adherence to hand hygiene is widely acknowledged to be the most important way of reducing infections in health care facilities. Despite evidence of benefit, adherence to hand hygiene among health care professionals remains low. Several behavioral and organizational theories have been proposed to explain this. As a whole, the success of interventions to improve adherence to hand hygiene among health care professionals has been limited. Recent data suggest that a multifaceted intervention, including the use of feedback, education, the introduction of alcohol-based hand wash, and visual reminders, may increase adherence to hand-hygiene recommendations. Although the "active ingredient" of such an intervention is unknown, there is evidence that the use of feedback may be the key to increasing adherence. In this article, we review the theoretical basis for interventions and provide an overview of the evidence for interventions. Coherent and methodologically sound research is required to better understand the factors contributing to hand-hygiene behavior among health care professionals.