Capability for change at community health centers serving Asian Pacific Islanders: an exploratory study of a cancer screening evidence-based intervention.

BACKGROUND: Understanding and enhancing change capabilities, including Practice Adaptive Reserve (PAR), of Community Health Centers (CHCs) may mitigate cancer-related health disparities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using stratified random sampling, we recruited 232 staff from seven CHCs serving Asian Pacific Islander communities to complete a self-administered survey. We performed multilevel regression analyses to examine PAR composite scores by CHC, position type, and number of years worked at their clinic. RESULTS: The mean PAR score was 0.7 (s.d. 0.14). Higher scores were associated with a greater perceived likelihood that clinic staff would participate in an evidence-based intervention (EBI). Constructs such as communication, clinic flow, sensemaking, change valence, and resource availability were positively associated with EBI implementation or trended toward significance. CONCLUSIONS: PAR scores are positively associated with perceived likelihood of clinic staff participation in cancer screening EBI. Future research is needed to determine PAR levels most conducive to implementing change and to developing interventions that enhance Adaptive Reserve.

Radiologists' performance and their enjoyment of interpreting screening mammograms.

OBJECTIVE: One might speculate that radiologists who enjoy mammography may exhibit better performance than radiologists who do not. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty-one radiologists at three Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) registries completed a survey about their characteristics, clinical practices, and attitudes related to screening mammography. Survey results were linked with BCSC performance data for 662,084 screening and 33,977 diagnostic mammograms. Using logistic regression, we modeled the odds of an abnormal interpretation, cancer detection, sensitivity, and specificity among radiologists who reported they enjoy interpreting screening mammograms compared with those who do not. RESULTS: Overall, 44.3% of radiologists reported not enjoying interpreting screening mammograms. Radiologists who reported enjoying interpreting screening mammograms were more likely to be women, spend at least 20% of their time in breast imaging, have a primary academic affiliation, read more than 2,000 mammograms per year, and be salaried. Enjoyment was not associated with screening mammography performance. Among diagnostic mammograms, there was a significant increase in sensitivity among radiologists who reported enjoyment (85.2%) compared with those who did not (78.2%). In models adjusting for radiologist characteristics, similar trends were found; however, no statistically significant associations remained. CONCLUSION: Almost one half of radiologists actively interpreting mammograms do not enjoy that part of their job. Once we adjusted for radiologist and patient characteristics, we found that reported enjoyment was not related to performance in our study, although suggestive trends were noted.