Reducing risk for chronic disease: evaluation of a collective community approach to sustainable evidence-based health programming.

BACKGROUND: Community initiatives can shape health behaviors, such as physical activity and dietary habits, across a population and help reduce the risk of developing chronic disease. To achieve this goal and impact health outcomes, Pasadena Vibrant Community aimed to engage communities in an ongoing dialogue about the importance of healthy behaviors, implement and advance community-based strategies to promote health, and improve diet and physical activity behaviors. The initiative was centered around a collaboration between a backbone organization, steering committee, and 7 collaborating organizations funded to implement multicomponent, evidence-based programs.. The common agenda was detailed in a community action plan, which included 19 interventions targeting healthy eating and active living among adults and youth in Pasadena, Texas. METHODS: A mixed methods evaluation of the initiative was conducted over 4 years. Data sources included document reviews of quarterly progress reports (n = 86) and supplemental data reports (n = 16) provided by collaborating organizations, annual Steering Committee surveys (n = 4), and interviews conducted with staff from a subset of Collaborating Organizations (n = 4). RESULTS: The initiative reached over 50,000 community members per year through 19 evidence-based interventions and impacted health outcomes, including knowledge and adoption of healthy eating practices and increased physical activity. Thirty-one systems-level changes were implemented during the initiative, including 16 environmental changes. Steering Committee meetings and shared goals enabled connections, communication, and cooperation, which allowed Collaborating Organizations to address challenges and combine resources to deliver their programs. CONCLUSIONS: Community initiatives can effectively permeate the community by reaching individuals, improving physical activity and dietary habits, and ensuring sustainability. Based on the experience reported here, the success of a community initiative can be facilitated if collaborating organizations come together to implement evidence-based interventions and tailor them to the community, and if they are empowered by significant leadership and supportive collaboration and aligned by a common agenda.

Attitudes and Experiential Factors Associated with Completion of mt-sDNA Test Kit for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Despite the availability of multiple screening options, CRC screening is underutilized. We conducted a survey of patients (n = 2973) who were prescribed the multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) screening test (commercialized as Cologuard® and manufactured by Exact Sciences Corporation) to understand attitudes and experiences that influence test completion and likelihood of future test completion. Using exploratory factor analyses, we developed three scales: Perceived Effectiveness, Perceived Ease of Use, and Perceived Comfort.

Awareness, perceptions, and choices of physicians pertaining to human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in India: A formative research study.

Introduction: India accounts for one-fifth of the global burden of cervical cancer cases and mortality. A safe and effective vaccine to prevent human papillomavirus (HPV) infections, the primary cause of cervical malignancies, is available in India but multiple barriers lead to its low uptake in the country. Physicians are a key stakeholder and communicator in the Indian health system and have the potential to increase HPV vaccine uptake. Objective: We undertook formative research to understand awareness, perceptions and choices of physicians when recommending the HPV vaccine to parents of adolescent girls. Methods: We conducted in-depth interviews with 32 physicians in two districts of West Bengal. Data collection was carried out between July and August 2019. The data was transcribed, coded, and analyzed using NVivo software using the thematic analysis technique. Results: Our findings suggest that while physicians are generally aware about the burden of cervical cancer and its prevention by HPV vaccination, they face several barriers to recommending the HPV vaccine routinely and strongly. These include the lack of national-level guidance on the age eligibility and dosage, lack of practice-level opportunities such as well or non-sick visits and other routine adolescent vaccines, practice-level barriers like out-of-pocket cost and vaccine availability, and perceived parental hesitancy arising from reluctance to discuss cervical cancer, its prevention, and HPV vaccination. Conclusions: Physicians in our study exhibited hesitancy when recommending the HPV vaccine. They also faced logistical barriers. It is important that the barriers pertaining to when and how physicians recommend the vaccine be tackled through further education, policy change, and development and implementation of interventions that are evidenced-based.

Development of a Patient Preference Survey for Wearable Kidney Replacement Therapy Devices.

Background: Recent innovations have the potential to disrupt the current paradigm for kidney failure treatment. The US Food and Drug Administration is committed to incorporating valid scientific evidence about how patients weigh the benefits and risks of new devices into their decision making, but to date, premarket submission of patient preference information (PPI) has been limited for kidney devices. With input from stakeholders, we developed a survey intended to yield valid PPI, capturing how patients trade off the potential benefits and risks of wearable dialysis devices and in-center hemodialysis. Methods: We conducted concept elicitation interviews with individuals receiving dialysis to inform instrument content. After instrument drafting, we conducted two rounds of pretest interviews to evaluate survey face validity, comprehensibility, and perceived relevance. We pilot tested the survey with in-center hemodialysis patients to assess comprehensibility and usability further. Throughout, we used participant input to guide survey refinements. Results: Thirty-six individuals receiving in-center or home dialysis participated in concept elicitation (N=20) and pretest (N=16) interviews. Participants identified reduced fatigue, lower treatment burden, and enhanced freedom as important benefits of a wearable device, and many expressed concerns about risks related to device disconnection-specifically bleeding and infection. We drafted a survey that included descriptions of the risks of serious bleeding and serious infection and an assessment of respondent willingness to wait for a safer device. Input from pretest interviewees led to various instrument modifications, including treatment descriptions, item wording, and risk-level explanations. Pilot testing of the updated survey among 24 in-center hemodialysis patients demonstrated acceptable survey comprehensibility and usability, although 50% of patients required some assistance. Conclusions: The final survey is a 54-item web-based instrument that will yield estimates of the maximal acceptable risk for the described wearable device and willingness to wait for wearable devices with lower risk.

Managing uncertainty and responding to difficult emotions: Cancer patients' perspectives on clinician response during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Patients undergoing cancer treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic have experienced stress and uncertainty with respect to disruptions in cancer care and COVID-19 related risks. We examined whether clinicians' responsiveness to patients' uncertainty and difficult emotions were associated with better health and well-being. METHODS: Patients were recruited from cancer support communities and a market research firm. Respondents assessed clinicians communication that addressed uncertainty and difficult emotions. Health status measures included mental and physical health, coping during the pandemic, and psychological distress. RESULTS: 317 respondents participated in the study. Patients' perceptions of their clinicians responsiveness to patient uncertainty and negative emotions were associated with better mental health, physical health, coping, and less psychological distress (all p-values <0.001). Respondents with greater self-efficacy and social support also reported better health. CONCLUSION: Even when controlling for patients' personal and health-related characteristics, clinicians' communication addressing patients' uncertainty and difficult emotions predicted better health, better coping, and less psychological distress. Access to social support and self-efficacy also were associated with better health status. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians' communication focused on helping with uncertainty and difficult emotions is important to cancer patients, especially during the pandemic. Clinicians should also direct patients to resources for social support and patient empowerment.

Patients' Experiences with Cancer Care: Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic heightened the psychosocial impact of a cancer diagnosis as patients face concerns about the risk of infection and serious disease and uncertainties about the impact on their treatment. We conducted an online survey (n = 317) and focus groups (n = 19) with patients to examine their experiences with cancer care during the pandemic. Most survey respondents (68%) reported one or more disruptions or delays in care, including appointments switched to telehealth (49%). Patients perceived both benefits (e.g., convenience) and drawbacks (e.g., more impersonal) to telehealth. For many patients, COVID-19-related restrictions on bringing family members to support them during appointments was a major concern and left them feeling alone and vulnerable during treatment. Patients' self-reported coping during the pandemic was positively associated with age, education, and income (P < .05 for each) and better communication with their doctors during telehealth sessions (P < .001). Study findings highlight the importance of patient-centered care and communication to help patients cope with the challenges of the pandemic. Further research is needed to develop guidelines for use of telehealth as part of patient-centered cancer care.

Oncology patients' communication experiences during COVID-19: comparing telehealth consultations to in-person visits.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic created significant disruptions in cancer care, much of which was transitioned to telehealth. Because telehealth alters the way clinicians and patients interact with one another, this investigation examined patients' perceptions of their communication with clinicians during the pandemic. METHOD: Patients were recruited from the Cancer Support Community, Fight Colorectal Cancer, and a market research firm to participate in an online survey. In addition to demographic and health-related information, respondents completed measures of patient-centered communication and evaluated how their communication in telehealth sessions compared with in-person visits. RESULTS: From October to December 2020, 227 respondents (65.6% female, 64.6% Non-Hispanic White, 33.5% had 6 or more telehealth sessions, 55% were 50 or older) reported having some of their cancer care provided via telehealth. Respondents who were of racial/ethnic minorities, male, had more telehealth sessions, or had poorer mental health reported less patient-centered communication with clinicians. Most patients thought communication in telehealth sessions was "about the same" as in-person visits with respect to good communication (59%). However, patients thinking communication in telehealth sessions was "better" than in-person visits were more likely to be Hispanic (49%), Non-Hispanic Black (41%), under 50 years of age (32%), male (40%), and had more telehealth sessions (34%). CONCLUSION: Respondents reporting less patient-centered communication during the pandemic-e.g., persons of racial/ethnic minorities and males-were also more likely to evaluate communication in telehealth sessions as better than in-person visits. Further research is needed to understand reasons underlying this finding. Cancer care clinicians should take into account patient preferences regarding telehealth care, which may be particularly important for racial and ethnic minority patients.

Addiction Treatment and Telehealth: Review of Efficacy and Provider Insights During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Addiction treatment via telehealth expanded to unprecedented levels during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to clarify whether the research evidence on the efficacy of telehealth-delivered substance use disorder treatment and the experience of providers using telehealth during the pandemic support continued use of telehealth after the pandemic and, if so, under what circumstances. METHODS: Data sources included a literature review on the efficacy of telehealth for substance use disorder treatment, responses to a 2020 online survey from 100 California addiction treatment providers, and interviews with 30 California treatment providers and other stakeholders. RESULTS: Eight published studies were identified that compared addiction treatment via telehealth with in-person treatment. Seven found telehealth treatment as effective but not more effective than in-person treatment in terms of retention, therapeutic alliance, and substance use. One Canadian study found that telehealth facilitated methadone prescribing and improved retention. In the survey results reported here, California addiction treatment providers said that more than 50% of their patients were being treated via telehealth for intensive outpatient treatment, individual counseling, group counseling, and intake assessment. They were most confident that individual counseling via telehealth was as effective as in-person individual counseling and less sure about the relative effectiveness of telehealth-delivered medication management, group counseling, and intake assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth may help engage patients in addiction treatment by improving access and convenience. Additional research is needed to confirm that benefit and to determine how best to tailor telehealth to each patient's circumstances and with what mix of in-person and telehealth services.

Assessing Assessments: Substance use disorder treatment providers' perceptions of intake assessments.

Background: Assessments to determine patients' treatment needs and preferences when they begin substance use disorder (SUD) treatment are essential. The objectives of this paper are to identify the perspectives of providers who conduct assessments on (1) assessments' utility in determining the level of care where patients will receive treatment, (2) strategies to engage patients in treatment during assessments, and (3) assessment strengths and shortcomings. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 California treatment providers who routinely perform SUD assessments for Medicaid beneficiaries. Interviews asked about the utility of assessment tools in determining appropriate levels of care, patient engagement during assessments, and strengths and shortcomings of intake assessment processes. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by multiple researchers using template analysis. Results: Providers reported that assessments linked to level-of-care decision rules sometimes generate recommendations inconsistent with their clinical judgment, and that the timing of assessments can influence the quality of the information collected. Providers described engagement strategies that help patients feel more comfortable during assessments and that encourage more thoughtful and accurate responses. Providers valued assessments that helped ensure comprehensive collection of patient information, that allowed flexibility to probe for additional information and context, and that facilitated treatment planning. Providers did not like assessments that were long and repetitive or those that did not collect detailed information about patients' mental health and recovery environments. Conclusions: Assessments can be improved if providers conduct them in a manner that makes patients feel comfortable while building trust and rapport. Ensuring that assessments are not long or repetitive and giving comprehensive assessments once patients have developed trusting relationships with treatment programs can improve assessment processes. Further research is needed to optimize SUD assessments.

Perceptions of Health Care, Information, and Social Support Among Women Affected by Zika Virus Infection During Pregnancy in Two U.S. States.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the information needs and experiences with health care and social support among women with confirmed or possible Zika virus infection during pregnancy. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 18 women whose pregnancies were part of surveillance efforts in two states, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Using a semi-structured guide available in English and Spanish, we asked women about their experiences. We conducted a thematic analysis using NVivo 11. RESULTS: Only one participant reported that her infant had been diagnosed with health problems related to congenital Zika virus infection. Most participants said they received the information they needed about Zika virus and their infant's medical care. Most participants primarily spoke Spanish and described satisfactory experiences communicating with providers, either using a mix of Spanish and English or using an interpreter. Coordination of care and clear communication among different providers was a key factor in participants' satisfaction with health care received. Participants noted high levels of stress around the uncertainty associated with Zika virus exposure during pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Although participants reported satisfaction with care, they also reported high levels of anxiety and challenges coping with the uncertainties along their journeys. Study findings support the need for guidance for providers about how to talk with women about Zika virus infection during pregnancy and specifically how to discuss the uncertainties about diagnosis and outcomes.

Is implementation of ASAM-based addiction treatment assessments associated with improved 30-day retention and substance use?

BACKGROUND: The American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) criteria were developed to provide a systematic, evidence-based, and transparent approach to addiction treatment assessment and level-of-care recommendations. In 2017, California began a Medicaid demonstration that required that providers in participating counties to adopt ASAM-based intake assessments and level-of-care criteria. We hypothesized that ASAM implementation would increase the proportion of patients retained in addiction treatment and successfully completing their treatment plan. METHODS: We implemented a comparative interrupted time series analysis with 407,792 treatment episodes by Medicaid beneficiaries in specialty addiction treatment settings from 2015 to mid-2019. We compared the change in retention rates and successful completion rates in counties that adopted ASAM-based assessments relative to counties that did not adopt ASAM-based assessments and used only clinical judgment for level-of-care decisions. Treatment retention was defined as staying in addiction treatment for at least 30 days. Successful completion of the treatment plan was determined by the patient's clinician. RESULTS: After one year, ASAM implementation was associated with a 9% increase in 30-day retention among treatment episodes that started in a residential setting, but no change in retention among episodes starting in outpatient settings. We found no statistically significant association between ASAM adoption and successful treatment completion. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of ASAM-based assessment may lead to improved retention for individuals who begin treatment in residential treatment, which may be encouraging to the many state Medicaid programs that are adopting ASAM-based criteria. More research is needed to clarify the mechanism by which ASAM leads to improved outcomes and to clarify how to maximize the potential benefits of ASAM, such as through patient-centered implementation.

Impact of the Coronavirus Pandemic on Substance Use Disorder Treatment: Findings from a Survey of Specialty Providers in California.

BACKGROUND: As the coronavirus pandemic public health emergency begins to ebb in the United States, policymakers and providers need to evaluate how the addiction treatment system functioned during the public health emergency and draw lessons for future emergencies. One important question is whether the pandemic curtailed the use of addiction treatment and the extent to which telehealth was able to mitigate access barriers. METHODS: To begin to answer this question, we conducted a survey of specialty addiction treatment providers in California from June 2020 through July 2020. The survey focused specifically on provider organizations that served Medicaid beneficiaries. RESULTS: Of the 133 respondents, 50% reported a decrease in patients since the stay-at-home order in March 2020, with the largest decline among new patients, and 58% said more patients were relapsing. Eighty-one percent of providers said that telemedicine use had increased since the stay-at-home order. Most said that telemedicine had moderately (48%) or completely (30%) addressed access barriers. CONCLUSION: More efforts are needed to ensure that patients, and in particular new patients, receive addiction treatment during public health emergencies.

Overcoming Barriers to Clinical Trial Participation: Outcomes of a National Clinical Trial Matching and Navigation Service for Patients With a Blood Cancer.

PURPOSE: There are numerous barriers to cancer clinical trial participation in the United States. This paper describes the approach and outcomes of The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society's Clinical Trial Support Center (CTSC), whose nurse navigators assist patients with a blood cancer and their oncologists by identifying all appropriate trials based on clinical data and patient preference, facilitating informed and shared decision making, and minimizing enrollment barriers. METHODS: Data on patients served from October 2017 to October 2019 were analyzed using bivariate and multivariate analyses to determine demographic and clinical characteristics associated with enrollment. Reasons for nonenrollment were examined. RESULTS: The CTSC opened 906 patient cases during this time frame. Among all US patients with a closed case (n = 750), the clinical trial enrollment rate was 16.1%. Among those with a known enrollment outcome after a trial search (n = 537), the enrollment rate was 22.5%. Multivariate analysis controlling for variables significant in bivariate analyses (insurance, treatment status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and urban or rural residence) revealed that patients with Medicaid were less likely to enroll than those with private or commercial insurance (adjusted odds ratio, 0.054; CI, 0.003 to 0.899), and patients in treatment or maintenance were less likely to enroll than those relapsed or refractory to most recent therapy (adjusted odds ratio, 0.312; CI, 0.139 to 0.702). Primary reasons for nonenrollment were preference for standard of care (66.3%) and patient passed away (16.1%). CONCLUSION: The CTSC is an effective, replicable model for addressing multilevel barriers to clinical trial participation. The findings highlight the need to increase opportunities for trial participation sooner after diagnosis and among patients with Medicaid.

Be Well Communities™: mobilizing communities to promote wellness and stop cancer before it starts.

PURPOSE: Increasingly, cancer centers are delivering population-based approaches to narrow the gap between known cancer prevention strategies and their effective implementation. Leveraging successful healthy community initiatives, MD Anderson developed Be Well Communities™, a model that implements evidence-based actions to directly impact people's lives. METHODS: In partnership with local organizations, MD Anderson's Be Well Communities team executed and evaluated 16 evidence-based interventions to address community priorities in healthy diets, physical activity, and sun safety. Evaluation included assessing the effectiveness of evidence-based interventions, stakeholders' perceptions of collaboration, and the population-level impact on dietary and physical activity behaviors among students using the School Physical Activity and Nutrition Survey and the System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time. Two-tailed t-tests were used to compare tested parameters at baseline and follow-up. p values less than .05 were considered significant. RESULTS: This model achieved its early outcomes, including effectively implementing evidence-based interventions, building strong partnerships, increasing access to healthy foods, improving the built environment, and increasing healthy food and water consumption and moderate to vigorous physical activity among students (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Be Well Communities is an effective model for positively impacting community health which could be leveraged by others to deliver evidence-based actions to improve population health.

"The assessment really helps you with the first step in recovery." What do clients think substance use disorder treatment intake assessments should look like?

Background: In general, research has found that patient-centered substance use disorder treatment is positively correlated with improved patient outcomes. However, little research has examined what factors make intake assessments-the first step in addiction treatment-patient-centered. Methods: We conducted interviews with 30 Medicaid-enrolled individuals who received addiction treatment in California about their experiences with the intake assessment process. Results: Participants reported that the intake assessment process evoked strong feelings, both positive and negative. Some participants said that answering detailed questions about their substance use, mental health, and social relationships, for example, was cathartic and gave them helpful insights. Other participants found the questions invasive, exhausting, and anxiety provoking. Participants also emphasized how critical it is for the person conducting the assessment to be supportive, nonjudgmental, and attentive. Participants recommended delaying the comprehensive assessment because they did not feel physically or emotionally ready to complete the intake. Conclusions and recommendations: Patients' introduction to addiction treatment is typically the intake assessment. By understanding how patients experience intake assessments, providers can make the process more patient-centered, which may lead to improved patient outcomes.

How Patient Centered Are Addiction Treatment Intake Processes?

OBJECTIVES: The substance use disorder (SUD) treatment field has conducted significant research on creating intake tools and processes that best match patients to the most appropriate treatment setting, but less research has been conducted on how those tools impact the patient experience. The study took advantage of a natural experiment in California to evaluate whether the implementation of American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) assessment criteria and a computer-facilitated intake assessment based on the ASAM criteria affects patient experiences and patient-centeredness during intake relative to patients receiving intake assessments not based on ASAM criteria. METHODS: We analyzed surveys completed by 851 patients covered by Medi-Cal who were receiving specialty SUD treatment at 33 providers across 10 California counties about their experiences and perceptions of the intake assessment process. To account for differences in patient mix, we used inverse-probability weighting and computed differences in the weighted means for patients across non-ASAM, ASAM, and computerized-ASAM patients. RESULTS: We have found that patients who underwent intake based on ASAM assessment criteria or computerized ASAM assessment experienced a more patient-centered intake. We also found that patients who received ASAM-based assessments were more satisfied with their choice of treatment setting. CONCLUSIONS: This evidence is encouraging for the SUD treatment field, especially considering that many Medicaid programs are adopting ASAM or similar patient placement criteria and multidimensional assessments. Future research should consider whether increases in the patient-centeredness of assessments are associated with increased retention in SUD treatment and other positive treatment outcomes.

Meeting the Information and Support Needs of Blood Cancer Patients and Caregivers: A Longitudinal Study of a Model of Patient-Centered Information Delivery.

Access to reliable, up-to-date information and resources can assist individuals managing and living with cancer. The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, through its Information Resource Center, provides personalized information and support to individuals affected by blood cancer. To examine its value and impact, we conducted qualitative interviews (n = 18) and an online survey of patients and caregivers (N = 515) after they talked with an Information Resource Center Information Specialist by phone, with a follow-up survey about 6 months later. Respondents most commonly contacted the Information Resource Center to get referrals to support programs (40.4%) and to obtain information about getting a second opinion (36.5%) and financial assistance (36.2%). After talking with an Information Specialist, respondents felt more hopeful (85.9%), more confident in managing care (82.9%), and more knowledgeable about their diagnosis (49.5%) and financial resources (42.4%). After speaking with an Information Specialist, respondents changed how they advocated for themselves/loved one (23.8%), changed how they communicated with doctors/other providers and family/friends (both 15.9%), received financial assistance (22.2%), and took other actions. Among respondents who took actions, most said that the conversation(s) had positively impacted the action. Respondents who spoke with an Information Specialist more than once were more likely to report positive impacts, including changing how they advocate for themselves/loved one and communicate with providers (both p < 0.05). Respondents diagnosed more recently were also more likely to report positive impact, including changing the way they communicate with providers (p < 0.05). Findings highlight the value of cancer helplines and suggest ways they can be most effective.

Effectively Communicating About HIV and Other Health Disparities: Findings From a Literature Review and Future Directions.

Despite significant progress in the prevention and treatment of HIV, disparities in rates of infection remain among key groups in the United States, including blacks and African Americans; Hispanics/Latinos; and men who have sex with men (MSM). The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' initiative, Ending the HIV Epidemic: A Plan for America, calls for addressing HIV-related disparities and reducing stigma and discrimination associated with HIV. The goal of this literature review was to identify approaches for effectively communicating about health disparities across the HIV care continuum. We reviewed the literature to investigate strategies used to communicate health disparities and to identify potential unintended adverse effects resulting from this messaging. Messages about health disparities often target subgroups at higher risk and can be framed in a variety of ways (e.g., social comparison, progress, impact, etiological). Studies have examined the effects of message framing on the risk perceptions, emotional reactions, and behaviors of individuals exposed to the messaging. The evidence points to several potential unintended adverse effects of using social comparison framing and individual responsibility framing to communicate about health disparities, and visual images and exemplars to target messages to higher-risk subgroups. There is not yet a clear evidence-based approach for communicating about health disparities and avoiding potential unintended effects. However, we offer recommendations for communicating about HIV-related disparities based on our findings. Because we found limited literature that addressed our research questions in the context of HIV, we propose a research agenda to build an evidence base for developing effective messages about HIV-related disparities.

Information needs across the family planning continuum: A survey of women with chronic autoimmune inflammatory conditions.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the information needs of women with chronic autoimmune inflammatory conditions across the pregnancy continuum. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey with women about information needs related to family planning. Eligible participants were female, aged 18-44, had a diagnosis of a chronic inflammatory condition, and were at one of three pregnancy stages (planning, currently pregnant, or postpartum). RESULTS: The survey yielded 209 responses. Respondents had high levels of information needs and were active information seekers. Many respondents reported difficulty finding the information they need. Over half (56.9%) reported receiving conflicting information from different doctors, and a majority of those respondents reported doing their own research. Respondents expressed the greatest interest in resources that facilitated connections to other women and their experiences (87.4%). Pregnancy stage was significantly associated with information needs and preferences; respondents in the planning stage of pregnancy had higher information needs, reported more dissatisfaction with communication with doctors, and were less connected to pregnancy resources. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Both providers and health/advocacy organizations have a role in improving information around this topic, such as developing and disseminating resources tailored to pregnancy status and supporting patient-centered communication around family planning.