Evaluating implementation of a community-focused patient navigation intervention at an NCI-designated cancer center using RE-AIM.

BACKGROUND: Patient navigation is an evidence-based intervention that reduces cancer health disparities by directly addressing the barriers to care for underserved patients with cancer. Variability in design and integration of patient navigation programs within cancer care settings has limited this intervention's utility. The implementation science evaluation framework, RE-AIM, allows quantitative and qualitative examination of effective implementation of patient navigation programs into cancer care settings. METHODS: The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was used to evaluate implementation of a community-focused patient navigation intervention at an NCI-designated cancer center between June 2018 and October 2021. Using a 3-month longitudinal, non-comparative measurement period, univariate and bivariate analyses were conducted to examine associations between participant-level demographics and primary (i.e., barrier reduction) and secondary (i.e., patient-reported outcomes) effectiveness outcomes. Mixed methods analyses were used to examine adoption and delivery of the intervention into the cancer center setting. Process-level analyses were used to evaluate maintenance of the intervention. RESULTS: Participants (n = 311) represented a largely underserved population, as defined by the National Cancer Institute, with the majority identifying as Hispanic/Latino, having a household income of $35,000 or less, and being enrolled in Medicaid. Participants were diagnosed with a variety of cancer types and most had advanced staged cancers. Pre-post-intervention analyses indicated significant reduction from pre-intervention assessments in the average number of reported barriers, F(1, 207) = 117.62, p < .001, as well as significant increases in patient-reported physical health, t(205) = - 6.004, p < .001, mental health, t(205) = - 3.810, p < .001, self-efficacy, t(205) = - 5.321, p < .001, and satisfaction with medical team communication, t(206) = - 2.03, p = .029. Referral patterns and qualitative data supported increased adoption and integration of the intervention into the target setting, and consistent intervention delivery metrics suggested high fidelity to intervention delivery over time. Process-level data outlined a successful transition from a grant-funded community-focused patient navigation intervention to an institution-funded program. CONCLUSIONS: This study utilized the implementation science evaluation framework, RE-AIM, to evaluate implementation of a community-focused patient navigation program. Our analyses indicate successful implementation within a cancer care setting and provide a potential guide for other oncology settings who may be interested in implementing community-focused patient navigation programs.

Bias in team decision-making for advanced heart failure therapies: model application.

Bias in advanced heart failure therapy allocation results in inequitable outcomes for minoritized populations. The purpose of this study was to examine how bias is introduced during group decision-making with an interprofessional team using Breathett's Model of Heart Failure Decision-Making. This was a secondary qualitative descriptive analysis from a study focused on bias in advanced heart failure therapy allocation. Team meetings were recorded and transcribed from four heart failure centers. Breathett's Model was applied both deductively and inductively to transcripts (n = 12). Bias was identified during discussions about patient characteristics, clinical fragility, and prior clinical decision-making. Some patients were labeled as "good citizens" or as adherent/non-adherent while others benefited from strong advocacy from interprofessional team members. Social determinants of health also impacted therapy allocation. Interprofessional collaboration with advanced heart failure therapy allocation may be enhanced with the inclusion of patient advocates and limit of clinical decision-making using subjective data.

Pilot test of a multicomponent implementation strategy for equity in advanced heart failure allocation.

Advanced heart failure (AHF) therapy allocation is vulnerable to bias related to subjective assessments and poor group dynamics. Our objective was to determine whether an implementation strategy for AHF team members could feasibly contribute to organizational and culture change supporting equity in AHF allocation. Using a pretest-posttest design, the strategy included an 8-week multicomponent training on bias reduction, standardized numerical social assessments, and enhanced group dynamics at an AHF center. Evaluations of organizational and cultural changes included pretest-posttest AHF team member surveys, transcripts of AHF meetings to assess group dynamics using a standardized scoring system, and posttest interviews guided by a framework for implementing a complex strategy. Results were analyzed with qualitative descriptive methods and Brunner-Munzel tests for relative effect (RE, RE >0.5 signals posttest improvement). The majority of survey metrics revealed potential benefit with RE >0.5. REs were >0.5 for 5 of 6 group dynamics metrics. Themes for implementation included (1) promoting equitable distribution of scarce resources, (2) requiring a change in team members' time investment to correct bias and change the meeting structure, (3) slowing and then accelerating the allocation process, and (4) adaptable beyond AHF and reinforceable with semi-annual trainings. An implementation strategy for AHF equity demonstrated the feasibility for organizational and culture changes.

Patient Navigation for Timely, Guideline-Adherent Adjuvant Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: A National Landscape Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Aligned with the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Head and Neck Cancers, in November 2021 the Commission on Cancer approved initiation of postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) within 6 weeks of surgery for head and neck cancer (HNC) as its first and only HNC quality metric. Unfortunately, >50% of patients do not commence PORT within 6 weeks, and delays disproportionately burden racial and ethnic minority groups. Although patient navigation (PN) is a potential strategy to improve the delivery of timely, equitable, guideline-adherent PORT, the national landscape of PN for this aspect of care is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From September through November 2022, we conducted a survey of health care organizations that participate in the American Cancer Society National Navigation Roundtable to understand the scope of PN for delivering timely, guideline-adherent PORT for patients with HNC. RESULTS: Of the 94 institutions that completed the survey, 89.4% (n=84) reported that at least part of their practice was dedicated to navigating patients with HNC. Sixty-eight percent of the institutions who reported navigating patients with HNC along the continuum (56/83) reported helping them begin PORT. One-third of HNC navigators (32.5%; 27/83) reported tracking the metric for time-to-PORT at their facility. When estimating the timeframe in which the NCCN and Commission on Cancer guidelines recommend commencing PORT, 44.0% (37/84) of HNC navigators correctly stated ≤6 weeks; 71.4% (60/84) reported that they did not know the frequency of delays starting PORT among patients with HNC nationally, and 63.1% (53/84) did not know the frequency of delays at their institution. CONCLUSIONS: In this national landscape survey, we identified that PN is already widely used in clinical practice to help patients with HNC start timely, guideline-adherent PORT. To enhance and scale PN within this area and improve the quality and equity of HNC care delivery, organizations could focus on providing better education and support for their navigators as well as specialization in HNC.

The Integration of Value Assessment and Social Network Methods for Breast Health Navigation Among African Americans.

OBJECTIVES: A major strategy to reduce the impact of breast cancer (BC) among African Americans (AA) is patient navigation, defined here as individualized assistance for reducing barriers to healthcare use. The primary focus of this study was to estimate the added value of incorporating breast health promotion by navigated participants and the subsequent BC screenings that network members may obtain. METHODS: In this study, we compared the cost-effectiveness of navigation across 2 scenarios. First, we examine the effect of navigation on AA participants (scenario 1). Second, we examine the effect of navigation on AA participants and their networks (scenario 2). We leverage data from multiple studies in South Chicago. Our primary outcome (BC screening) is intermediate, given limited available quantitative data on the long-term benefits of BC screening for AA populations. RESULTS: When considering participant effects alone (scenario 1), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $3845 per additional screening mammogram. When including participant and network effects (scenario 2), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $1098 per additional screening mammogram. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that inclusion of network effects can contribute to a more precise, comprehensive assessment of interventions for underserved communities.

Barriers and opportunities to measuring oncology patient navigation impact: Results from the National Navigation Roundtable survey.

BACKGROUND: Patient navigation improves cancer care delivery for those most at risk for poor outcomes. Lack of sustainable funding threatens the full integration of navigation services into health care delivery systems. Standardized navigation metrics that document impact and identify best practices are necessary to support sustainability. METHODS: The National Navigation Roundtable administered a web-based, cross-sectional survey to oncology patient navigation programs to identify barriers and facilitators to the use of navigation metrics. The 38-item survey asked about data-collection practices and specific navigation metrics used by the program. Exploratory and descriptive statistics were used to identify factors associated with data collection and reporting. RESULTS: Seven hundred fifty respondents from across the country represented navigation programs across the continuum of care. Although 538 respondents (72%) reported participating in routine data collection, only one-half of them used data for reporting purposes. For the 374 programs that used electronic health records, only 40% had discrete, reportable navigation fields, and 25% had an identifier for navigated patients. Program funding was identified as the only characteristic associated with data collection, whereas the type of data collected was associated with work setting, participation in alternative payment models, and where on the continuum navigation services are provided. Respondents participating in an oncology accreditation program were more likely to collect specific outcome metrics across the continuum and to use those data for reporting purposes. The most common barriers to data collection were time (55%) and lack of support for complex data systems and/or platforms (50%). CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent data collection and reporting of oncology navigation programs remain a threat to sustainability. Aligning data collection with oncology accreditation, funding, and reimbursement is a viable path forward.

Exploring classes of cancer patient navigators and determinants of navigator role retention.

BACKGROUND: In the current nationwide study, the authors used latent class analysis (LCA) to identify classes of cancer patient navigators (CPNs) and examined whether class membership and 12 indicators were related to navigator role retention. METHODS: By using data from 460 CPNs in the United States, LCA identified classes (ie, homogenous subgroups) of CPNs with the following indicators: type of CPN (clinical vs nonclinical), education level, area(s) of the cancer care continuum in which the CPN provided patient navigation, region and urbanity where the CPN provided services, organizational work setting, and patient navigation program funding source. The associations of navigator retention with class membership and each indicator were examined using χ2 tests. RESULTS: LCA identified 3 classes of CPNs. Classes 1 and 3 were conceptualized as distinct, homogeneous subgroups of clinical CPNs that appeared to differ mainly on their likelihood of engagement in outreach, survivorship, palliative care, and end-of-life patient navigation. Class 2 was conceptualized as a nonclinical CPN subgroup that was distinct primarily based on their high endorsement of employment in programs, which are at least partially funded by grants and engagement in earlier stages of patient navigation (eg, early detection). The provision of survivorship and treatment patient navigation was related to navigator role retention, with senior CPNs providing these patient navigation services more than novice CPNs. CONCLUSIONS: The current study highlights 3 distinct classes of CPNs, provides initial information regarding determinants of navigator retention, and makes several recommendations for future patient navigation research.

Collective pursuit for equity in cancer care: The National Navigation Roundtable.

BACKGROUND: The evidence continues to build in support of implementing patient navigation to reduce barriers and increase access to care. However, health disparities remain in cancer outcomes. The goal of the National Navigation Roundtable (NNRT) is to serve as a convener to help support the field of navigation to address equity. METHODS: To examine the progress and opportunities for navigation, the NNRT submitted a collection of articles based on the results from 2 dedicated surveys and contributions from member organizations. The intent was to help inform what we know about patient navigation since the last dedicated examination in this journal 10 years ago. RESULTS: The online survey of >700 people described navigators and examined sustainability and policy issues and the longevity, specific role and function, and impact of clinical and nonclinical navigators in addition to the role of training and supervision. In addition, a full examination of coronavirus disease 2019 and contributions from member organizations helped further define progress and future opportunities to meet the needs of patients through patient navigation. CONCLUSIONS: To achieve equity in cancer care will demand the sustained action of virtually every component of the cancer care system. It is the hope and intent of the NNRT that the information presented in this supplement will be a catalyst for action in this collective action approach.

Comparing clinical and nonclinical cancer patient navigators: A national study in the United States.

BACKGROUND: A nationwide survey was conducted to examine differences between clinical and nonclinical oncology navigators in their service provision, engagement in the cancer care continuum, personal characteristics, and program characteristics. METHODS: Using convenience sampling, 527 oncology navigators participated and completed an online survey. Descriptive statistics, χ2 statistics, and t tests were used to compare nonclinical (eg, community health worker) and clinical (eg, nurse navigators) navigators on the provision of various navigation services, personal characteristics, engagement in the cancer care continuum, and program characteristics. RESULTS: Most participants were clinical navigators (76.1%). Compared to nonclinical navigators, clinical navigators were more likely to have a bachelor's degree or higher (88.6% vs 69.6%, P < .001), be funded by operational budgets (84.4% vs 35.7%, P < .001), and less likely to work at a community-based organization or nonprofit (2.0% vs 36.5%, P < .001). Clinical navigators were more likely to perform basic navigation (P < .001), care coordination (P < .001), treatment support (P < .001), and clinical trial/peer support (P = .005). Clinical navigators were more likely to engage in treatment (P < .001), end-of-life (P < .001), and palliative care (P = .001) navigation. CONCLUSIONS: There is growing indication that clinical and nonclinical oncology navigators perform different functions and work in different settings. Nonclinical navigators may be more likely to face job insecurity because they work in nonprofit organizations and are primarily funded by grants.

Implementing patient navigation programs: Considerations and lessons learned from the Alliance to Advance Patient-Centered Cancer Care.

BACKGROUND: Six multidisciplinary cancer centers were selected and funded by the Merck Foundation (2017-2021) to collaborate in the Alliance to Advance Patient-Centered Cancer Care ("Alliance"), an initiative to improve patient access, minimize health disparities, and enhance the quality of patient-centered cancer care. These sites share their insights on implementation and expansion of their patient navigation efforts. METHODS: Patient navigation represents an evidence-based health care intervention designed to enhance patient-centered care and care coordination. Investigators at 6 National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers outline their approaches to reducing health care disparities and synthesize their efforts to ensure sustainability and successful transferability in the management of patients with cancer and their families in real-world health care settings. RESULTS: Insights are outlined within the context of patient navigation program effectiveness and supported by examples from Alliance cancer center sites: 1) understand the patient populations, particularly underserved and high-risk patients; 2) capitalize on the existing infrastructure and institutional commitment to support and sustain patient navigation; and 3) build capacity by mobilizing community support outside of the cancer center. CONCLUSIONS: This process-level article reflects the importance of collaboration and the usefulness of partnering with other cancer centers to share interdisciplinary insights while undergoing intervention development, implementation, and expansion. These collective insights may be useful to staff at other cancer centers that look to implement, enhance, or evaluate the effectiveness of their patient navigation interventions.

Is the affordable care act medicaid expansion associated with receipt of heart failure guideline-directed medical therapy by race and ethnicity?

BACKGROUND: Uninsurance is a known contributor to racial/ethnic health inequities. Insurance is often needed for prescriptions and follow-up appointments. Therefore, we determined whether the Affordable Care Act(ACA) Medicaid Expansion was associated with increased receipt of guideline-directed medical treatment(GDMT) at discharge among patients hospitalized with heart failure(HF) by race/ethnicity. METHODS: Using Get With The Guidelines-HF registry, logistic regression was used to assess odds of receiving GDMT(HF medications; education; follow-up appointment) in early vs non-adopter states before(2012 - 2013) and after ACA Medicaid Expansion(2014 - 2019) within each race/ethnicity, accounting for patient-level covariates and within-hospital clustering. We tested for an interaction(p-int) between GDMT and pre/post Medicaid Expansion time periods. RESULTS: Among 271,606 patients(57.5% early adopter, 42.5% non-adopter), 65.5% were White, 22.8% African American, 8.9% Hispanic, and 2.9% Asian race/ethnicity. Independent of ACA timing, Hispanic patients were more likely to receive all GDMT for residing in early adopter states compared to non-adopter states (P <.0001). In fully-adjusted analyses, ACA Medicaid Expansion was associated with higher odds of receipt of ACEI/ARB/ARNI in Hispanic patients [before ACA:OR 0.40(95%CI:0.13,1.23); after ACA:OR 2.46(1.10,5.51); P-int = .0002], but this occurred in the setting of an immediate decline in prescribing patterns, particularly among non-adopter states, followed by an increase that remained lowest in non-adopter states. The ACA was not associated with receipt of GDMT for other racial/ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among GWTG-HF hospitals, Hispanic patients were more likely to receive all GDMT if they resided in early adopter states rather than non-adopter states, independent of ACA Medicaid Expansion timing. ACA implementation was only associated with higher odds of receipt of ACEI/ARB/ARNI in Hispanic patients. Additional steps are needed for improved GDMT delivery for all.

Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Improve Patient Experience Among Adults During Transitions from Hospital to Home: the PArTNER study.

INTRODUCTION: Minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) need evidence-based strategies tailored to the populations they serve to improve patient-centered outcomes after hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial (RCT) from October 2014 to January 2017 at a MSH comparing the effectiveness of a stakeholder-supported Navigator intervention vs. Usual care on post-hospital patient experience, outcomes, and healthcare utilization. Community health workers and peer coaches delivered the intervention which included (1) in-hospital visits to assess barriers to health/healthcare and to develop a personalized Discharge Patient Education Tool (DPET); (2) a home visit to review the DPET; and (3) telephone-based peer coaching. The co-primary outcomes were between-group comparisons of 30-day changes in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures of anxiety and informational support (minimum important difference is 2 to 5 units change); a p-value <0.025 was considered significant using intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included death, ED visits, or readmissions and measures of emotional, social, and physical health at 30 and 60 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 1029 adults hospitalized with heart failure (28%), pneumonia (22%), MI (10%), COPD (11%), or sickle cell disease (29%). Over 80% were non-Hispanic Black. Overall, there were no significant between-group differences in the 30-day change in anxiety (adjusted difference: -1.6, 97.5% CI -3.3 to 0.1, p=0.03), informational support (adjusted difference: -0.01, 97.5% CI -2.0 to 1.9, p=0.99), or any secondary outcomes. Exploratory analyses suggested the Navigator intervention improved anxiety among participants with COPD, a primary care provider, a hospitalization in the past 12 months, or higher baseline anxiety; among participants without health insurance, the intervention improved informational support (all p-values <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this pragmatic RCT at a MSH, the Navigator intervention did not improve post-hospital anxiety, informational support, or other outcomes compared to Usual care. Benefits observed in participant subgroups should be confirmed in future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02114515.

Patient Navigation Can Improve Breast Cancer Outcomes among African American Women in Chicago: Insights from a Modeling Study.

African American (AA) women experience much greater mortality due to breast cancer (BC) than non-Latino Whites (NLW). Clinical patient navigation is an evidence-based strategy used by healthcare institutions to improve AA women's breast cancer outcomes. While empirical research has demonstrated the potential effect of navigation interventions for individuals, the population-level impact of navigation on screening, diagnostic completion, and stage at diagnosis has not been assessed. An agent-based model (ABM), representing 50-74-year-old AA women and parameterized with locally sourced data from Chicago, is developed to simulate screening mammography, diagnostic resolution, and stage at diagnosis of cancer. The ABM simulated three counterfactual scenarios: (1) a control setting without any navigation that represents the "standard of care"; (2) a clinical navigation scenario, where agents receive navigation from hospital-affiliated staff; and (3) a setting with network navigation, where agents receive clinical navigation and/or social network navigation (i.e., receiving support from clinically navigated agents for breast cancer care). In the control setting, the mean population-level screening mammography rate was 46.3% (95% CI: 46.2%, 46.4%), the diagnostic completion rate was 80.2% (95% CI: 79.9%, 80.5%), and the mean early cancer diagnosis rate was 65.9% (95% CI: 65.1%, 66.7%). Simulation results suggest that network navigation may lead up to a 13% increase in screening completion rate, 7.8% increase in diagnostic resolution rate, and a 4.9% increase in early-stage diagnoses at the population-level. Results suggest that systems science methods can be useful in the adoption of clinical and network navigation policies to reduce breast cancer disparities.

Navigated African American breast cancer patients as incidental change agents in their family/friend networks.

BACKGROUND: Patient navigation is an increasingly widespread intervention to address the persistent, severe, and disproportionate breast cancer (BC) burden that African Americans (AA) face. Navigation may have more widespread effects than previously estimated due to patient-driven diffusion of BC information. METHODS: This pilot study examined the network effects of a randomized controlled trial via recruitment of navigated and non-navigated AA BC patients as well as their network members. We estimated study arm differences in patient BC promotion (i.e., number of individuals to whom BC patients promote BC screening) and network BC screening (i.e., % BC screening among network members). RESULTS: Among our sample of 100 AA BC patients, navigated patients promoted BC screening to more individuals than non-navigated patients. BC patients were more likely to promote BC screening to children and individuals with whom they communicated more frequently. Some models further suggested more network BC screening among "navigated" network members relative to "non-navigated" network members. CONCLUSIONS: Navigated AA patients promoted BC screening more widely throughout their networks than non-navigated AA BC patients. There were also suggestive findings regarding increased BC screening among their network members. Our pilot study highlights the potential for social network analysis to improve the precision of intervention effect estimates and to inform future innovations (e.g., integrating navigation and network-based interventions) with multilevel effects on cancer health disparities.

Community health workers and non-clinical patient navigators: A critical COVID-19 pandemic workforce.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in substantial morbidity and mortality and challenged public health agencies and healthcare systems worldwide. In the U.S., physical distancing orders and other restrictions have had severe economic and societal consequences. Populations already vulnerable in the United States have experienced worse COVID-19 health outcomes. The World Health Organization has made recommendations to engage at risk populations and communicate accurate information about risk and prevention; to conduct contract tracing; and to support those affected by COVID-19. This Commentary highlights the ways in which an existing and cost-effective, but underutilized workforce, community health workers and non-clinical patient navigators, should be deployed to address the COVID-19 pandemic. Community health workers and non-clinical patient navigators have skills in community engagement and health communication and are able to gain the trust of vulnerable communities. Furthermore, many community health workers and non-clinical patient navigators have skills in assisting community members with meeting basic needs and with navigating public health and healthcare systems. Members of this workforce are more than prepared to conduct contact tracing. State, local, tribal, and territorial public health agencies and healthcare systems should be collaborating with national, state, and local organizations that represent and employ CHWs/non-clinical patient navigators to determine how to better mobilize this workforce to address the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, Congress, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), and individual states need to adopt policies to sustainably fund their critically needed services in the long term.

The association between breast cancer capacity and resources with incidence and mortality in Arizona's low populous counties.

INTRODUCTION: While cancer deaths have decreased nationally, declines have been much slower in rural areas than in urban areas. Previous studies on rural cancer service capacity are limited to specific points along the cancer care continuum (eg screening, diagnosis or treatment) and require updating to capture the current rural health landscape since implementation of the 2010 Affordable Care Act in the USA. The association between current rural cancer service capacity across the cancer care continuum and cancer incidence and death is unclear. This cross-sectional study explored the association between breast cancer service capacity and incidence and mortality in Arizona's low populous counties. METHODS: To measure county-level cancer capacity, clinical organizations operating within low populous areas of Arizona were surveyed to assess on-site breast cancer services provided (screening, diagnosis and treatment) and number of healthcare providers were pulled from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services National Provider Identifier database. The number of clinical sites and healthcare providers were converted to county-level per capita rates. Rural-Urban Continuum codes were used to designate rural or urban county status. Age-adjusted county-level breast cancer incidence and death rates from 2010 to 2016 were obtained from the Arizona Department of Health Services, Arizona Cancer Registry. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the results. Multivariate regression was used to evaluate the association between cancer service capacity and incidence and mortality in 13 out of Arizona's 15 counties. RESULTS: Rural counties had more per capita clinical sites (20.4) than urban counties (8.9) (p=0.02). Urban counties had more per capita pathologists (1.0) than rural counties (0) (p≤0.01). In addition to zero pathologists, rural counties had zero medical oncologists. Rural county status was associated with a decrease in breast cancer incidence (β=-20.1, 95% confidence interval: -37.2-3.1). CONCLUSION: While Arizona's sparsely populated rural counties may have more physical infrastructure per capita, these services are dispersed over vast geographic areas. They lack specialists providing cancer services. Non-physician clinical providers may be more prevalent in rural areas and represent opportunities for improving access to cancer preventive services and care. Compared to urban counties, rural county status was associated with lower detected breast cancer incidence rates although there were no statistically significant differences in breast cancer mortality. Other factors may contribute to rural-urban differences in breast cancer incidence. Future research should explore these factors and the association between cancer capacity and local resources because the use of county-level data represents a challenge in Arizona, where counties average over 19 425 km2 (7500 square miles).

Use of cervical cancer preventive services among US women aged 21-29: an assessment of the 2010 Affordable Care Act rollout through 2018.

PURPOSE: The 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA) provided millions of people with health insurance coverage and facilitated routine cancer screening by requiring insurers to cover preventive services without cost-sharing. Despite greater access to affordable cancer screening, Pap testing has declined over time. The aim of this study is to assess participation in Pap test and HPV vaccination, and adherence to guidelines as outlined by the American Cancer Society (ACS) from the 2010 ACA provision eliminating cost-sharing for preventive services. METHODS: Using multi-year responses from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we examined the association between the ACA and participation in and adherence to Pap testing and HPV vaccination behaviors as set by the ACS. The sample included women aged 21-29 who completed the survey between 2008 and 2018 (every other year) and who live in 24 US States (N = 37,893). RESULTS: Results showed significant decreases in Pap testing rates but increases in the uptake of the HPV vaccine series for all age groups and across all demographics. Post-ACA year significantly predicted increases in HPV + Pap co-testing participation and adherence. Women with health insurance coverage were more likely to engage in both behaviors. CONCLUSION: Findings raise concerns around declines in the proportion of women receiving and adhering to Pap testing guidelines. A need exists for research to examine the role of increases in HPV vaccination uptake on decreases in Pap testing. Moreover, effective strategies should target increases in cervical cancer screening uptake among women vaccinated against HPV.

A Comparison of Different Intensities of Patient Navigation After Abnormal Mammography.

Background. Patient navigation is a practice strategy to address barriers to timely diagnosis and treatment of cancer. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of varying intensities of patient navigation and timely diagnostic resolution after abnormal mammography. Method. This is a secondary analysis of a subset of women with an abnormal screening or diagnostic mammogram who participated in the "patient navigation in medically underserved areas" 5-year randomized trial. We compared timely diagnostic resolution in women assigned to different intensities of patient navigation including, full navigation intervention, no contact with navigators, or limited contact with navigators. Results. The sample included 1,725 women with abnormal mammogram results. Women who interacted with patient navigators had significantly fewer days to diagnostic resolution after abnormal mammography compared with women who did not interact with patient navigators. Discussion. Results from our study suggest that even limited contact with navigators encourages women to seek more timely diagnostic resolution after an abnormal mammogram, which may offer a low-cost practice strategy to improve timely diagnosis for disadvantaged and underserved women.

Gendered and racialized social expectations, barriers, and delayed breast cancer diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Black women are more likely to be diagnosed at a later stage of breast cancer in part due to barriers to timely screening mammography, resulting in poorer mortality and survival outcomes. Patient navigation that helps to overcome barriers to the early detection of breast cancer is an effective intervention for reducing breast cancer disparity. However, the ability to recognize and seek help to overcome barriers may be affected by gendered and racialized social expectations of women. METHODS: Data from a randomized controlled trial, the Patient Navigation in Medically Underserved Areas study, were used. The likelihood of obtaining a follow-up screening mammogram was compared between women who identified ≥1 barriers and those who did not. RESULTS: Of the 3754 women who received the Patient Navigation in Medically Underserved Areas navigation intervention, approximately 14% identified ≥ 1 barriers, which led to additional navigator contacts. Consequently, those women who reported barriers were more likely to obtain a subsequent screening mammogram. Black women, women living in poverty, and women with a higher level of distrust were less likely to report barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Minority women living in poverty have always been the source of social support for others. However, gendered and racialized social expectations may affect the ways in which women seek help for their own health needs. A way to improve the effectiveness of navigation would be to recognize how minority women's gender images and expectations could shape how they seek help and support. A report of no barriers does not always translate into no problems. Proactive approaches to identify potential barriers may be beneficial.