Attitudes toward the American Cancer Society's 2020 cervical cancer screening guidelines: A qualitative study of a national sample of US clinicians.

BACKGROUND: The 2020 American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for cervical cancer screening. These guidelines propose two major changes from current practice: initiating screening at age 25 years and using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. Adoption of guidelines often occurs slowly, and therefore understanding clinician attitudes is important to facilitate practice change. METHODS: Interviews with a national sample of clinicians who perform cervical cancer screening in a variety of settings explored attitudes toward the two major changes from the 2020 ACS cervical cancer screening guidelines. Clinicians participated in 30- to 60-min interviews exploring their attitudes toward various aspects of cervical cancer screening. Qualitative analysis was performed. RESULTS: Seventy clinicians participated from across the United States. Few respondents were initiating screening at age 25 years, and none were using primary HPV testing. However, over half would be willing to adopt these practices if supported by scientific evidence and recommended by professional medical organizations. Barriers to adoption included the lack of endorsement by professional societies, lack of laboratory availability and insurance coverage, limited autonomy within large health care systems, and concerns related to missed disease. CONCLUSIONS: Few clinicians have adopted screening initiation or primary HPV testing, as recommended by the 2020 ACS guidelines, but over half were open to adopting these changes. Implementation may be facilitated via professional organization endorsement, clinician education, and laboratory, health care system, and insurance support. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: In 2020, the American Cancer Society (ACS) released updated guidelines for cervical cancer screening. The main changes to current practices were to initiate screening at age 25 years instead of age 21 years and to screen using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing rather than cytology alone or in combination with HPV testing. We performed in-depth interviews with 70 obstetrics and gynecology, family medicine, and internal medicine physicians and advanced practice providers about their attitudes toward these guidelines. Few clinicians are following the 2020 ACS guidelines, but over half were open to changing practice if the changes were supported by evidence and recommended by professional medical organizations. Barriers to adoption included the lack of endorsement by professional medical organizations, logistical issues, and concerns about missed disease.

A cross-sectional survey examining clinician characteristics, practices, and attitudes associated with adoption of the 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) risk-based management consensus guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. These guidelines benefit patients by concentrating testing and treatment in those at highest cervical cancer risk. Adoption of guidelines often occurs slowly, with few studies examining the factors associated with guideline-adherent management of abnormal results. METHODS: To elucidate the factors associated with the use of the 2019 ASCCP guidelines among clinicians who perform cervical cancer screening, physicians and advanced practice professionals who perform cervical cancer screening were cross-sectionally surveyed. Clinicians responded to screening vignettes with differing recommendations for management between the 2019 and prior management guidelines. Screening vignette 1 involved reduction of invasive testing on a low-risk patient; screening vignette 2 involved increased surveillance testing on a high-risk patient. Binomial logistic regression models determined the factors associated with the use of the 2019 guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 1251 clinicians participated from across the United States. For screening vignettes 1 and 2, guideline-adherent responses were given by 28% and 36% of participants, respectively. Management recommendations differed by specialty and were incorrect in different situations: there was inappropriate invasive testing by obstetrics and gynecology physicians (vignette 1) and inappropriate discontinuation of screening by family and internal medicine physicians (vignette 2). Regardless of their chosen response, over half erroneously believed they were guideline adherent. CONCLUSIONS: Many clinicians who believe they are following appropriate guidelines may not realize their management strategy is inconsistent with the 2019 guidelines. Education initiatives tailored to clinician specialty could address the understanding of current guidelines, encourage the use of updated guidelines, maximize patient benefits, and minimize harms. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening test management. We surveyed over 1200 obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN), family medicine, and internal medicine physicians and advanced practice providers about their screening and abnormal results follow-up practices in relation to guidelines. Few clinicians are following the 2019 guidelines. Management recommendations differed by clinician specialty and were incorrect in different situations: there was inappropriate invasive testing by OB/GYN physicians and inappropriate screening discontinuation by family and internal medicine physicians. Education tailored by clinician specialty could address the understanding of current guidelines, encourage the use of updated guidelines, maximize patient benefits, and minimize harms.

'They say you can get addicted': Exploring factors that fuel the fear of addiction to prescription opioids among cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVES: To explore misconceptions regarding addiction potential of prescription opioids among cancer survivors. METHODS: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of cancer survivors (N = 25) treated with prescription opioids for pain management. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and coded using Atlas.ti version 8. Inductive applied thematic analysis techniques were employed to identify emergent themes. RESULTS: The majority of participants were breast cancer survivors (88%) who underwent a combination of surgery, chemotherapy and radiation (72%). Thematic analysis revealed that (1) cancer survivors view opioids as an illicit drug, (2) media narrative of the opioid epidemic increased negative perception of opioid use for cancer-related pain, (3) perceptions of opioids were also informed by experiences of friends and family with an opioid use disorder, (4) poor understanding of terminology resulted in misconceptions of opioid use and addiction and (5) fear of opioid addiction resulted in unrelieved cancer pain and poor quality of life. CONCLUSION: Our findings support previously identified concerns among cancer patients about fear of addiction to opioids, a barrier to effective pain management. It highlights the importance for health care providers caring for cancer survivors to continue to address misconceptions about prescribed opioids.

Stakeholders' perspectives on system-level barriers to and facilitators of HPV vaccination among Hispanic migrant farmworkers.

OBJECTIVES: Latinx populations suffer from a disproportionate burden of HPV-related cancers, yet vaccination completion rates nationally among this population remain low, with 46% of females and 35% of males completing the vaccine series. Given the heterogeneity of Latinx populations, sub-populations such as Latinx individuals who live in migrant farmworker communities experience additional system-level barriers to healthcare utilization. Thus, we examined stakeholder perceptions of barriers and facilitators to Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination among Latinx migrant farmworkers. Such information is critical to informing intervention development targeting vaccination uptake and completion, ultimately decreasing HPV-related cancer disparities. DESIGN: Guided by the PRECEDE-PROCEED model and the Social Ecological Model (SEM), interviews were conducted with diverse stakeholders (n = 13) representative of health, social services, and political sectors. Stakeholders were asked about their perceptions of barriers to and facilitators of HPV vaccination among migrant farmworkers. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Responses were coded according to components of the SEM. RESULTS: Micro-level facilitators identified included positive attitudes and vaccine acceptance among parents. Meso-level facilitators included availability of free or low-cost health care clinics, and macro-level facilitators included federal programs (e.g. Medicaid, Vaccine for Children). Micro-level barriers included lack of education and low health literacy. Meso-level barriers included poor patient-provider communication, lack of access (e.g. clinics not stocking/administering the vaccine; limited clinic hours; lack of reminder systems; insufficient organizational structure), public perceptions/attitudes towards HPV vaccination, and lack of healthcare service continuity due to migratory patterns. Macro-level barriers included public perceptions and attitudes towards HPV vaccination, transportation, vaccine availability and coverage for non-citizens, and lack of school entry policy. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that multi-level interventions should be developed to leverage existing facilitators while addressing system-level barriers, ultimately creating a supportive environment for HPV vaccine initiation and completion among this marginalized population comprised of individuals living in migrant farmworker communities.

Cervical cancer screening in the United States: Challenges and potential solutions for underscreened groups.

Cervical cancer screening rates in the United States are generally high, yet certain groups demonstrate disparities in screening and surveillance. Individuals at greatest risk for cervical cancer are often from marginalized or underserved groups who do not participate in regular screening for a variety of reasons. Using the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR) Trans-Organ Conceptual Model, including concepts of individual-, provider-, facility-, system-, or policy-level factors, we provide a commentary to highlight reasons for low screening participation among subgroups in the U.S. These include racial and ethnic minorities, rural residents, sexual and gender minorities, those with limited English proficiency, those with particular religious beliefs, and various health conditions. We describe barriers and offer potential solutions for each group. In addition, we discuss cross-cutting barriers to screening including difficulty interacting with the healthcare system (limited knowledge and health literacy, lack of provider recommendation/contact), financial (cost, lack of insurance), and logistical barriers (e.g., lack of usual source of care, competing demands, scheduling issues). Solutions to address these barriers are needed to improve screening rates across all underscreened groups. Changes at state and national policy levels are needed to address health insurance coverage. Mobile screening, ensuring that interpreters are available for all visits, and targeted in reach at non-gynecological visits can further overcome barriers. Employing community outreach workers can increase community demand for screening, and patient navigators can improve adherence to both screening and follow-up diagnostic evaluation. HPV self-sampling can address multiple barriers to cervical cancer screening.

Understanding Cancer Survivors' Educational Needs About Prescription Opioid Medications: Implications for Cancer Education and Health Literacy.

Cancer survivors' perceptions of prescription opioid medication (POM) and the health communications they receive about POM's safety and effectiveness are embedded within the national discourse of the opioid epidemic. Using qualitative methods, this community-based study explored the health communication and the educational needs of diverse cancer survivors who received opioid agonist treatment to manage cancer pain. Our community-based sample consisted of 25 cancer survivors, 24 healthcare providers, and six community-level stakeholders. Over half of the cancer survivors interviewed were from underrepresented minority groups (52% African American and 12% Hispanic/Latino). The data were analyzed using applied thematic analysis techniques. The over-arching themes include the need to (1) provide clear, consistent, and comprehensive education and information about POM to ensure safe use; (2) discuss the risks, benefits, and proper use of POM in the treatment of cancer-related pain; (3) communicate realistic expectations and address common misconceptions about pain; and (4) address cancer survivor beliefs and concerns surrounding fear of addiction. Our findings highlight the need for effective cancer education and communication about opioid agonist treatment and POM in plain simple language that is easy to understand, relevant, and culturally appropriate. Recommendations for cancer education and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Exploring patient and provider perspectives on the intersection between fertility, genetics, and family building.

OBJECTIVE: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients have distinct medical and psychosocial needs and fertility is a key concern. Early age of onset is a risk factor for hereditary cancer and AYAs are more likely to experience reduced fertility. This has implications for future family building decisions and fertility preservation (FP) and genetic testing/counseling (GT/GC) education. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with cancer between the ages of 18 and 39 and health care providers (HCPs) who treat AYA cancer patients were recruited from a single institution. Qualitative interviews explored AYA patients' and HCPs' concerns regarding their experiences discussing genetics and FP. RESULTS: The majority of patients (n = 17) were female (59%), and the majority of HCPs (n = 18) were male (67%). Overall, participants had differing perceptions of FP and GT/GC-related information provided during the clinical visit. Patients indicated initiating the conversation about FP and did not recall HCPs discussing GT/GC with them. HCPs indicated patients were often overwhelmed with too much information and comprehension of this discussion is limited. HCPs also felt patients' emotions/beliefs determined their information-seeking behavior specific to FP and GT/GC. Participants felt educational materials should be developed and delivered in a video format depicting a patient-provider interaction or patient testimonial. CONCLUSION: AYA patients are often overwhelmed by a cancer diagnosis; the complexity/volume of information regarding FP and GT/GC may hinder understanding and decision-making about family building. Educational materials that help patients understand what questions to ask HCPs about FP and GT/GC should be developed to improve knowledge, psychosocial well-being, and future family building decisions.

Incorporating Stakeholder Feedback in Guidelines Development for the Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests.

OBJECTIVE: The 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines present a paradigm shift from results- to risk-based management. Patient and provider factors can affect guideline adoption. We sought feedback from stakeholders to inform guideline development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To solicit provider feedback, we surveyed attendees at the 2019 ASCCP annual meeting regarding readiness to adopt proposed changes and used a web-based public comment period to gauge agreement/disagreement with preliminary guidelines. We elicited patient feedback via a brief survey on preferences around proposed recommendations for treatment without biopsy. Surveys and public comment included both closed-ended and free-text items. Quantitative results were analyzed using descriptive statistics; qualitative results were analyzed using content analysis. Results were incorporated into guideline development in real time. RESULTS: Surveys indicated that 98% of providers currently evaluate their patients' past results to determine management; 88% felt formally incorporating history into management would represent an improvement in care. Most providers supported expedited treatment without biopsy: 22% currently perform expedited treatment and 60% were willing to do so. Among patients, 41% preferred expedited treatment, 32% preferred biopsy before treatment, and the remainder were undecided. Responses from the public comment period included agreement/disagreement with preliminary guidelines, reasons for disagreement, and suggestions for improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholder feedback was incorporated into the development of the 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines. Proposed recommendations with less than two-thirds agreement in the public comment period were considered for revision. Findings underscore the importance of stakeholder feedback in developing guidelines that meet the needs of patients and providers.

Florida physicians' reported use of AFIX-based strategies for human papillomavirus vaccination.

HPV vaccination rates in Florida are low. To increase rates, the CDC recommends clinics adhere to components of their evidence-based quality improvement program, AFIX (Assessment, Feedback, Incentives, and eXchange of information). We explored factors associated with engaging in HPV-specific AFIX-related activities. In 2016, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of 770 pediatric and family medicine physicians in Florida and assessed vaccination practices, clinic characteristics, and HPV-related knowledge. Data were analyzed in 2017. The primary outcome was whether physicians' clinics engaged in ≥1 AFIX activity. We stratified by physician specialty and developed multivariable models using a backward selection approach. Of the participants in the analytic sample (n = 340), 52% were male, 60% were White of any ethnicity, and 55% were non-Hispanic. Pediatricians and family medicine physicians differed on: years practicing medicine (p < 0.001), HPV-related knowledge (p < 0.001), and VFC provider status (p < 0.001), among others. Only 39% of physicians reported engaging in ≥1 AFIX activity. In the stratified multivariable model for pediatricians, AFIX activity was significantly associated with HPV-related knowledge (aOR = 1.33;95%CI = 1.08-1.63) and provider use of vaccine reminder prompts (aOR = 3.61;95%CI = 1.02-12.77). For family medicine physicians, HPV-related knowledge was significant (aOR = 1.57;95%CI = 1.20-2.05) as was majority race of patient population (non-Hispanic White vs. Other: aOR = 3.02;95%CI = 1.08-8.43), daily patient load (<20 vs. 20-24: aOR = 9.05;95%CI = 2.72-30.10), and vaccine administration to male patients (aOR = 2.98;95%CI = 1.11-8.02). Fewer than half of Florida pediatric and family medicine physicians engaged in any AFIX activities. Future interventions to increase AFIX engagement should focus on implementing and evaluating AFIX activities in groups identified as having low engagement in AFIX activities.

Health Care Provider Willingness to Recommend Self-collected Tests for Human Papillomavirus: A Mixed Methods Examination of Associated Factors.

INTRODUCTION: Cervical cancer disproportionately affects those who are underscreened. Human papillomavirus self-collection is a promising tool to expand screening. OBJECTIVE: Study objectives were to examine 1) factors (provider characteristics and practice type) associated with and 2) attitudes (perceived benefits and concerns) toward using human papillomavirus self-collection for cervical cancer screening in clinical practice. METHODS: This study had a mixed method design; prior to regulatory approval of self-collection, we conducted a national survey and interviews of health care providers who perform cervical cancer screening. Quantitative measures included provider and practice characteristics, willingness to recommend, and preferences related to self-collection. Qualitative interviews further elucidated provider perspectives. RESULTS: A total of 1,251 providers completed surveys, and 56 completed interviews. Among survey respondents, 33.4% reported they were likely to offer self-collection, 28.6% were unsure, and 38.0% reported they were unlikely. Most would offer self-collection either in the clinic or at home per patient preference. Male participants, advanced practice providers, internal and family physicians, and those practicing in academic medical center, hospital, or community health settings were more likely than female participants, obstetrician-gynecologist physicians, and those in private practice to indicate they were likely to offer self-collection. Concerns expressed in both surveys and interviews included the adequacy of sample collection and the ability to follow-up. Respondents felt that self-collection would be particularly beneficial for those who did not have access to clinician-collected screening, as well as for patients who may have difficulty with pelvic examinations for any reason. CONCLUSION: Providers considered human papillomavirus self-collection to be a way to expand access for patients with health care barriers and pelvic examination difficulties. They had concerns related to sample adequacy and follow-up after abnormal results.

Factors Associated With Guideline-concordant and Excessive Cervical Cancer Screening: A Mixed Methods Study.

INTRODUCTION: National guidelines recommend cervical cancer screening with Papanicolaou (Pap) testing at 3-year intervals or with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone or HPV/Pap cotesting at 5-year intervals for average-risk individuals aged 30-65 years. METHODS: We explored factors associated with clinician-reported guideline-concordant screening, as well as facilitators and barriers to appropriate cervical cancer screening. RESULTS: A national sample of clinicians (N = 1,251) completed surveys; a subset (n = 55) completed interviews. Most (94%) reported that they screened average-risk patients aged 30-65 years with cotesting. Nearly all clinicians who were categorized as nonadherent to national guidelines were overscreening (98%). Guideline concordant screening was reported by 47% and 82% of those using cotesting and HPV testing, respectively (5-year intervals), and by 62% of those using Pap testing only (3-year intervals). Concordant screening was reported more often by clinicians who were aged <40 years, non-Hispanic, and practicing in the West or Midwest, and less often by obstetrician-gynecologists and private practice physicians. Concordant screening was facilitated by beliefs that updated guidelines were evidence-based and reduced harms, health care system dissemination of guidelines, and electronic medical record prompts. Barriers to concordant screening included using outdated guidelines, relying on personal judgment, concern about missing cancers, inappropriate patient risk assessment, and lack of support for guideline adoption through health care systems or electronic medical records. CONCLUSIONS: Most clinicians screened with Pap/HPV cotesting and approximately one-half endorsed a 5-year screening interval. Clinician knowledge gaps include understanding the evidence underlying 5-year intervals and appropriate risk assessment to determine which patients should be screened more frequently. Education and tracking systems can promote guideline-concordant screening.

"No one size fits all" A Multi-Method Survey of Oncology Allied Health Professionals Experiences with Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender/Queer Questioning Adolescent, and Young Adult Patients with Cancer and Reproductive and Sexual Health".

Objectives: To assess training needs for providers who care for adolescent and young adult (AYA) lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender/queer questioning (LGBTQ) cancer patients, we conducted a mixed-method survey. During their cancer care experience, AYA cancer patients experience physical, psychosocial, and reproductive health challenges. In addition to these challenges, AYA LGBTQ individuals are a diverse and medically underserved population who experience unique challenges and disparities in medical care. Methods: Health care providers (n = 351) who participated in our reproductive health in cancer training program completed a survey with 28 quantitative items and 4 open-ended items assessing knowledge, confidence discussing reproductive health, and confidence in knowledge specific to reproductive needs and general health needs among AYA LGBTQ patients. Results: Confidence discussing and confidence in knowledge of reproductive and general health needs are lower regarding transgender and nonbinary patients. Nearly half of providers (45%) demonstrated low knowledge, while 38% and 17% demonstrated moderate and high knowledge, respectively. Open comments indicated providers desired more training around the needs of Trans and nonbinary patients, and creating welcoming environments. Conclusions: The majority of our participants demonstrate low or moderate knowledge regarding factors that can influence AYA LGBTQ patient care, suggesting that this is a key area for improvement. Furthermore, improving provider knowledge may subsequently improve confidence in general and reproductive needs of LGBTQ patients, resulting in improved patient-centered care. Improving provider knowledge and confidence may then ultimately help reduce disparities in cancer care among this patient population.

Barriers to Adequate Pain Control and Opioid Use Among Cancer Survivors: Implications for Nursing Practice.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors can experience long-term negative effects from cancer and its treatment. Pain is one of the most common and distressing symptoms that cancer survivors experience. Opioids are often prescribed for pain; however, cancer survivors who have completed active treatment may have unique challenges with regard to pain management. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore barriers to pain management and perceptions of opioid use among cancer survivors. METHODS: This research was an exploratory pilot study using in-depth qualitative interviews with adult cancer survivors who were recruited from community-based survivorship organizations. Data were analyzed using applied thematic analysis techniques. RESULTS: Participants (n = 25) were mostly women (96%), diagnosed with breast cancer (88%) and stages I to III disease (84%), with a mean age of 56.2 years. Three themes on barriers to adequate pain control emerged: (1) taking just enough to take the edge off: self-medicating behaviors and nonadherence to prescribed regimen; (2) lack of insurance coverage and costly alternative pain treatment options; and (3) chronicity of cancer-related pain not adequately addressed and often mismanaged. CONCLUSIONS: Discussions with cancer survivors unveiled personal accounts of unmanaged pain resulting from limited pain management/opioid education, fear of opioid addiction, negative perceptions/experiences with opioids, lack of insurance coverage for alternative pain therapies, and regulatory policies limiting access to opioids. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: There is a clear need for improved access to multimodal pain management options and nonopioid alternatives for cancer survivors. Oncology nurses should endeavor to support policies and procedures aimed at opioid education, training, and legislation.

HPV vaccine recommendations by age: A survey of providers in federally qualified health centers.

Clinician recommendation remains a critical factor in improving HPV vaccine uptake. Clinicians practicing in federally qualified health centers were surveyed between October 2021 and July 2022. Clinicians were asked how they recommended HPV vaccination for patients aged 9-10, 11-12, 13-18, 19-26, and 27-45 y (strongly recommend, offer but do not recommend strongly, discuss only if the patient initiates the conversation, or recommend against). Descriptive statistics were assessed, and exact binomial logistic regression analyses were utilized to examine factors associated with HPV vaccination recommendation in 9-10-y-old patients. Respondents (n = 148) were primarily female (85%), between the ages of 30-39 (38%), white, non-Hispanic (62%), advanced practice providers (55%), family medicine specialty (70%), and practicing in the Northeast (63%). Strong recommendations for HPV vaccination varied by age: 65% strongly recommended for ages 9-10, 94% for ages 11-12, 96% for ages 13-18, 82% for age 19-26, and 26% for ages 27-45 y. Compared to Women's Health/OBGYN specialty, family medicine clinicians were less likely to recommend HPV vaccination at ages 9-10 (p = .03). Approximately two-thirds of clinicians practicing in federally qualified health centers or safety net settings strongly recommend HPV vaccine series initiation at ages 9-10. Additional research is needed to improve recommendations in younger age groups.

Examining the perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cervical cancer screening practices among clinicians practicing in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A mixed methods study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to reductions in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy. Therefore, in this mixed methods study we explored perceived pandemic-related practice changes to cervical cancer screenings in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). Methods: Between October 2021 and June 2022, we conducted a national web survey of clinicians (physicians and advanced practice providers) who performed cervical cancer screening in FQHCs in the United States during the post-acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, along with a sub-set of qualitative interviews via video conference, to examine perceived changes in cervical cancer screening practices during the pandemic. Results: A total of 148 clinicians completed surveys; a subset (n=13) completed qualitative interviews. Most (86%) reported reduced cervical cancer screening early in the pandemic, and 28% reported continued reduction in services at the time of survey completion (October 2021- July 2022). Nearly half (45%) reported staff shortages impacting their ability to screen or track patients. Compared to clinicians in Obstetrics/Gynecology/Women's health, those in family medicine and other specialties more often reported reduced screening compared to pre-pandemic. Most (92%) felt that screening using HPV self-sampling would be very or somewhat helpful to address screening backlogs. Qualitative interviews highlighted the impacts of staff shortages and strategies for improvement. Conclusions: Findings highlight that in late 2021 and early 2022, many clinicians in FQHCs reported reduced cervical cancer screening and of pandemic-related staffing shortages impacting screening and follow-up. If not addressed, reduced screenings among underserved populations could worsen cervical cancer disparities in the future. Funding: This study was funded by the American Cancer Society, who had no role in the study's design, conduct, or reporting.

Examining the association of clinician characteristics with perceived changes in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy practice during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed methods assessment.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to reductions in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy. Therefore, in this mixed method study we explored perceived pandemic-related practice changes to cervical cancer screenings and colposcopies. Methods: In 2021, a national sample of 1251 clinicians completed surveys, including 675 clinicians who performed colposcopy; a subset (n=55) of clinicians completed qualitative interviews. Results: Nearly half of all clinicians reported they were currently performing fewer cervical cancer screenings (47%) and colposcopies (44% of those who perform the procedure) than before the pandemic. About one-fifth (18.6%) of colposcopists reported performing fewer LEEPs than prior to the pandemic. Binomial regression analyses indicated that older, as well as internal medicine and family medicine clinicians (compared to OB-GYNs), and those practicing in community health centers (compared to private practice) had higher odds of reporting reduced screening. Among colposcopists, internal medicine physicians and those practicing in community health centers had higher odds of reporting reduced colposcopies. Qualitative interviews highlighted pandemic-related care disruptions and lack of tracking systems to identify overdue screenings. Conclusions: Reductions in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy among nearly half of clinicians more than 1 year into the pandemic raise concerns that inadequate screening and follow-up will lead to future increases in preventable cancers. Funding: This study was funded by the American Cancer Society, who had no role in the study's design, conduct, or reporting.

Anxiety and depression among Black breast cancer survivors: Examining the role of patient-provider communication and cultural values.

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer survivors frequently experience anxiety and depression post-treatment. Patient-provider communication and cultural values may impact these psychological outcomes. We examined the impact of patient-provider communication and cultural values on anxiety and depression among Black breast cancer survivors. METHODS: Using an observational, cross-sectional design, 351 survivors self-reported patient-provider communication (quality, confidence), cultural values (religiosity, collectivism, future time orientation), anxiety, and depression. Patients were categorized into high, moderate, and low levels of communication and cultural values. Separate linear regressions examined the effect of levels of communication and cultural values on anxiety and depression, controlling for sociodemographic variables. RESULTS: A subset of breast cancer survivors reported clinically significant symptoms of anxiety (40%) and depression (20%). Communication was associated with anxiety (ß = -0.14, p = 0.01) and depression (ß = -0.10, p = 0.04). Specifically, women reporting higher levels of communication quality/confidence reported lower levels of anxiety and depression. There was a trend towards a significant association between cultural values and depression (ß = -0.09, p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Black breast cancer survivors experience poor psychological functioning. Effective patient-provider communication may reduce anxiety and depression post-treatment. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Patient-provider relationships and patient empowerment may be key components of cancer survivorship. Special attention should be paid to patient-centered communication for Black breast cancer survivors.

Association between patient characteristics and HPV vaccination recommendation for postpartum patients: A national survey of Obstetrician/Gynecologists.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates in the U.S. are relatively low. Provider recommendation rates for HPV vaccination often vary by patient age and relationship status. Obstetrician/gynecologists (OB/GYNs) represent a key provider group that can recommend the HPV vaccine. This study examined differences in OB/GYN recommendation of HPV vaccination for inpatient postpartum patients by age, parity, and marital status. Data were collected from OB/GYNs nationally via a cross-sectional survey. Participants were randomized to two vignette groups (23-year-old patient or 33-year-old patient). Within each group, participants received 4 vignettes that were identical except for patient marital status (married/not in a committed relationship) and number of children (first/third child), and were asked to indicate HPV vaccination recommendation likelihood on a scale of 0 (definitely would not) to 100 (definitely would). A 2 × 2 × 2 general linear model with repeated measures was used to examine main and interaction effects of patient age, relationship status, and parity. 207 OB/GYNs were included in the final analyses. Recommendation was high for 23-year-old patients (range: 64.5-84.6 out of 100). When marital status and parity were held constant, recommendation likelihood was higher for the younger vs. older patient and was also higher for patients not in a committed relationship, compared to married patients (all p-values < 0.001). Differences in recommendation exist when considering age and relationship status, which provides insight into OB/GYN clinical decision-making. Findings highlight the need to address barriers to HPV vaccination recommendation, including awareness of risk factors to consider when recommending the vaccine.

Perceptions of prescription opioid medication within the context of cancer survivorship and the opioid epidemic.

PURPOSE: Prescription opioid medication can be of great benefit for cancer patients and survivors who suffer from cancer-related pain throughout their cancer care trajectory. However, the current opioid epidemic has influenced how such medications are perceived. The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of opioid use and misuse in cancer survivorship within the context of the opioid epidemic. METHODS: pt?>A qualitative study using a semi-structured interview was conducted with a purposive sample of health care professionals (n = 24), community-level stakeholders (n = 6), and cancer survivors (n = 25) using applied thematic analysis techniques. RESULTS: Crosscutting themes include (1) fear of addiction and living with poorly managed pain, (2) the importance of good patient/provider communication and the need for education around the use/handling/disposal of prescription opioid medication, (3) preference for nonopioid alternatives for pain management, (4) cancer survivors perceived to be low risk for developing opioid use disorder (include inconsistent screening), and (5) impact of policies aimed at curbing the opioid epidemic on cancer survivors. CONCLUSION: This study illustrates the intersecting and sometimes conflicting assumptions surrounding the use of opioids analgesics in the management of cancer pain among survivors embedded within the national discourse of the opioid epidemic. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: A system of integrated cancer care using psychosocial screening, opioid risk mitigation tools, opioid treatment agreements, and specialist expertise that cancer care providers can rely on to monitor POM use in conjunction with patient-centered communication to empower patients informed decision making in managing their cancer pain could address this critical gap in survivorship care.